Would the Greek crisis exist without the media?

DW: Would there be a Greek crisis if the media didn't exist?

Hans-Mathias Kepplinger: If mass media didn't exist, we wouldn't have so many summits and emergency meetings on Greece - where ultimately very little is ever agreed upon or decided, despite the immense importance attributed to these occurrences.

If mass media didn't exist, the public - in Germany, at least - wouldn't be concerned in the least about [Greek Prime Minister Tsipras and Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis], and, as well, the negative reception we hear about of these Greek politicians around Europe wouldn't exist either.

Let me be clear. Mass media are not the sole cause of these phenomena, but they are essential to their existence.

What does the extra media coverage serve? The media themselves?

No. In the final analysis, it's done for the public.

However, the "reality" that is reported to the public is not independent from the reporting. It is the direct result of reports that have already been written about Greece, and thus also serves to shape reports that will be written in the future.

The supposition that reality transpires on its own, and that journalists simply describe it, has always been wrong. As time progresses, this idea is becoming more and more wrong.

The flood of reports about Greece from newsrooms around Europe right now is because this is an important story for Europeans. Would you disagree with that?

"Important" is what the media deem important.

But whether Greece remains in the eurozone is certainly of importance, isn't it ?

The true substance of the Greek crisis, including wide-ranging domestic financial issues and the reconstruction of the Greek state and the future makeup of the eurozone will not change in the immediate future, nor can these things be affected in any fundamental way by what is reported.

But isn't the function of mass media to inform the public about relevant, important happenings?

Allow me to bring up an example that illustrates what I'm saying. In 1989, there was an earthquake in San Francisco that ultimately killed a few dozen people. A few months later, an earthquake happened in Iran that killed tens of thousands of people. Here in Germany, there was wall-to-wall coverage of the San Francisco tragedy and the public perception in Germany was that this was an extremely important event.

Barely anything was reported about the Iran earthquake, and thus it was deemed insignificant.

Importance is a subjective category that cannot be attributed to any event. The more people think an event is important, the more "important" it becomes, exactly like what's happening right now with Greece. When "breaking news" happens, very few are aware the feeling that suggests an event is important is simply a subjective reaction in imitation of all the others who think the same thing.

So journalists simply imitate each other?

What's really going on right now in Athens or Berlin in its entirety is far too complicated for our brains to comprehend. In order to reduce this complexity, we need stereotypes and certain patterns that we can understand. As soon as these stereotypes begin to be shared on a widespread level, our brains begin to copy what those around us think, and we believe what we think is true - without the need of objective proof.

So if "The New York Times," the "Guardian," and "Der Spiegel" report tomorrow that the Greek crisis has been solved, will it just disappear?

(Laughs) Indeed, there are leading outfits that enjoy influence over the others. And when these big publications reach consensus on a certain topic, the other, less influential publications will follow.

This is most apparent in the case of personal scandals, such as that of former German Federal President Christian Wulff. Despite the fact that there was no substantial evidence against him [the former president has since been acquitted of all charges of abuse of office], as soon as the leading media in German published allegations suggesting he had abused his office, every single paper, news channel or online site immediately let loose. It was like a bush fire all around the country.

Like right now with the causes for the crisis in Greece?

Let's look at a comparison of how different countries have reported on the eurozone crisis as part of a study we've been conducting in 10 countries over the past few years with regard to the following question: What is the cause of the debt crisis?

If you look at the German press, the cause is clearly found in structural deficiencies in those particular countries where debt problems have arisen, above all Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. I reiterate - structural deficiencies on the domestic level.

If you look at the British press, the cause of the crisis is clearly found in structural deficiencies with regard to the treaty on which the introduction of the euro is based. This represents an extreme difference to the German perspective, although we are talking about the same phenomenon.

As a result, these differing perspectives exert strong influence on the proposed solutions for how to solve the crisis in these respective countries - both in the media and in reality.

Hans Mathias Kepplinger is a renowned German sociologist and communications researcher who has written extensively on the nature and role of media in the context of modern society. He currently teaches at the University of Mainz.