New medium “Otter News”: “We also need stories that give courage”

taz: The climate crisis is dangerous, destructive, deadly. You could say: a beast. You name your new medium after the cute otter, of all things. Why is that, Mr. Drepper?

Daniel Drepper: Because I want to make it clear that Otter News does not only deal with the climate crisis in the form of scientific studies and hard facts, but simply with everything that surrounds us and that affects the climate crisis. I hope that people who don't read every new study on the topic will also be interested in the research and stories. The name is an attempt to appeal to people who might be put off by a name like “Climate Reporting Center”. At the same time, the otter is a good symbol.

taz: Is it particularly threatened by the climate crisis?

Drepper: It can only settle in certain ecosystems. It needs clean water, enough fish to eat and natural shores to hide. Because there was a lack of this, the otter was almost extinct in Germany. But in recent years things have recovered and he is back at home in almost all parts of Germany. So it's also an encouraging story.

taz: So you want to do constructive journalism with “Otter News”?

Drepper: Above all, it's about investigative research on the climate and environmental crisis, of which there is too little in Germany. And the spaces for publication are becoming fewer and fewer. There is a lot to research. But yes, we also need stories that encourage us and stories of examples that work. So that people have something to use as a guide. And I hope that we create journalism that people understand better. So it's not so much secret research behind closed doors for 18 months, but rather that we take the audience along and integrate them step by step.

taz: Investigative journalism brings information to the public that is not easily accessible to them. Isn't it a contradiction to take the readers with you during the research?

Drepper: Theoretically yes. Investigative journalists often keep their research secret because they are afraid of competition. So that the topics are stolen from them. And they fear that companies, authorities and people they are researching will embezzle something, burn documents or intimidate sources.

Drepper: In theory, anything can happen and there will also be research at Otter News that we will only share with the public at the end. But in many cases, research can take place much more transparently because it cannot be hindered at all. There are often too many informants and documents. It would simply be too much effort to cover it all up. And secondly, when people start to cover up, the opposite effect occurs and people start to listen up. Often it is not the story that is the bigger scandal, but the cover-up of this story is what ends up being the big upset. That was also the case with Watergate.

taz: What could this open approach at “Otter News” actually look like?

Drepper: I can tell you about my first research at Otter News, which we started this week. In 2019, there was research into the oil company Exxon in the USA, which showed how the company knew about the impending climate crisis 40 or 50 years ago, but still sabotaged a sustainable energy transition. There is no such research for Germany. I would like to know what things look like here at RWE, Eon, EnBW, Vattenfall, and possibly also at VW, Mercedes, BMW and other large, climate-relevant companies. So what did they know? What studies have you done internally? Who is responsible for this? What options would we have had if companies had reacted earlier? I want to find out all of this and have now announced in a video on Instagram that I would like to research it. The next step is that I call the press offices and say that I want to go into their archives and see all of their documents. And if they don't do that, then the public already knows that the companies are actively blocking it. My hope, of course, is that people who worked there a long time ago and know things will contact me. From previous research, I know that this is sometimes the best way to approach sources.

taz: According to surveys, people are no longer that interested in the climate crisis. How do you want to combat this lack of interest?

Drepper: I think it's all about how we tell stories. As a journalist, despite all my criticism of Meta, Tiktok and the like, I have to acknowledge that I naturally reach people primarily via social media. That's why, in addition to my newsletter, my membership campaign is also running there with 100 short videos in 100 days. And in the future I will continue to communicate in short video content. In podcasts. And also in newsletters, but if possible not constantly with 30,000 character texts. It is my concession to the viewing and attention habits of the audience. Because I think it's important to motivate them to be interested in this relevant topic.

taz: At the time of climate stickers and Fridays for Future, interest was once greater. Where did it go? Gone to hopelessness?

Drepper: That is certainly one reason. But we also have a stressful situation right now: people feel like they have to deal with bad things on all fronts. And many of those who were involved back then can now see that little has improved. That's tiring. For me personally, I notice that the more I engage meaningfully with the topic, the less powerless I feel. Of course I have the advantage of being able to make this my job. This is more difficult for other people. But that is my hope, that if you offer people a medium that involves them more and also wants to tell positive stories, that it will awaken optimism.

taz: It is definitely optimistic to found a medium in these times. The media landscape is not doing well: media outlets are closing, jobs are being cut. Wouldn't it be better to integrate your journalism into an existing media company?

Drepper: I also got the advice from an experienced mentor. But my impression is that you can make the most difference when something new is created. You are freed from bureaucratic processes and are free to try things out. When I founded my last company - both at Correctiv and at Buzzfeed Germany - I had the impression that this also allowed me to influence the work of others. At Buzzfeed we had the first investigative reporter on queer issues or sexual violence. And Correctiv has strengthened the willingness to cooperate in the German media market. This has had an impact beyond our own research.

taz: At that time there was no additional threat from artificial intelligence, which is already replacing the first editorial positions.

Drepper: That's right. But that's precisely why it's important to use a medium to focus on the things that AI can't do. First: shared exchange. I would like to build a community that discusses environmental and climate issues and also the emergence of journalism itself. Because, in my theory, people prefer to communicate with people in the long term than with a robot. Second: investigative stories. Figuring things out against resistance, because AI won't overcome that resistance.

taz: You need 3,000 subscribers who pay 8 euros per month to start “Otter News”. How is the campaign going so far?

Drepper: I get a lot of enthusiastic news. People who write: Finally something is happening in this area. Because of course they also notice how the reporting is decreasing, that WDR is discontinuing its climate account, and that Flip is being closed. And what I think is a great vote of confidence: that after just over a week, 50 people have already applied to me, even though we haven't published a single story yet. Of course, in order to hire anyone at all, you first need the subscriptions. But I am confident that they will come.