Executive Summary

The Independent Complaints Board for Radio and Television (UBI) upheld several complaints against SRG broadcasts on 22 May 2026. The radio programme «Treffpunkt» featuring an SRF science journalist on Covid vaccination violated the accuracy requirement through one-sided positive presentation without critical contextualization. An SRF television programme on inheritance tax violated the diversity requirement as it was broadcast three weeks before the vote. An RTS radio programme on measles and Covid vaccination also violated the accuracy requirement. Interviews with former vaccination chief Christoph Berger and four reports on the Middle East conflict were found to be legally compliant.

People

Topics

  • Media supervision and broadcasting law
  • Covid-19 vaccination communication
  • Voting coverage
  • Accuracy requirement
  • Diversity requirement

Clarus Lead

The UBI decisions demonstrate intensified scrutiny of vaccination reporting and voting journalism. The cases point to tensions between science communication and editorial balance – particularly when experts are given a platform without critical contextualization or when broadcasts are repeated during sensitive voting phases. The decisions will be subject to challenge at the Federal Court and could set precedents for future vaccination and voting coverage.

Detailed Summary

The UBI criticized the December 2025 broadcast «Treffpunkt» (title: «5 Years On: First Corona Vaccination in Switzerland»), because the nearly one-hour discussion with a journalist presenting herself as a specialist and science editor contained no critical perspectives on mRNA vaccines. Missing: medical criticism, side effects, and open research questions. The UBI rejected the argument that the audience had sufficient prior knowledge and referred to decision b. 1014 («RKI Protocols»). The vote was 7:2 in favour.

The programme «Bleisch & Bossart» (8 November 2025, title: «Is Inheritance Fair?») was broadcast three weeks before the inheritance tax vote (30 November 2025) and positioned two philosophers one-sidedly in favour of the tax. Although it was a repeat from 2021, the UBI found the diversity requirement to be violated (7:2). The editorial team had already acknowledged the error and apologized in writing; therefore, the UBI unanimously refrained from initiating enforcement proceedings under Art. 89 RTVG.

The RTS radio programme «Forum» of 24 April 2025 reported on a WHO-UNICEF-GAVI statement on measles outbreaks. A majority of UBI members (5:4) criticized the fact that journalists had not verified the mortality figures of an INFOVAC expert and had not corrected a false statement («Effects of the Covid vaccine are not there»). The statement was factually incorrect; Covid vaccination side effects had actually occurred and in some cases persisted. The majority found the journalistic duty of care to be violated.

Interviews with Christoph Berger (former head of the Federal Commission for Vaccination Issues, EKIF) in the programme «Tagesgespräch» (18 December 2024) and online (28 December 2024) were unanimously rejected. Although the UBI criticized the statement that infections and vaccinations were «harmless» for children, it considered the publications overall to be accurate due to the moderator's critical questioning. A popular complaint against four RTS publications on Gaza (October 2025) was unanimously rejected: the UBI found that media professionals are not bound by terminology pending judicial clarification and that RTS was entitled to rely on official Federal Council terminology.

Key Statements

  • The UBI found two SRF broadcasts on Covid vaccination to be factually inappropriate because critical perspectives were lacking or one-sided presentations dominated.
  • An SRF television programme on inheritance tax violated the diversity requirement by being broadcast shortly before a vote.
  • The UBI criticized deficiencies in journalistic due diligence in RTS reporting on measles outbreaks (fact-checking, source verification).
  • Interviews with former vaccination chief Christoph Berger were found to be fundamentally accurate despite critical points.

Critical Questions

  1. Evidence/Data Quality: What specific criteria does the UBI define for the «accuracy requirement» on scientific topics – and how does it distinguish between legitimate simplification and impermissible one-sidedness?

  2. Conflicts of Interest: Did the complainants themselves have scientific or political positions on vaccination or inheritance tax that could have influenced their perception of «one-sidedness»?

  3. Causality/Alternatives: Can the UBI demonstrate that the lack of critical contextualization in the «Treffpunkt» broadcast actually led to opinion formation – or is this a hypothetical assumption?

  4. Feasibility/Risks: How can media professionals conduct real-time fact-checking in live broadcasts (such as «Forum») without delaying or interrupting reporting?

  5. Diversity Requirement and Repeats: Is it factually justified to evaluate a 2021-produced broadcast as a diversity violation during the 2025 voting phase if the original production preceded this phase?

  6. Source Validity in RTS Broadcast: Would the invitation of an INFOVAC expert to balance WHO figures not already have represented sufficient multi-perspective coverage?

Bibliography

Primary Source: Independent Complaints Board for Radio and Television (UBI): Press Release on Decisions of 22 May 2026 – https://www.news.admin.ch/de/newnsb/X0Jm81bnHn12

Verification Status: ✓ 22.05.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-checking: 22.05.2026