Talk:West German student movement

Still, with the exception of ARD and ZDF, the state television networks as well as several local radio stations, there IS no "government-controlled mass media" in Germany. Axel Springer and other German publishing houses are privately-owned and are in no way related to any part of the government. Rather, they, especially Springer, are a force of their own in German politics, a fact that is not reflected in the article. Rather, it portrays these publishing houses as extensions of a purported (and largely non-existent) government propaganda machine which does not do justice to their important - and controversial - role in the events of 68. This image of government propaganda only adds to the bias in favour of the students in an already quite biased article. Something Wicked (talk)

The content of this article is excellent; whoever wrote it clearly has a deep understanding of the German student movement. However, there are issues of writing and style that need to be fixed -- I have essentially fixed the first section and I'm continuing on the rest of the article. When this task is done, the cleanup tag will be removed, for, as I've already stated, this is an excellent article.Zantastik 17:36, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think this article is too biaised in favour of the students. e.g. "the police attacked and hunted down protestors" or "the government controlled the mass media". this article needs to be more neutral and less in favour of the student movement.

I am rewording as much of the article as is plausible, and hopefully removing bias as I do. Polocrunch 12:42, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is no information here on Fritz Teufel and his impact on the student movement? Unfortunately most of what I've found online is in Deutsch (which I do not speak or read fluently), and much of his impact may be mostly known to German-speakers. Could someone please add to this? 67.10.131.229 05:25, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

This is still too biased. "students had already discovered that the economic wealth of the nation, instead of improving the standard of living of the working class, would destroy it". Is that a discovery? On the other hand, "students were mostly taught scientific models of economics, politics etc. but were not taught how they worked, that they could be changed", this is part of a discussion on the epistemology of social sciences, it should be made more neutral. I am making some changes on "intoleran decision-making process", the above "discovered", "aggresively imperialistic policy" (of the USA), all the paragraph on the "aggresive public opinion" (by such a definition of aggresive, the students themselves were agressive), the "it happened" and other diction issues, "with brutal force", "aggresively conservative". YoungSpinoza

The article seems very biased in favor of "the students."

What's missing from this article is the fact that the 68ers were very much a "WEST German" movement. Even the title needs changing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.188.235.172 (talk) 08:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The article seems very biased in favor of "the students." It is indeed! Very unbalanced! It reads as if it were the work of a member of the SDS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.237.47.51 (talk) 11:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The article seems generally simplistic and overly generalised in its explanation. There is nary a sentence that I read without questioning its precision or validity, and it reads in a very stilted manner (Perhaps a non-native speaker? As a linguist, I would be tempted to suggest this to be the case. Not a problem in and of itself, but it could be improved to be a better read.) It is also very allusive, with little in the way of solidly referenced 'facts'; with properly researched and cited information, this could be a truly informative article. As it stands, it explains little, poorly, in a biased manner, and without lending much credence to what it says. Locuteh (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

bad Bad BAD

this article is terrible.

• practically every other word needs verification.
• there is too much jumping to conclusion without deep reflection on the facts.
• there is absolutely no media in this article.
• written as if the article was a school essay.