Lying press

"Lügenpresse" banner seen in a Pegida demonstration

In late 2014, the term was repopularised by the far-right political movement Pegida in response to what its protesters felt was a scornful treatment by the mainstream media, as well as biased press reporting on the rising migrant influx and other immigration issues. It was chosen to be the "Un-word of the year" for 2014 by a panel of five linguists and journalists of the Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache for "wholesale defamation" of the work of the media.[7] President Joachim Gauck condemned the chanting of the slogan as "ahistorical nonsense", maintaining that in contrast to the Nazi and the GDR era the federal German press is not manipulative in character and "covers events mostly in a correct and balanced way".[8]

Alternative for Germany chair Frauke Petry accused the German media of "defamatory" coverage of her party at a party congress at Hanover, but said the party executive would use the term "lying press" sparingly, preferring the milder designation "Pinocchio press".[9] Her fellow party member Björn Höcke criticized Lügenpresse as too sweeping a verdict for the journalistic profession, arguing instead for the alternative, phonetically very similar term 'Lückenpresse' ("gaps press"), which would describe more accurately reporting bias.[10]

German media detractors felt vindicated by the perceived lack of mainstream coverage of the 2016 New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany.[11] Most media outlets ignored the mass assaults by North African migrants and only started reporting on them five days later, after a wave of anger on social media made covering them unavoidable.[12][13] The delay in reporting on the incidents led to accusations that the authorities and the media attempted to ignore or cover up the migrant attacks to avoid criticism against the asylum and migration policy of the Merkel government.[14][15] Former interior minister Hans-Peter Friedrich (CSU) criticized the media for upholding a "cartel of silence": "There's suspicion that they believe they don't have to report on such assaults, especially involving migrants and foreigners, for fear of unsettling the public."[11] The German press codex at that time still advised against mentioning the religion or ethnicity of criminal suspects and offenders unless there was a "factual connection" to the crime.[16]

A 2015 poll by Infratest dimap found one-fifth of Germans using the term in reference to German media, including newspapers, radio and TV, while almost three-fourths do not employ the word. 42 percent have doubts about the media's credibility, whereas 52 percent believe its coverage to be reliable on the whole.[17] According to a representative poll by the Allensbach Institute of the same year, 39 percent of adult Germans think that there is some truth to the criticism of Pegida that the mainstream press is distorting facts and concealing crucial information from the reader; in the new states of Germany this is believed by 44 percent of the population.[18] Another 2015 survey, by the weekly Die Zeit, found that 50 percent of respondents did not trust the media coverage on the refugee crisis, 56 percent not on the Pegida movement, 63 percent not on the European debt crisis and 66 percent not on the Ukraine conflict.[19]

Prior to the 2016 Presidential election, the term began to be known in American society due to its usage by some, such as neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, president of the National Policy Institute (NPI).[20] The term was also used at an October 2016 campaign rally in Cleveland, Ohio for Donald Trump.[21]