AI Opinion Column Scandal Rocks German Media
The Berlin-based newspaper Tagesspiegel has temporarily suspended the column of one of its most prominent political commentators after discovering he used artificial intelligence to write his articles. Former publisher and editor-in-chief Stephan-Andreas Casdorff, 67, admitted to the ‘grave mistake’, stating he had damaged the publication’s reputation and his own. ‘I used AI in these texts. I should have disclosed that, and because I did not, I should not have allowed the articles to be published,’ he said. The editorial team has removed several of his articles from the website pending a detailed investigation.
The case has intensified the often fierce debate about the use of AI in journalism. It emerged just days after another incident involving the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), which published a guest opinion piece by Thuringia’s State Premier Mario Voigt that was also created with the help of AI. FAZ stated it only learned of the AI involvement after publication.
Media researcher Vera Katzenberger from the University of Leipzig described the Casdorff case as particularly serious because it shakes trust in journalism. ‘This is not about support in brainstorming or research; it concerns the core of journalistic work,’ she told DW. She argued that if opinion pieces are generated by AI without disclosure, the public could rightly view it as deception. Katzenberger warned that AI-generated commentary is dangerous because opinion pieces serve a special function in democratic discourse, providing orientation and helping people form their own views. AI, lacking values, political stance, or a sense of responsibility, directly interferes with this process of public opinion formation.
Tagesspiegel’s editorial team stated that the columnist had violated clear internal editorial guidelines which mandate that journalistic judgement, the weighing of information, analytical classification, and the writing itself must always be the author’s responsibility. The FAZ also removed the AI-generated guest article from its website. Researcher Katzenberger sees the issue from two sides: anyone writing or submitting an article must disclose whether and how AI was used, but editors can no longer simply rely on authors’ statements and must adapt their verification processes.
In a provocative counter-move, Mathias Döpfner, CEO of the influential media company Axel Springer, criticised the FAZ’s decision to delete the AI-generated article. Döpfner revealed he had prompted an AI to polemically attack FAZ, then published the resulting text under his own name, accusing the paper of rejecting modern technology in a ‘desperate attempt by the horse-drawn carriage lobby to ban the automobile.’
The German Press Council, the self-regulatory body overseeing print and online media, maintains that editorial responsibility for all reports lies entirely with the newsroom, regardless of how they are produced. While it currently sees no need for mandatory labelling of AI-generated texts, it acknowledges that certain cases could constitute serious violations of the duty of care and truthfulness. The debate follows earlier criticism of Axel Springer-owned Business Insider for publishing an AI-generated report about a mother working from home while caring for a toddler.