party worker of AfD: struggle for research at "Context"
As a fresh-out-of-the-oven journalist, I dove headfirst into the saga of Anna Hunger and the weekly Kontext Magazine back in early 2018. Things really heated up when Anna stumbled upon a USB stick loaded with extremist chats from an AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) member. The stuff she found was downright disgusting – war rhetoric, bigotry, blatant racism – the whole nine yards. This four-year-long conversation painted a striking picture of extremist ideology.
The Kontext team threw their investigative hats on and meticulously scrutinized the chat logs. After weeks of gritty work, it was clear as day that the chats were authentic. On May 9, 2018, they published the bombshell report, "‘Sieg Heil’ with a Smiley."
The debate about whether the AfD was extremist was heated back then. The Constitutional Protection Intelligence Service has since confirmed it, but at the time, it was still a bone of contention. The Kontext Redaction was keen to expose the right-wing bias of this guy. But then came the long-drawn-out legal battle, one that challenged the very foundations of investigative journalism. The AfD member sued Kontext and its journalists, aiming to suppress the naming and location of the chats in relation to right-wing extremism.
The 60,000 euro lawsuit was a shockingly high figure for a media rights case from the get-go. A loss in court would have spelled the end for the little Kontext Redaction. Only through a crowd-funding campaign could they arm themselves against the financial risks. The wild chase through the courtrooms began at the Mannheim Regional Court, where Kontext came up short. However, in the second instance at the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court (OLG), a decision was made in favor of Kontext. But the plaintiff and his lawyers were far from finished and initiated a main trial, which eventually landed at the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main.
The Frankfurt trial made headlines and the court ruled again in favor of Kontext. But then came the unusual verdict in March 2025. The Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt am Main decided that the chats could not be definitively attributed to the AfD member. Kontext could not prove the chats were not manipulated. This decision caused a stir in many newsrooms and raised important questions, particularly about source protection and the authenticity of digital evidence.
The Kontext Redaction and their lawyers are determined to appeal the verdict. An objection was filed with the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) to challenge the verdict. Much is at stake, not just for Kontext, but for investigative journalism as a whole. If the verdict stands, it could significantly impact the way journalists work. It remains to be seen how the story of Kontext and the AfD member unfolds further.
Come on, folks! Support the taz and our journalism. We need your help to continue producing critical journalism. With just 5 euros, you're part of the action!
The Kontext Magazine's controversial report, "‘Sieg Heil’ with a Smiley," uncovered extremist chats from an AfD member, sparking debates about the party's extremist policies and ideology in politics and policy-and-legislation. The subsequent legal battle between the AfD member and Kontext Magazine has raised critical questions about source protection, authenticity of digital evidence, and the future of investigative journalism. Their ongoing appeal to the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) may set a significant precedent in these areas, highlighting the importance of general-news publications like the taz for supporting critical journalism.
