Talk:List of newspapers in Germany

Berliner Morgenpost
The daily newspaper Berliner Morgenpost should be added to this list.
 * Berliner Morgenpost on German Wikipedia

In which section of the list does it belong? — Athænara  ✉  01:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Added to regional newspapers, as the circulation area is limited to Berlin and Brandenburg (source: http://www.axelspringer-mediapilot.de/artikel/BERLINER-MORGENPOST-Reichweite-Berliner-Morgenpost_750665.html ) 79.211.188.153 (talk) 00:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the state of the list
This list is an absolute mess. I don't even know where to start fixing this. Anyone have ideas? Yiosie 2356 06:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd say that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_newspapers_in_Germany&oldid=412838466 is the last good incarnation of this page. After that, one user went in and gutted it. The IP appears to be blocked; would it be possible to revert it back to this version, at least for now? Paris1127 (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The state of the list July 2011
Now I understand. I just had a look at ‘the state of the list’ in January 2011. But now, I think

is fixed (already in February.) So this box can be removed? --Schwab7000 (talk) 16:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Wirtschaftswoche
Wirtschaftswoche it is an national news magazine and not a newspaper. A common abbreviation is “Wiwo”. --Schwab7000 (talk) 13:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Berliner Zeitung and Der Tagesspiegel
Berliner Zeitung (207,800 copies) and Der Tagesspiegel (184,830) have to be in the same category. They are both either national or regional (subscription) papers in Germany. In Southern Germany (e.g.), they can be bought in (few) shops in (big) cities, at the airport and so on. --Schwab7000 (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Historical note: “Der Tagesspiegel” was in West-Berlin and the only (big) paper there not from the “Axel Springer Verlag”. “Berliner Zeitung” has “East” background, with big changes after the Wende. Recenet news: Berliner Zeitung will be editors of “Frankfurter Rundschau”, too. (Both will ‘cooperate’, but at Berlin). --Schwab7000 (talk) 13:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

(too) many links
Do smaller papers in this list need redlinks? I think they don't. And I add the names of the cities if they are not in the title. Köln = Cologne. --Schwab7000 (talk) 13:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Aachener Zeitung
 * Aachener Nachrichten
 * Münstersche Zeitung
 * Stuttgarter Nachrichten
 * Westfälische Nachrichten

Boulevard papers are RED TOP
To the main author: I wonder if the expression “Boulevard papers” really exists in English. German [de:Boulevardzeitung] is linked with red top in tabloid journalism article. --Schwab7000 (talk) 12:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Characteristical expressions
Those word listed below are common in German newspapers' names. An English equivalent is given: --Schwab7000 (talk) 13:30, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Zeitung - newspaper, the word comes from "Zeit"=time
 * Nachrichten - news
 * "-blatt" - '-paper'
 * as in Handelsblatt (Handel = commerce)
 * or Tageblatt/Tagblatt - daily paper
 * Rundschau - review (literally a look around)
 * Morgen - morning (as in "Mannheimer Morgen")
 * "Allgemeine Zeitung" - general/common newspaper
 * Spiegel - mirror
 * Tagesspiegel - the day's mirror
 * Anzeiger - can be gazette or advertiser

taz, die Tageszeitung, is its political alignment also to be listed as "independent"?
There is a disagreement between myself, and another about the political categorisation of taz, after I edited in "independent". Rational: taz is Germany's only mainstream national newspaper, particularly created to be an independent alternative. This meant that the paper was deliberately set up in a way, that it never needs to depend on advertising. This means that say if they wanted to talk about the environmental damage of a big German car manufacturer, they can do so, without suffering advertising withdrawal.Often that ability to critique or say what they like without fear makes them situated on the left. But in their English self-explanation, the word left does not appear once, however they call themselves independent twice, for example in the last paragraph on page 4 see http://download.taz.de/TAZFlyer_engl_2016_web.pdf However taz indeed refers to its online version for example as "the left news portal" on taz.de, so left of centre is also correct. In the past, it has been identified also as close to the German Green party. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Tageszeitung the paper is introduced as follows (I translate): "Die Tageszeitung... was founded in 1978 in West-Berlin as an alternative, self-administrating Newspaper project and is situated in the left political spectre". The point is, "left" as category being accepted, it seems that the independence ought to be stressed within its political identity. The underlying Panther Foundation see http://taz.de/Panter-Stiftung/!p4258/ also underlines the mantra of independent journalism. When you look at the elaborate description of Süddeutsche Zeitung for example, listed with the three words "center-left[3]/ left-liberal[4] or "critical-liberal"[5]", is it not reasonable that within its listing of political alignment, reference to its independence is made, in whatever words, because it is both a political orientation as it is a statement about their administration. Rather than playing ping pong with user Joobo, it is probably best that the community as such deliberates this issue. (KxLondon (talk) 21:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC))
 * Here it is about the political alignment of the newspaper. It is not about the way they use or do not use advertisement and generate the income. That aspect has no importance regarding the question of the political stance. Being "independent" of possible ads and possible conflicts of interests has nothing to do with the political stance the newspaper's editorial has. The newspaper is a political left-leaning and also green-leaning newspaper. The degree of "independence" of any income by ads is in this context not of relevance. Furthermore the sources which are self aspcriptions are not reliable or applicable. --Joobo (talk) 13:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)