top of page

Satire – freedom of speech vs defamation

Writer's picture: Marie Flugel Marie Flugel

What is Satire?  

Satire’s purpose is to critique broader social issues in an exaggerated way. As a popular rhetorical device, its intention is to ridicule, not to defame. Mischa Senn of Zurich University of the Arts identifies three key elements of satire: an aggressive element, a social element, and an aesthetic element. The aggressive element is directed against an authority, power, or institution that represents certain behaviors being criticized. The social element ensures that satire does not become abusive criticism, as it is not meant to serve as a personal attack. The aesthetic element provides the framework for the critique by incorporating artistic and fictional components.  


Defamation: A Political and Legal Éclat  

There is often a thin line between satire and defamation, as satire seeks to push the legal boundaries of freedom of speech. In Germany, the TV program ZDF Magazin Royale has gained popularity as a satirical show that combines investigative journalism with comedy.  


The show’s presenter, Jan Böhmermann, brought the issue of satire’s boundaries into international legal and political focus. In one instance, the program aired a satirical song about Turkish President Erdogan, which was later removed after Erdogan summoned the German ambassador to demand its deletion. Böhmermann subsequently criticized

Erdogan’s approach to freedom of speech, accusing him of attempting to ban anything portraying him negatively. To illustrate his point, Böhmermann read an offensive poem about Erdogan, framing it as an example of testing the limits of free speech.  


The poem sparked a political and legal crisis. Erdogan responded by contacting then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel and filing criminal charges against Böhmermann under German law. In its final decision, the German Federal Constitutional Court dismissed Böhmermann’s appeal.  


While the legal situation is now resolved, the court’s decision raised significant policy

concerns. Critics argue that the ruling narrowed the scope of satire, prioritizing political interests over a broad interpretation of freedom of speech.  


Similar concerns arose in a more recent case. In 2024, ZDF Magazin Royale aired an episode criticizing comparisons made by several FDP politicians between the terrorist organization Rote Armee Fraktion (RAF) and Last Generation climate activists. While the episode was largely protected under freedom of speech, a poster created for the show included misleading information about Stefan Aust, a journalist who had reported on the RAF in the 1970s. Aust successfully sued the TV channel ZDF for defamation.  


Where Should We Draw the Line?  

The cases presented highlight the delicate balance between satire and defamation. When determining whether a work is defamatory, it is crucial to consider the overall purpose of the work and its context, as these shape audience expectations and perceptions. However, as these examples demonstrate, even with careful consideration, it is often safer to err on the side of caution.


References:

  • “Wo liegen die rechtlichen Grenzen der Satire”( www.zhdk.ch)

  • “Die Causa Böhmermann  Eine Zwischenbilanz” -(DW) 

  • “Erdogan-Schmähgedicht: Böhmermann verliert vor Bundesverfassungsgericht” - (Süddeutsche Zeitung)

  • “Böhmermanns Satirekonzept in Gefahr” (Legal Tribune Online)

  • Böhmermann: German satirist sparks freedom of speech debate”-(DW)







14 views2 comments

2 Comments


flying.dutchman
Jan 23

The German Constututional Court cannot dismiss apeals because you can literlly not appeal to the German Constitutional Court. You can only bring forward new action but not appeal to already existing actions (like you could, for example, in a civil procedure where you can appeal from an Antsgericht to an Oberlandesgericht etc.). Böhmermann did bring forward an action (a Verfassungsbeschwerde, i.e. an action against the legality of e.g. a law) which was ultimately dismissed. However, this is NOT an appeal. There was a civil procedure which he lost, yes, but that was the same action as the one brought before the Constitutional court. Please do make sure the terminology you are using is accurate.


Further, it would also have been…


Like
Marie F
Marie F
Jan 26
Replying to

Hi flying.dutchman, thank you very much for your comment on my article! You have made a valid point about the German Constitutional Court that you cannot bring an appeal directly. My article aims to give a brief overview of the topic for those unfamiliar with the Böhmermann cases and to highlight the balance between satire and legal limits, especially targeting readers from other jurisdictions.

Like
  • Spotify
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

Subscribe 

Join our email list to get our articles straight in your inbox

Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page