Written by ostanden on February 15, 2025

From the regions of Hyde Park to Hamburg: the story of Rob Hyde and his journalistic experiences

Freedom of speech . Germany . Interview . Media . Media influence . Opinion piece . Research@IfKW . Travel

by Ollie Standen

Born and raised in England, Rob Hyde graduated from London College of Communications before working for a small English-language newspaper called ‘The Vienna Reporter’. After working in London for the BBC’s ‘German Fix’ language learning Channel he returned to Austria to work for ‘Central European News’ in Vienna before becoming a freelance for a lot of mainstream UK newspapers and moved to Germany to do a mixture of Journalism work and English-Language training work.

The transition for anyone working abroad may cause a lot of difficulties, especially with different cultural and language barriers in the way and trying to adapt:

Ollie Standen: How do you find living in Germany, is there any particular activities you like doing here?

Rob Hyde: “I’ve been in Germany for 20 years now, so I know it pretty well. Through my work as a journalist, I’m constantly on the move, which means where I actually live isn’t that important to me.

Yesterday, for example, I was covering the trial related to the extortion of Michael Schumacher’s family. On my way back up north, another major story broke in Bavaria, and under normal circumstances, I would have had to go there as well. However, I can’t because tomorrow I’m heading up to Koln. In a way, this constant movement is a good thing—it means I’m very familiar with the country as a whole. That said, I don’t love everything about it. After 20 years here, I’ve noticed certain cultural differences, particularly in customer service and bureaucracy, which can be frustrating.

As a journalist, dealing with the courts, the police, or even companies can be challenging. In Germany, if you contact a company for a quick comment, they’ll often insist on responding in writing, which can take days. You might get an email back five days later that simply says, “No comment,” or, worse, they might commission a professor to write a lengthy, overly formal four-page response that doesn’t actually address the question.

A simple 10-minute phone call could provide much more natural and direct answers, but that approach is rare here. Even when you do receive a response, it’s often so pre-prepared and rehearsed that it feels artificial.

I know the British press has a bad reputation in Germany, and in some ways, that reputation is deserved. However, one thing the British press does well is refusing to accept vague, bureaucratic answers. In contrast, the German press tends to be quite tame it seems almost grateful for whatever information it gets from lawyers, PR teams, or official sources. As a result, journalism here often feels less direct and less investigative.”

O.S.: So if there is this frustrating nature within the Journalistic world in German, what made you want to report on German affairs?

RH: I guess I’ve always had a natural connection to journalism it’s just who I am. I love research, I’m a bit of a nerd, and I enjoy writing, asking questions, and uncovering information. In a way, I get a real kick out of exposing corruption and taking down the bad guys.

Unfortunately and I say this with no pride a significant part of the job isn’t quite as meaningful. A lot of it involves covering trivial stories, like writing about celebrities I don’t particularly care for, simply because that’s what gets attention.

I don’t feel especially proud of that, but at the same time, who am I to dictate what the British public should be reading? If people want to read about Nottingham beauty queens or Boris Becker, even if I don’t personally have much interest in them, then so be it. It’s not my place to tell them they should be reading in-depth investigative pieces instead.

O.S.: So on the topic of the British public, when reporting on German affairs to UK readers how do you decide which stories about Germany will resonate with that readership?

RH: “I wish I could just pitch stories to newspapers and have them say, “Great, go for it!” but it doesn’t work that way. When I put together my news list, I’ve learned to focus on stories I know will actually get picked up.

I used to feel a bit ashamed about chasing stories just because they were more likely to get published. But then I had a key turning point.

I remember a key turning point for me it was a really lovely story from Germany. There was a young girl whose ID card had previously labelled her as “handicapped.” But in a rare moment of flexibility, the authorities agreed to change it to simply “determined.”

The story got a lot of coverage in the local press, and even other small municipalities started following the example. I thought, This is a beautiful story—it deserves to be shared.

But when I pitched it to the British press, I didn’t even get a single email back. So I started calling around charity magazines, hoping someone would publish it. I even ended up offering it for free, just because I believed in it so much. But despite my efforts, I couldn’t place it anywhere.

And yet, if I had written a throwaway article about Boris Becker, it probably would have reached millions. That was tough to accept. But I’ve realized that you have to work with where the public interest is, even if you try to shape it in small ways.

That said, I’m slowly trying to shift away from just reporting and move more into commentary. I feel like that adds a new dimension to what I can offer more analysis, more depth rather than just chasing the stories that are easiest to sell.

O.S.: With the challenges you face with the German media, what encounters with reporting on Germans news to a British audience?

RH: Germany’s privacy laws are absolutely appalling. In German publications, they only provide the first name and the first letter of the surname so, for example, Robert H. If you ask authorities for more details, they’ll simply say, “We can’t give you that information.”

This is because, when they publish stories, they go through a process called Anonymisierung (anonymisation), where they strip out all the crucial details, including names. That makes investigative journalism incredibly difficult.

In contrast, this kind of information is more accessible in the UK. Of course, even Britain has tightened regulations private investigators can no longer be used, as we saw with Prince Harry’s legal case. That makes things harder, too.

In Germany, journalists who have good relationships with lawyers might manage to access certain details, but even then, they won’t publish the names. So, a lot of the time, I end up relying on social media, where people often piece together the information themselves. It’s frustrating because, while everyone knows who the person probably is, the press still won’t confirm it.

And it’s even worse in Switzerland. There, instead of just withholding names, they sometimes literally make up fake ones because even revealing a first name is considered too much.

It’s a tricky issue. On one hand, I understand why press freedom needs limits there are cases where British tabloids have been too aggressive and have genuinely invaded people’s privacy. But at the same time, Germany, as a modern democracy, should know better. If someone has committed a crime or is involved in a public scandal, there should be more transparency. Right now, it feels like people can get away with things simply because their names are hidden.

That’s definitely my biggest challenge as a journalist here.

O.S.: Lastly, as I know you are on a tight schedule, in your view what role does Journalism play in bridging cultural and political gaps between nations like Germany and the UK?

RH: I think Germany’s approach to privacy and bureaucracy has both positives and negatives. On the positive side, there are definitely things Germany does better. It has a strong separation between work and personal life people actually leave the office on time, and weekends are respected. Employment rights are also much stronger here. There’s no hire and fire culture like in some other countries, which gives workers more security.

Germany also has systems in place that genuinely work better in some areas, and other countries could learn from them. But at the same time, the idea that Germany is this super-efficient industrial powerhouse while places like Italy are supposedly backward is outdated. In reality, Germany is at least 10 years behind in many ways.

For example, an astonishing number of companies here still use fax machines. The country is deeply fragmented, with federal states, local municipalities, and layers of bureaucracy all struggling to communicate. Combine that with strict privacy laws, and things just move incredibly slowly. It doesn’t fit with the modern world we live in.

For Brits, I think it’s important to recognize that Germany does get some things right, and there’s value in learning from that. But at the same time, these differences can sometimes create tension. Every so often, you get silly tabloid stories like the old cliché about Germans reserving sun loungers with towels—which just fuel pointless stereotypes.

I’ll need to think more about this, but those are my main thoughts for now.