The Great Irritability

The Editorial Society

Principles and Responsibility in the Digital Media World

The interconnected world of the 21st century exists in a state of permanent excitement, characterized by accelerated flows of information, fragmented publics, and the dissolution of traditional gatekeeper structures. Bernhard Pörksen analyzes in The Great Irritation the crises of the digital media order – from the truth and discourse crisis to the crisis of reputation and authority – and proposes in response the utopia of an editorial society. This vision aims for a culture of media literacy, in which each individual internalizes the principles of journalistic diligence and assumes responsibility for their role as both sender and recipient of information.

At the heart of this are the ethical considerations between freedom and responsibility, transparency and privacy, autonomy and regulation.

The Crises of the Digital Media Order as a Starting Point

Truth Crisis: The Fragility of Certainty

Digitization has democratized the production and dissemination of information, but at the same time shaken the foundations of truth and credibility. Pörksen describes the modern 'Turing Test' of the digital age: Every user must decide daily whether they are dealing with human communication, algorithmically generated content, or targeted disinformation. The example of the fictional kidnapping case of 13-year-old Lisa – which turned out to be a media fabrication but led to international diplomatic tensions – illustrates how rumors mutate into perceived realities in echo chambers, and traditional media lose interpretive authority. The result is a perceived manipulation that fosters distrust and poisons social discourse.

Discourse Crisis: The Loss of Civilizing Filters

In the 'outrage democracy' (Pörksen), narratives clash unfiltered. Social networks enable radical positions to spread without journalistic containment – a phenomenon made visible in the 'Lisa case' through the targeted instrumentalization by Russian state media and far-right groups. The weakening of traditional gatekeepers leads to a polarization in which debates revolve not around consensus but around maximum excitement. Pörksen speaks of a 'fifth power' of networked many, who exercise power through scandalization but hardly take responsibility for the consequences.

Authority Crisis: The Disenchantment of Institutions

Digital media expose the fallibility of authorities in real-time. Politicians, scientists, or journalists lose their charisma as soon as personal indiscretions or intellectual contradictions go viral. These 'pains of visibility' (Pörksen) undermine trust in institutions and create a vacuum filled by populists and conspiracy theorists. The consequence is a vicious circle of cynicism and further loss of solidarity.

Principles of the Editorial Society

Publication Ethics: Responsibility as New General Education

Pörksen calls for an 'ethics of publishing' that goes beyond journalism. Every user should learn to apply the key questions of editorial work – source verification, transparency, relevance – to their actions. This includes:

Obligation of Research: The verification of facts before sharing, even if it takes time.

Contextualization: Avoiding out-of-context quotes and showing larger contexts.

Error Culture: The correction of misinformation instead of defensive justification.

The goal is a society where the 'journalistic zone of responsibility' (Pörksen) is no longer reserved for professionals but becomes a collective practice.

Dialogic Journalism: From Gatekeeper to Moderator

Traditional media must relinquish the claim to sole interpretive authority. Instead, they should function as moderators who convey different perspectives and report transparently on decision-making processes. Pörksen advocates for a 'journalism at eye level' that:

• Involves readers in research (e.g., through crowdsourcing),

• Discloses algorithms that control news selection,

• Communicates its own mistakes and conflicts of interest.

This requires a departure from 'asymmetric communication' (Pörksen), in which journalists appear as infallible authorities.

Platform Responsibility: Regulation and Self-Control

Social networks often operate as 'excitement machines' that maximize profit through clickbait and emotional content. Pörksen proposes a platform council – a self-regulatory body analogous to the press council – that develops ethical standards for algorithms and sanctions violations. Central to this are:

• Transparency of Filters: Users must know why certain content is shown to them.

• Combating Bots and Fake Accounts: Platforms must be required to identify manipulative actors.

• Privacy Protection: The collection and commercial use of data must be limited.

Proposals for Expanded Responsibility

Media Literacy as a School Subject

Pörksen calls for a dedicated curriculum in critical information competence. This includes:

• Media History: From printing to AI, to understand power structures.

• Practical Error Science: Students analyze their own filter bubbles and experiment with manipulation techniques.

• Ethics of Publication: Role plays in which decisions about sharing content are debated.

Such a subject would not be a technical manual, but a 'school of judgment' (Pörksen), sharpening empathy for the consequences of communication.

The Ambivalence of Scandalization

The example of the #Aufschrei hashtag shows the dual nature of digital outrage: On the one hand, it made structural sexism visible, on the other hand, it led to blanket denouncements. Pörksen emphasizes that an editorial society must learn to differentiate between justified criticism and destructive smear. This requires:

• Context-Sensitive Moderation: Platforms must differentiate whether a statement is part of a legitimate debate or targeted degradation.

• Right to Be Forgotten: Victims of unfounded scandals must be afforded opportunities for rehabilitation.

The Utopia of Editorial Awareness

Ultimately, Pörksen seeks a cultural revolution: The principles of the editorial society should help transform the 'collective irritation' into productive discourse. This presupposes that individuals and institutions:

• Accept Vulnerability: Admit mistakes instead of retreating into cynicism.

• Strengthen Dialog Capability: View debates as an opportunity for self-reflection, not a battleground.

• Cultivate Slowness: Consciously resist the pressure for immediate reaction.

Media Literacy as a Democratic Survival Question

Pörksen's vision of the editorial society is not a technocratic rulebook but a call for intellectual humility. In a world where everyone has become a broadcaster, the ability to responsibly handle information determines the cohesion of democracy. This requires the courage to be imperfect, investments in education, and the will to make power structures – whether in editorial offices, platforms, or governments – transparent. The alternative is further escalation of the 'great irritation', where truth turns into opinion, and democracy into spectacle.1 Bernhard Pörksen: The Great Irritation. Paths Out of Collective Excitement. Hanser Verlag, 2018.