Berliner Tageblatt

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Poster advertising for the Berliner Tageblatt (inv.Ephraim Moses Lilien , 1899)

The Berliner Tageblatt (BT) was a national daily newspaper in the German Reich from 1872 to 1939 . The full name was: Berliner Tageblatt and Handelszeitung . Founded by Rudolf Mosse , the paper was aimed at a mass audience and, as the newspaper with the highest circulation in the German Empire, developed into a leading medium . During the Weimar Republic , the Berliner Tageblatt took a left-wing liberal line and was perceived as a non-official party newspaper of the German Democratic Party , which resulted in a significant decrease in circulation. In 1933 it was brought into line and in 1937 it was incorporated into the Deutsche Verlag for liquidation . The newspaper had editorial offices in several cities at home and abroad. The head office was in the Mossehaus at Jerusalemer Strasse 46-49 in Berlin .

Structure and content

Inside of the Berliner Tageblatt from January 13, 1930

The Berliner Tageblatt appeared twelve times a week with a Berlin and a Reich edition. The week in the Mosse house always began with an evening edition on Mondays; there was no morning edition that day. From Tuesdays to Saturdays a morning and an evening edition were delivered, on Sundays only a morning edition (later referred to as the Sunday edition ). The typeface was Fraktur until March 21, 1927 , then Antiqua .

On weekdays the newspaper had 16 pages and on Sundays 32 pages with reports from the fields of culture, politics, business and sport. Characteristic for what is modern and diverse from today's perspective were sensational reports about records, accidents, assassinations, crimes, fires and other exceptional facts. The front page was largely reserved for politics with a critical editorial . The second page continued with domestic and nationwide news. This was followed by international reporting and a short business section along with stock market prices . The feature was a high priority given to: In addition to travelogues, short stories, serialized novels, poems, there were book recommendations, cinema, theater and broadcasting weekly game plans and reviews of art exhibitions, cinema, cabaret, theater and concert performances. Tables with various current comparative prices for bread, milk, briquettes and other items of everyday life offered a concrete benefit . Throughout its existence, the newspaper had a large number of classified ads and, especially on weekends, a very large number of commercial advertisements .

Regular supplements, mostly in booklet form, included:

  • Joke
  • Illustrated sports paper
  • Technical review
  • Berliner Stadtblatt (explicit local section of the Berliner Tageblatt )
  • The world mirror
  • The women's mirror
  • House, yard and garden

Edition and statistics

The Berliner Tageblatt was at times one of the newspapers with the highest circulation in the German Reich, although the information in the literature available today varies considerably. Background: A uniform and quarterly survey did not yet exist, control mechanisms were only installed from 1933. According to the Mosse Group, the circulation is said to have been 300,000 on some Sundays during the Weimar period. Specifically, for example, 137,000 copies are given for 1929 on weekdays (including 83,000 circulation in the capital) and 250,000 copies on Sundays. Advertisers and lenders were already questioning these in-house statistics at the time . An aggressive battle for advertisers was raging among the 4,700 daily and weekly newspapers that existed, so that even then publishers were happy to correct the circulation upwards because of the cost of one thousand contacts. In this context, the house bank of the Mosse Group found in 1929 that the 3.2 million inhabitants in Berlin only had 308,900 households and 147 in the capital of the Reich , or 4,700 daily and weekly newspapers across the country.

The information is also improbable because the circulation figures for the Berliner Morgen-Zeitung of 150,000 and of the Berliner Volks-Zeitung of 160,000, both of which also appeared in the Mosse Group, were often given in the same period . If only Ullstein Verlag is taken into account, which claims to have achieved a whopping 1,952,740 copies at the same time with its Berliner Morgenpost 623,000 and the Berliner Illustrirte Zeitung , then the whole thing can be described as “ reductio ad absurdum ”.

There is evidence that the circulation of the Berliner Tageblatt reached its peak on the eve of the First World War , declined from 1916, fluctuated greatly during the Weimar period and fell extremely in 1932. The information is considered certain for the following years:

Nevertheless, these figures speak for the high level of acceptance and quality of the Berliner Tageblatt . Because of the great variety of media, the circulation of most daily newspapers was between 5,000 and 20,000 copies.

Beginnings in the imperial era

The Berliner Tageblatt , founded on January 1, 1872 , initially only consisted of advertisements. In order to attract more attention from the readers, Rudolf Mosse very soon added editorial articles to the pages . The first editor-in-chief was Arthur Levysohn . He was followed in 1906 by Mosse's cousin Theodor Wolff , who had a decisive influence on the character of the newspaper for 27 years. He was the last resort in personnel decisions, was responsible for design, overall content as well as selection of topics and determined the ideological orientation.

The Berliner Tageblatt had the distinctive features of a family business : In the editorial offices at home and abroad, all management positions were occupied by close relatives of Rudolf Mosse. At times the publishing house employed over 4,000 people, a large proportion of whom belonged to the Jewish religious community. These roots were only partially reflected in the newspaper. When it came to explicitly Jewish topics, these were discussed in response to current events and not out of an actively propagated ideologically motivated attitude. Politically, the paper had a liberal orientation during the imperial era , whereby during Mosse's lifetime attention was paid to a certain neutrality or partisan balance on political issues. In principle, in the first four decades of its existence , the Berliner Tageblatt reported a matter not as a comment , but as a report or message .

After the outbreak of World War I , the editors temporarily postponed internal political disputes in their reporting. With increasing duration of the war and the lack of victory, the willingness of the imposed restraint began to crumble. In the second year of the war , a lack of supplies and war fatigue led to the first wildcat strikes and demonstrations. The end of the political truce came in the summer of 1916: The Berliner Tageblatt was the first newspaper to publicly address the issue of the war objective. As a result, the edition of June 28, 1916 was confiscated and the delivery of the newspaper was prohibited from August 1 to 7, 1916. For Wolff, publishing exclusive reports was extremely difficult until the end of the war. Reich Chancellor Bernhard von Bülow generally refused to interviews the paper and Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg forbade all government agencies to collaborate with the editors of the Berliner Tageblatt .

Development in the Weimar Republic

Political positioning

In the course of the November Revolution, the paper positioned itself as an advocate of radical democracy with strong left-wing liberal tendencies. On November 14, 1918, it was published under the title "Volksstaat oder verkehrter Obrigkeitsstaat?" a guest contribution by Hugo Preuss , in which the legitimacy and democracy deficits of the revolutionary government and the urgency of convening a national assembly working towards social and liberal reforms were pointed out - one day later Friedrich Ebert , chairman of the council of people's representatives, called on this critical article Preuss to the office of State Secretary in the Reich Office of the Interior, in order to have the government draft of a draft for a new, republican constitution drawn up through him. On November 16, 1918, the morning edition published a call for the foundation of the German Democratic Party (DDP) , written by Theodor Wolff and signed by 60 other people, under the heading “The Great Democratic Party” . The Berliner Tageblatt was very close to this party in the following years, rejected socialism and an excessive welfare state and advocated individual freedom for people. From then on, the editors practiced clearly recognizable opinion journalism .

Rudolf Mosse around 1916

The founding proclamation also bore the signature of 78-year-old Rudolf Mosse, who on the one hand always held his hand over Theodor Wolff and on the other hand always rejected excessive and above all one-sided politicization in his newspapers. Because the Berliner Tageblatt spoke out against communism and against a Soviet republic , the editorial office was occupied for a week by armed Spartakists on January 5, 1919 , and the Mossehaus was badly damaged by the use of artillery, hand grenades and machine guns.

Theodor Wolff around 1901

When Mosse died on September 8, 1920 at Schenkendorf Castle , he left behind a multimillion-dollar and debt-free company. He had chosen his son-in-law, Hans Lachmann-Mosse , to succeed him . The economically oriented financial expert took over the publishing management of one of the largest German newspaper publishers. In his will, Mosse had given his editor-in-chief not only full responsibility for personnel and content, but also 50% of the right to have a say in the commercial management, who in future would exercise this influence on the Berliner Tageblatt as well as the Berliner Volks-Zeitung and the Berliner Tages-Zeitung . Tensions between Wolff and Lachmann-Mosse, who was 17 years younger than him, were inevitable.

Wolff, who from today's perspective was undisputedly one of the best journalists of his time, developed more and more into a politician. He repeatedly called in the Berliner Tageblatt not to sign the Versailles Treaty. On the question of war guilt he published two books in which he opposed the sole responsibility thesis. In several articles Wolff fought democratically elected cabinets in which the DDP was not represented, and openly pushed their principle of the private sector. For his party he traveled to various conferences abroad as an official representative and campaigned vehemently for the democratic-parliamentary system of government . In 1920 Hermann Müller wanted to make him ambassador to Paris, which Wolff refused. His lack of neutrality in the editorials met with increasing criticism from Lachmann-Mosse, who foresaw a decrease in circulation with a readership that was increasingly diverging politically. In fact, as early as 1920, the DDP lost a large number of votes to the DVP and DNVP , as there was disagreement within the party on the reparations issue . In addition, the public perceived that the DDP was a “party of high capital”.

On December 4, 1926, Wolff resigned from the DDP. The occasion was the approval of his party in the adoption of the so-called dirt and trash law . This legal norm was not new ; special censorship authorities were installed in Berlin and Munich to enforce it. The Berliner Tageblatt had already been warned several times because of linked business , the spread of surreptitious advertising, scam reports and advertisements that were harmful to young people, and issues were banned from October 7-14, 1920, July 1-12, 1922, and November 10-16, 1923, for example. The Mosse company was never choosy when it came to advertisers. Filthy and fraudulent advertisements formed a not inconsiderable part of the advertising business. This included, among other things, angel making , miraculous healings, pornography , false price information, but also advertisements for frivolous cabaret, cinema or theater events. Coupling deals were customary in the industry, the more often a theater advertised, for example, the better the reviews .

Despite his resignation, Wolff remained true to his political line: In the years that followed, the Berliner Tageblatt became the spearhead of liberal democracy . The political department alone consisted of a 90-strong staff with editors, editorialists and foreign correspondents who described themselves as the “core force of the republic”. Later his agitation was judged more differently. He fought left, right, conservatives, but also members of democratic parties. His methods went far beyond verbal attacks. The founding of the Republican Party of Germany (RPD) met with such resolute resistance from Wolff that, among other things, it prompted the dismissal of Carl von Ossietzky , who was employed as an editor at the Berliner Volks-Zeitung belonging to the Mosse group and was a founding member of the RPD . The same happened to the social democrat Kurt Tucholsky , who in a disparaging retrospective described Theodor Wolff as a condescending, “somewhat stupid man” with “supposedly so liberal” but one-sided principles.

Economic collapse

The Mossehaus (1923) in the Berlin newspaper district

In the course of the hyperinflation of 1922/23 , the group lost most of its current assets , but was able to save its property in Germany and abroad. In any case, the family had invested their immense private assets in a Basel SBV bank in Swiss francs .

Due to the inflation experience, Lachmann-Mosse acquired a large number of land and real estate from 1926 onwards using equity and debt capital. Whole rows of houses in Berlin on Hohenzollerndamm , Lehniner Platz , Kurfürstendamm and Cicerostraße soon belonged to Mosse-Verlag. At the same time, he expanded the art collection in the Mosse-Palais with large sums of money , invested in music publishers, founded other advertising expeditions abroad and bought a large number of newspapers. Both the Dresdner Bank , as the house bank of Rudolf Mosse OHG, granted loans in the millions, as did the Deutsche Bank , the Danat Bank and Swiss banks. The acquisition of further print media in particular turned out to be a wrong entrepreneurial decision, because it created competition for its previous publications. Above all with the Berliner Tageblatt from 1926 onwards only losses could be made, whose advertising income was 2.1 million marks in 1913, 705,000 marks in 1928 and 304,000 marks in 1930. The circulation of the newspaper fell in the same way.

Leipziger Platz in the 1920s, on the far left the Mosse-Palais

Ullstein Verlag benefited most from the decline in circulation of Mosse newspapers . Until the end of the Weimar Republic, the editors practiced a pronounced interpretive journalism in which attention was paid to neutrality and political balance. In droves, readers and advertisers from Mosse switched to the Berliner Morgenpost in particular . Due to the impartial reporting, the Berliner Morgenpost developed with an exorbitant circulation of 614,680 copies from 1929 to the highest circulation newspaper in the Weimar Republic.

Lachmann-Mosse blamed Theodor Wolff for the decline. The accusation was not entirely unjustified. The tone of instruction in particular met with less and less acceptance from many readers. However, Wolff did not take a step back from the politicization of the paper. More and more he closed his eyes to the real conditions in the Weimar Republic and the needs and problems of his readership. This culminated in the propagated programs of “social capitalism”, in which workers and entrepreneurs should mutually recognize “duty, right, performance and profit”. With rising unemployment, cuts in social benefits, tax increases and the pressure of reparations burdens, these visionary ideas were completely unrealistic. Accordingly, towards the end of the Weimar Republic, the left-wing liberals only achieved about one percent in elections and sank to insignificance.

In November 1927, Deutsche Bank was the first creditor to give up its majority stake in Rudolf Mosse OHG. At that time, all properties in Germany and abroad were already encumbered with mortgages. From January 1928, the publisher's house bank pointed to an impending insolvency , which the management ignored. In the spring of 1928 an orderly insolvency procedure could have saved at least parts of the Mosse group; with the start of the global economic crisis in 1929 this was no longer possible. All foreign banks withdrew money from Germany and insisted on immediate repayment of the loans. The resignation of the chief legal officer and authorized signatory Martin Carbe in December 1930 sent a tremendous signal effect . He switched to Ullstein-Verlag, which was an incredible event in the entire press landscape. In fact , the Mosse group management postponed bankruptcy until autumn 1932. Lachmann-Mosse was responsible for this, but specifically for the Berliner Tageblatt Theodor Wolff, half of whom had co-determination rights and obligations. In addition, it was the Berliner Tageblatt which incurred the greatest losses.

Lachmann-Mosse relentlessly demanded changes to the content of the newspaper and a reduction in the number of political editors. Rabid savings followed: fee cuts, agencies closed at home and abroad, the omission of inserts and color prints as well as the number of pages decimated destroyed the editors' trust in the company. Many young and good journalists left of their own accord. When long-serving employees were about to be laid off, the workforce took strike action . The economic collapse of what was once the largest German press company took place in 1932. Over 3,000 jobs were at stake. Wolff, who lacked any understanding of business administration, waged a long-lost battle. He no longer spoke to Lachmann-Mosse and wrote to him:

“ I know that you have little interest in politics, but it is the backbone of the paper. The audience has become overly political. Even if my editors took on even more work, the damage would be extraordinary. Because every day that the paper does not appear full of strength, it loses weight and political significance. "

Wolff ignored the fact that the decline in circulation was an indication that hardly anyone across the Reich wanted to read the Berliner Tageblatt . On September 13, 1932, bankruptcy proceedings were opened. Around 8,000 creditors registered their claims.

time of the nationalsocialism

Theodor Wolff is dismissed

In principle, the sixty-year-old Theodor Wolff could not be terminated. Although he repeatedly threatened to resign himself, in reality he was fighting to keep his power. Wolff's rumors of resignation not only caused great uncertainty within the workforce; he even made them a public topic in newspaper articles, so that the publisher's difficulties remained no secret in political Berlin.

After the Reichstag elections in June 1932 , Lachmann-Mosse took the initiative and made all Mosse newspapers more neutral. Victor Klemperer noted in his diary on January 30, 1933 that “the Berliner Tageblatt had also become quite tame”. Wolff wrote only a few articles after the change of government. His one-column leading article on January 31, 1933 was entitled “It has been achieved” and contained the names of the new cabinet members along with cautious comments about the prospects for success of the Hitler government. The events surrounding the Reichstag fire were also factually presented in the Berliner Tageblatt , without the involvement of Theodor Wolff.

In fact, he had left Berlin for Munich on the night of February 27-28. He returned on March 3, 1933 and was dismissed as soon as he arrived at the Mossehaus . The dismissal did not take place at the instigation of the new rulers, Lachmann-Mosse thus drew the line under the dispute he had had with Wolff since 1928. When he was removed from office, Lachmann-Mosse informed him:

“ For the foreseeable future, the Berliner Tageblatt will concentrate essentially on the domestic policy on dealing with the major economic and foreign policy issues. But true democracy and justice require that positive achievements by the state, even if this state has assumed a significantly different shape, receive objective recognition. '"

The last leading article by Theodor Wolff dealt with the upcoming Reichstag election on March 5, 1933 . The article, which had already been drafted in Munich, appeared two days after his release. On the basis of this publication, which took place after the termination, his abundance of power and joint responsibility for the disorientation of managers and employees becomes clear. At this point in time, the workforce had no knowledge of who was running the Berliner Tageblatt . On March 5, 1933, Wolff cast his vote for the Reichstag election at a polling station in the immediate vicinity of his house on Hohenzollerndamm and left Berlin on the evening train for Munich. On March 9, he went into exile with his family in southern France, with stops in Austria and Switzerland. He wrote several letters again to Lachmann-Mosse, in which he insisted on being named as editor-in-chief in the Berliner Tageblatt . In fact, it wasn't until March 21, 1933 that his name was no longer listed in the legal notice.

Due to different representations in contemporary literature, it must be expressly pointed out that after March 5, 1933, Wolff was no longer involved in the editorial work of the Berliner Tageblatt in any way.

Prohibition and anticipatory obedience

With the headline: "March 1933: The misdeeds of the old - the promises of the new government!", And due to the width of the column below, "In Manschukuo ", an article written by Wolfgang Bretholz about the incidents should be on the front page on March 10, 1933 appear in Manchuria . Because the headline could be misunderstood, Walter Haupt, who had been the publisher's insolvency administrator since September 13, 1932 , had the edition that was already in print stopped and submitted the edition to the censors for review. This actually viewed the headline as a provocation and, based on the ordinances issued by the Reich President in February 1933 for the protection of the people and the state , banned the newspaper from March 10th to March 13th, 1933. All other Mosse newspapers were not affected.

When Joseph Goebbels learned of the matter on March 11th, he had the ban lifted with immediate effect and the Berliner Tageblatt was able to appear again on March 12th; with the article and the heading. However, Goebbels was now interested in the anarchistic conditions in the Mosse house, accompanied by wild strikes. On March 21, 1933, he put SA-Sturmbannführer Wilhelm Ohst in charge of the rotary printing presses for several days , which caused even more unrest among the workforce.

The later assertion made by some authors that Lachmann-Mosse dismissed a particularly large number of Jews after this ban to ingratiate themselves with the National Socialists does not correspond to reality. The historian Elisabeth Kraus describes the anecdotes spread by Alfred Kerr in exile, according to which not only dismissals but also censorship measures were used to “de-Jewry”, as “unscientific defamation” against the Mosse family. Rather, the wave of layoffs began in the autumn of 1932 and, given the high proportion of Jewish employees at the Berliner Tageblatt, logically affected many Jews. Incidentally, the Berliner Tageblatt was not the only and not the first sanctioned bourgeois newspaper after Hitler came to power . For example, on February 18, 1933, the Catholic-conservative Germania and the Märkische Volkszeitung were banned for two days, not to mention communist party papers .

"Cold Aryanization"

Despite all due caution, according to various historians, an " Aryanization " and expropriation of the Mosse Group did not take place. If anything, then one could speak of a “cold Aryanization”. What is certain is that the National Socialists took over a highly indebted company with 3,000 jobs at risk, unpaid salaries, outstanding social security contributions , unpaid bills and an editor-in-chief and management board who were no longer present. Hans Lachmann-Mosse fled to Paris on April 1, 1933, and from there initiated the conversion of the group into a foundation on April 15, 1933. On the same day, Rudolf Mosse OHG stopped all payments. Regarding the purpose of the foundation, he informed the bankruptcy administrator in writing:

“ I don't want to benefit from anything. All the fruit that the tree still bears should belong to the starving war victims (First World War). "

Walter Haupt was not satisfied with this "patriotic declaration by the newly established foundation". Because he no longer had a responsible contact person in the company and needed the signature of the company owner at several banks, he asked Lachmann-Mosse to provide specific succession plans. He did not comment on it. On July 12, 1933, the foundation also stopped making payments. True to the too big to fail phenomenon , which has been known since 1914 , Joseph Goebbels and Hermann Göring stated that they did not want to break up the publishing house because of the many jobs. In particular, the Berliner Tageblatt should be preserved. In Paris, Lachmann-Mosse received an offer from Göring to forward the newspaper as managing director. For this he was even offered an "honorary arena" . Theodor Wolff, who was in Switzerland at the time, received the same offer. Both refused the offer.

Max Winkler has now been appointed as insolvency administrator , who as a crisis manager and gray eminence of the German press, was just as willing to serve the National Socialists as previous cabinets. Winkler saw no way to continue the publishing house economically. Only on repeated insistence by Goebbels did he agree to a restructuring through rescue companies . On December 23, 1933, the Reich government initiated a settlement procedure to avert bankruptcy and provided 30 million marks from tax revenues to pacify the creditors. This sum would correspond to a purchasing power of around 2 billion euros today. The claims could only be satisfied to a fraction. Many small creditors, especially the craftsmen from the WOGA complex on Lehniner Platz , went away empty-handed. In some cases, legal clarification continued until the post-war period.

The "front pig article"

The leading article known as the Frontschwein article went down in German press history and appeared in the Berliner Tageblatt on April 4, 1933 with the headline “Clarity” . In it, Wolff's longstanding political colleague, Karl Vetter, called on the tensions of the change of government to be overcome. He went on to say that he “weep no tear for the gods and idols of a time that has been”. As a front pig, he defended his homeland with the same loyalty as any German soldier, despite the lack of hurray psychosis. In memory of Otto von Bismarck , he appealed that “Adolf Hitler should now also shake hands with the defeated”. He accused the Weimar Republic of believing that it could shape the new Germany “with a weary generation of party officers”. Vetter called for the "opponent of yesterday not to announce the hostility of tomorrow". Turning to the Jews, he wrote that "abroad would do them no service if they run around as old accusers." On the way to the “future no state-conscious German should be excluded”, the “forces willing to build now need inner peace” in the country. He confessed “in the name of the editors” to the “fateful events of these days” and wrote as a final sentence: “The Berliner Tageblatt respect the will of the people in front of the whole world”.

Vetter was not in a position to decide whether to publish the article alone. The Frontschwein article was an open break by the editorial team to the republican past of the Berliner Tageblatt and was often viewed as a submission, not only by journalists. With this article, the editors have not only publicly committed to the new system, but have also been the first newspaper to "align themselves " with the new power .

“Departure” and the end

In April 1934, the Reich Press Chamber appointed Paul Scheffer as the new chief editor. The self-confident, well-traveled, educated and financially independent Scheffer worked for the Berliner Tageblatt as a correspondent in the Far East , the USA, Italy, Great Britain and Soviet Russia since 1919 . In July 1933 he had already been made head of the foreign policy department. Goebbels, who repeatedly criticized the “monotony” of the German press, wanted to establish the Berliner Tageblatt as a German “world newspaper ”. In return, he guaranteed the new editor-in-chief a free hand in designing the content.

With a lot of energy Scheffer set out to keep the Berliner Tageblatt from sinking completely into journalistic insignificance. He succeeded in stabilizing the circulation and increasing it significantly. Scheffer's editorials and reports showed a factual brilliance and clout that were completely in contrast to the instructional tone of other newspapers. He attached great importance to foreign reports that were almost of literary quality. To this end, Scheffer sent young journalists on week-long trips to countries that were unknown and exotic to many readers at the time. Particular mention should be made of Margret Boveri , who traveled to Malta , Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan on behalf of the newspaper and who conducted an interview with Haile Selassie in the Abyssinian empire, which was widely recognized by the foreign press ; or Herbert Ihering, who flew to India, South America and Hollywood for exclusive film reviews .

In his articles, Scheffer always spoke of "Herr Hitler" instead of "Führer" or "Chancellor". The first scandal broke out at a press conference of the Propaganda Ministry in 1935 . Scheffer had written in an editorial that “peoples with intact religious communities, such as those in Italy and England, are superior to other nations in terms of mental elasticity. Germany, on the other hand, lacks the regular binding force ”. Alfred-Ingemar Berndt , the spokesman for the Propaganda Minister, yelled at Scheffer if he didn't know Alfred Rosenberg's first volume, "Myth of the 20th Century" . To the horror of the conference participants, Scheffer not only forbade himself to use the harsh tone, but added with cutting irony: "Incidentally, I note that Germany now has a religion of which the first volume has already been published."

With the four-year plan , Goering's and Goebbels' goals changed from 1936. The focus was now on the optimization of resources , among other things by controlling the use of labor, the allocation of paper and raw materials, and the associated reduction in press products. Overall, the number of newspapers fell to 2,500 by 1937 and to 977 by 1944. Like all newspapers, from 1936 onwards the Berliner Tageblatt had to meet various requirements from steering bodies. Scheffer, who always tried to preserve his independence, finally gave up in exasperation and left Germany at the end of 1936. He traveled to Southeast Asia for two years, then worked for German newspapers in New York as a foreign correspondent and finally settled in the USA as a freelance journalist in 1942 after the United States entered the war .

Goebbels appointed the staunch National Socialist Erich Schwarzer as the new editor-in-chief, who from August 1937 also headed the Kreuzzeitung as chief secretary. Most of the members of the editorial team reacted to the new tone that Schwarzer struck, partly by resigning and partly by doing some kind of duty . Some later found work for the weekly Das Reich . The last editor-in-chief was Eugen Mündler in May 1938 , who had taken on the task of handling the newspaper. The Berliner Tageblatt appeared under his direction in full with the text of the Kreuzzeitung , where Mündler was also appointed editor-in-chief. Both newspapers were last delivered on January 31, 1939.

News about trademark rights

On July 31, 2007, the word / figurative trademark Berliner Tageblatt was secured at the German Patent and Trademark Office . The brand owner is based in Moscow Russia . The brand is used for a German-language online newspaper based in Tiraspol .

Editors-in-chief

Well-known authors (selection)

See also

Web links

Commons : Berliner Tageblatt  - Collection of images, videos and audio files

literature

  • Editor of the Berliner Tageblatt: Twenty-five years of German contemporary history. 1872-1897 . Anniversary font. Mosse-Verlag, 1897.
  • Margret Boveri : We all lie: A capital newspaper under Hitler. Walter Verlag, 1965.
  • Gotthart Schwarz: Berliner Tageblatt (1872–1939). In: Heinz-Dietrich Fischer (Ed.): German newspapers of the 17th – 20th centuries. Century. (= Journalism-historical articles. Volume 2). Pullach near Munich 1972, ISBN 3-7940-3602-6 .
  • Walther G. Oschilewski : Newspapers in Berlin: In the mirror of the centuries . Haude & Spener, 1975.
  • Peter de Mendelssohn : Newspaper City Berlin: People and Powers in the History of the German Press . Ullstein, 1982, ISBN 3-550-07496-4 .
  • Karl Schottenloher: leaflet and newspaper. A guide through the printed daily literature. Volume 1: From the beginning to 1848 . Schmidt, 1922. (New edition: J. Binkowski by Klinkhardt and Biermann, 1985, ISBN 3-7814-0228-2 )
  • Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, ISBN 3-406-44694-9 .
  • Arnulf Kutsch, Johannes Weber: 350 years of daily newspaper, research and documents. Edition Lumiere, 2002, ISBN 3-934686-06-0 .
  • Siegfried Jacobsohn, Kurt Tucholsky: The seventy year old Mosse. In: Siegfried Jacobsohn: Collected writings. Volume 2: Cry for the Censor 1909–1915. (= Publications of the German Academy for Language and Poetry. Volume 85). Wallstein-Verlag, 2005, ISBN 3-89244-672-5 .
  • Karsten Schilling: The Destroyed Legacy: Portrait of Berlin Newspapers of the Weimar Republic. Dissertation. BoD, Norderstedt 2011.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Detlef Lehnert: The "success spiral" of non-simultaneity: Evaluation patterns of the NSDAP election results in the Berlin and Vienna daily press. Springer-Verlag, 2013, p. 30.
  2. ^ Rüdiger Graf: The future of the Weimar Republic: Crises and future appropriations in Germany 1918-1933. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2008, pp. 48-49.
  3. ↑ Karsten Schilling: The Destroyed Legacy: Berlin Newspapers of the Weimar Republic in Portrait. Dissertation . BoD, Norderstedt 2011, p. 214 f.
  4. ↑ Gotthart Schwarz: Berliner Tageblatt (1872-1939). In: Heinz-Dietrich Fischer (Ed.): German newspapers of the 17th – 20th centuries. Century. Fischer, 1972, pp. 315-327.
  5. ↑ Karsten Schilling: The Destroyed Legacy: Berlin Newspapers of the Weimar Republic in Portrait. BoD, Norderstedt 2011, p. 224 f.
  6. ↑ Sabine Rennefanz: The IVW's circulation numbers are not always exact. In: Berliner Zeitung. November 28, 2001.
  7. ^ Otto Altendorfer, Ludwig Hilmer: Media Management. Volume 2: Media Practice. Media history. Media regulations. Springer-Verlag, 2015, p. 164.
  8. ↑ Institute for Comparative Media and Communication Research at the Austrian Academy of Sciences
  9. ↑ David Oels, Ute Schneider: "The whole publishing house is simply a bonbonniere": Ullstein in the first half of the 20th century. Walter de Gruyter, 2015, p. 266.
  10. ^ Otto Altendorfer, Ludwig Hilmer: Media Management. Volume 2: Media Practice. Media history. Media regulations. Springer-Verlag, 2015, p. 164.
  11. ^ Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, p. 470 f.
  12. ↑ ibid.
  13. ^ Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, p. 193 f.
  14. ↑ Karsten Schilling: The Destroyed Legacy: Berlin Newspapers of the Weimar Republic in Portrait . BoD, Norderstedt 2011, p. 222 f.
  15. ^ Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, p. 470.
  16. ^ Kurt Koszyk: German press policy in the First World War. Droste, 1968, p. 167.
  17. ↑ Uwe Klußmann, Joachim Mohr: The Weimar Republic: Germany's first democracy. DVA, 2015, p. 22 f.
  18. ↑ Michael Dreyer: Hugo Preuss. Biography of a Democrat . Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 334-336 .
  19. ↑ Konstanze Wegner: Left liberalism in Wilhelmine Germany and in the Weimar Republic. Literature review. In: History and Society. No. 4, 1978, p. 120.
  20. ^ Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, p. 362 f.
  21. ^ Heinrich August Winkler: Weimar, 1918–1933: The history of the first German democracy. CH Beck, 1998, p. 302.
  22. ↑ Kraus, p. 154 f.
  23. ↑ Bernd Sösemann: Theodor Wolff. A life with the newspaper . Econ Verlag, 2000, ISBN 3-430-18569-6 , p. 88 f.
  24. ↑ Uwe Klußmann, Joachim Mohr: The Weimar Republic: Germany's first democracy. Deutsche Verlagsanstalt, 2015, p. 270.
  25. ↑ Konstanze Wegner: Left liberalism in Wilhelmine Germany and in the Weimar Republic. A literature review. In: History and Society. No. 4, 1978, p. 120.
  26. ^ Peter de Mendelssohn: Berlin newspaper city. People and Powers in the History of the German Press. Frankfurt am Main 1982, p. 180 f.
  27. ↑ Horst Wagner: The founding of the DDP 1918. In: Berlinische Monatsschrift. No. 11, 1998.
  28. ^ Elisabeth Kraus: The Mosse family: German-Jewish bourgeoisie in the 19th and 20th centuries. CH Beck, 1999, p. 495.
  29. ↑ Margret Boveri: We all lie. Walter Olten, 1965, p. 38.
  30. ^ Friedhelm Greis, Ian King: Tucholsky and the media: Documentation of the 2005 conference: "We live in a strange newspaper". Röhrig Universitätsverlag, 2006, pp. 21-27.
  31. ↑ Michael Hepp: Kurt Tucholsky. Rowohlt Verlag, 2015, p. 134.
  32. ↑ ibid.
  33. ↑ Kraus, p. 500 f.
  34. ↑ Karsten Schilling: also, pp. 197–205.
  35. ^ Karl Schottenloher, Johannes Binkowski: Flyer and newspaper: From 1848 to the present. Klinkhardt & Biermann, 1985, p. 116 f.
  36. ↑ Werner Faulstich : The culture of the 30s and 40s. Fink Wilhelm Verlag, 2009, p. 155.
  37. ↑ ibid.
  38. ↑ Werner Stephan: Rise and Decline of Left Liberalism 1918-1933. The history of the German Democratic Party. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973, p. 94 f.
  39. ^ German Democratic Party (DDP) / German State Party 1918–1933 ( German Historical Museum )
  40. ↑ Kraus, also, p. 366 f.
  41. ↑ Kraus, p. 366 f.
  42. ^ Norbert Frei, Johannes Schmitz: Journalism in the Third Reich. CH Beck, 2011, p. 41.
  43. ↑ abbreviated, Elisabeth Kraus, pp. 513-516.
  44. ^ Elisabeth Kraus, p. 513.
  45. ^ Wolfram Köhler: The chief editor Theodor Wolff. Droste, 1978, p. 154.
  46. ↑ Victor Klemperer: I want to testify to the last: Diaries 1933–1945. Aufbau Verlag, 2012. Diary entry from January 30, 1933, p. 10.
  47. ^ Georg Lachmann Mosse: Confronting History - A Memoir. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison 2000, p. 44.
  48. ↑ Bernd Sösemann: Theodor Wolff. A life with the newspaper. Walter de Gruyter, 2001, p. 293.
  49. ↑ ibid.
  50. ↑ ibid.
  51. ↑ George Wronkow : Little man in great times: Reports of a life. Walter de Gruyter, 2008, p. 135.
  52. ↑ Boveri, p. 77.
  53. ↑ ibid
  54. ^ Kraus, p. 511. as well as Karl Vetter: In my own case. In: Mannheimer Morgen. April 26, 1947.
  55. ↑ Kraus, p. 511.
  56. ↑ Wolfram Pyta, Carsten Kretschmann, Giuseppe Ignesti, Tiziana Di Maio: The Challenge of the Dictatorships: Catholicism in Germany and Italy 1918–1943/45. Walter de Gruyter, 2009, p. 146.
  57. ↑ Kraus, p. 492 f.
  58. ↑ Birgit Bublies-Godau, Hans-Georg Fleck, Jürgen Frölich: Yearbook on Liberalism Research. Volumes 12-13. Nomos, 2000, p. 256.
  59. ↑ Kraus, p. 492 f.
  60. ↑ Kraus, p. 719.
  61. ↑ Boveri, p. 219.
  62. ↑ Kraus, p. 501 f.
  63. ↑ Jost Hermand : Culture in dark times: Nazi fascism, internal emigration, exile. Böhlau Verlag, 2010, p. 152.
  64. ^ Norbert Frei, Johannes Schmitz: Journalism in the Third Reich. CH Beck, 2011.
  65. ↑ Kraus, p. 522.
  66. ↑ cf. Reichsmark , purchasing power conversion section: 1 Reichsmark (1924–1936) = 3.32 euros (6.49 Deutsche Mark), which currently (2016) would correspond to 6.63 euros
  67. ↑ Boveri, p. 122 f.
  68. ↑ Boveri, pp. 95-97.
  69. ↑ Margret Boveri, ibid, pp. 95-97.
  70. ↑ Christina Holtz-Bacha, Arnulf Kutsch: Key works for communication science. Springer-Verlag, 2013, p. 79.
  71. ↑ Alexander Kluge: Making newspapers under Hitler. In: Der Spiegel. January 10, 1966.
  72. ↑ Boveri, p. 322 f.
  73. ↑ Walter Kiaulehn : “We all lie” - Margret Boveri's report on the “Berliner Tageblatt” under Hitler . In: The time . No. 51, 1965.
  74. ↑ ibid
  75. ^ Kurt Koszyk : German Press 1914–1945. History of the German Press Part III. Colloquium Verlag, 1972, p. 997.
  76. ↑ Alexander Kluge: Making newspapers under Hitler. In: Der Spiegel. January 10, 1966.
  77. ^ Norbert Frei, Johannes Schmitz: Journalism in the Third Reich. CH Beck, 2011, p. 47.
  78. ^ Burkhard Treude: Conservative Press and National Socialism. Content analysis of the "Neue Preußische (Kreuz-) Zeitung" at the end of the Weimar Republic. Studienverlag Brockmeyer, 1975, p. 32.
  79. ↑ dpma.de