Criticism has been mounting around the planned television duels between Chancellor Olaf Scholz and opposition leader Friedrich Merz, scheduled for February 9 and 16, 2025, as part of the upcoming Bundestagswahl. The duels, airing on ARD, ZDF, and RTL, are set against the backdrop of significant scrutiny from various political parties, particularly the Greens.
The controversy erupted after reports surfaced alleging Scholz exerted pressure on the television networks to format the encounters exclusively as duels, effectively sidelining other key candidates vying for the chancellorship. Irene Mihalic, the parliamentary group leader of the Greens, emphatically stated, “Das ist aus meiner Sicht erklärungsbedürftig” (Translated: “This is, in my opinion, worthy of explanation”), calling for clarity on whether Scholz's demands compromised the democratic integrity of the process.
Earlier this month, ARD and ZDF announced the duels, positioning Scholz as the incumbent and Merz representing the greatest challenge to his leadership. The decision to limit the debates to just these two candidates ignited fierce backlash from not only the Greens but also from other political factions, like the AfD. A spokesperson for ARD refuted allegations of influence, asserting, “Unser redaktionelles Konzept wurde vollständig unabhängig von jeglichen Bedingungen oder Einflussnahmen der Politikerinnen und Politiker entwickelt” (Translated: “Our editorial concept was developed independently of any conditions or influences from politicians”).
Critics argue this setup offers a distorted representation of the political reality, where the inclusion of candidates such as Robert Habeck of the Greens and Alice Weidel of the AfD is necessary for voters to make informed decisions. Notably, during the last Bundestagswahl, three candidates participated – Scholz, Armin Laschet, and Annalena Baerbock – which reflects the more complex political dynamics within the country.
Britta Haßelmann, another prominent Green figure, shared her incredulity over the media's decision, stating, “Die Zeiten der beiden großen Volksparteien sind vorbei. Das wissen alle. Der Öffentlich-Rechtliche noch nicht?” (Translated: “The times of the two major parties are over. Everyone knows this. The public broadcaster evidently does not?”).
The limited nature of this year’s format has led other parties to voice their grievances. Robert Habeck explicitly declined to accept invitations for these duels without broader representation, hinting at the necessity of diverse candidate perspectives. Meanwhile, Sahra Wagenknecht of the self-named coalition expressed the need for all candidates to be part of these discussions, stating, “Dann könnten die Bürger sich ihr eigenes Bild von den Kandidaten und ihren Programmen machen” (Translated: “Then citizens could form their own idea of the candidates and their programs”).
Adding to the discourse, Christian Lindner, the leader of the FDP, even proposed replacing Habeck should he decline participation, emphasizing the importance of inclusive debate formats, particularly with rising influencer pressures such as the AfD.
According to Kristina Weissenbach, a political researcher from the University of Duisburg-Essen, these TV debates are pivotal: “Das sind 90 Minuten Wahlkampf im Brennglas” (Translated: “These are 90 minutes of campaign reflection”). They tend to engage voters who otherwise might not familiarize themselves with the candidates or their platforms. Hinrichs from the AfD has gone as far as to indicate potential legal action against the networks over their decision to exclude her party, arguing “dass sie als Partei mit den aktuell zweitbesten Umfragewerten” (that they are excluded as the party with currently the second best polling numbers).
The impending duels carry the weight of the democratic process on their shoulders, positioned amid wider discussions about representation and accessibility within the electoral system. The airwaves, largely state-funded and publicly regulated, hold specific obligations to provide coverage reflective of the political spectrum.
With the series of upcoming debates fast approaching, all eyes will be on how well this limited representation—rooted heavily around the two largest parties—will resonate with the electorate. The ethical dilemmas stemming from such formatting decisions pose significant questions about the future of public broadcasting and the role it plays during major electoral contests.
Past TV duels have set precedents for engaging the voting populace, but this planned approach may leave numerous voters feeling disconnected from the political conversation. The duels have become not only about debate performance, but also about shaping public perception, which promises to be as indicative of the potential election outcome as the actual votes cast come February 23, 2025.
