Brooklyn Nine-Nine. Context: Police procedural comedy. Illustration: Captain Holt’s feedback, while often deadpan, is ultimately personal and supportive, and the show frequently explores how praise, criticism, and mentorship affect the officers’ confidence and relationships.
television
career trajectories
Mad Men. Context: Follows the lives of advertising executives in 1960s New York. Illustration: Feedback on creative work is highly personal, often delivered in emotionally charged meetings. Characters’ self-esteem and career trajectories are closely linked to the praise or criticism they receive from superiors and clients.
Leslie Knope
Parks and Recreation. Context: Centers on the Parks Department of a small town. Illustration: Leslie Knope, the main character, gives and receives feedback that is always considerate of feelings and personal growth. The show highlights how encouragement, recognition, and even constructive criticism are tailored to the individual, reinforcing bonds and motivation.
Ted Lasso
Ted Lasso. Context: Follows an American football coach leading a British soccer team. Illustration: Ted’s feedback style is empathetic, supportive, and always considers how his words will affect each player personally. The series is a masterclass in emotionally intelligent, personal feedback that drives both performance and well-being.
“Whattya want from me?”
The 2014 Soccer World Championship. Prelims. Germany vs. Algeria. It’s a nerve wracking game, but in the end Germany wins 2:1. It was a tough game for the German team, but in the end they prevailed. Grounds to celebrate, one would think.
Boris Büchler, however, the ZDF television reporter who interviewed center back Per Mertesacker directly after the game, saw things differently. After a short “congratulations” he went straight to his criticisms: “What made the German players so sluggish and vulnerable?”
Mertesacker, already slightly annoyed, emphatically stated that the victory is all that matters: “I don’t give a ****. We’re in the final eight and that’s what counts.”
But Büchler won’t back down: “But this cannot possibly be the level of playing at which you expected to enter the quarter-final? I think the need for improvement must be clear to you as well.”
Mertesacker can no longer keep his cool: “What do you want from me? What do you want, right now, immediately after the game? I don’t understand.” But Büchler stays firm, and repeats his criticism: “Firstly, I congratulate you, and then I wanted to ask why the defensive plays and turnovers did not go as well as one would have liked. That’s all.”
Mertesacker: “Do you think think there is a carnival-troupe (meaning a bunch of clowns) amongst the final 16 teams or something? They made it really hard for us for 120 minutes, and we fought until the very end to prove ourselves. It was a real back-and forth Of course we allowed a lot from them. But in the end our victory was well deserved…”
Mertesacker once again emphasizes how the German team won, in spite of his concession that not everything went as one might have hoped.
But not even this was enough for Büchler: “An absolute show of strength. A high-power performance. Do you think that we will see the same sort of wow-effects again that we saw in the 2010 World Championship, so that the team’s game will improve?”
Mertesacker: “What do you want? Do you want a successful World Championship, or should we just step down and call it a game already? I just don’t understand all of these questions.”
Germany won 2:1. But there will always be something left to criticize. In this case: Just because you won does not mean that you played the game well.
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMJJMpufE2g[/embedyt]“A little humility would have been better”
Germany. Election night 2005. Chancellor Schröder against the challenger Angela Merkel. German television. The heads of the major parties are present to discuss the results, including Schröder and Merkel.
The moderator addresses Schröder with Herr Bundeskanzler. Schröder grins and says with a touch of irony: “How nice it is for you to address me so.” The moderator is taken aback: “Have you already conceded defeat?” Schröder: “No, absolutely not.”
Gerhard Schröders behavior on that September 18, 2005 remains unique in German television history. It is 8:15 p.m. and Schröder’s SPD and Merkel’s CDU are neck and neck at 34% and 35% respectively.
Schröder acts, though, as if he has won handily. siegessicher, siegestrunken – sure of victory, triumphant – were the terms later used by the German media. Schröder went on the attack against Merkel on live television: “There is a clear loser, and that very clearly is Merkel.”
Six years later Schröder looked back on that evening and explained to the German people in an article in the Welt am Sonntag what his motives were. His thinking was “there is now no room for diplomacy. This is the moment of truth.”
But it is not true, Schröder continued, that on that evening he thought the election results could swing in favor of his SPD. The Chancellor admitted that “a little humility would have been better.”
Source: Süddeutsche Zeitung, August 14, 2011.
Marcel Reich-Ranicki
German literature, film and theater critics are particularly critical. They view everything with skepsis and are therefore considered by Germans – a skeptical people in general – to be more serious, more reliable. One German literature critic labeled a new novel the most impressive of the year, but still gave it four out of a possible five stars.
Marcel Reich-Ranicki was considered the most influential literature critic in today‘s Germany. He was known to tear apart the works of contemporary German writers both in his written critiques and on his television show. Active until 92 years of age Reich-Ranicki remained the most read critic in Germany precisely because of his very high standards of excellence.
Thirty minutes of Reich-Ranicki criticizing books.
“What would you do?“
With the recent popularity of YouTube and other amateur video websites, people have been staging scenarios and filming people’s reactions to them. This is particularly popular in the U.S., where, in addition to amateur reaction videos, in 2008 ABC created a television show called What Would You Do?
In the show, actors and actresses pretend to be in situations in which they would benefit from unsolicited advice (domestic abuse, drugged beverages, etc.), and the show collects statistics on how many people offer advice or warnings.
Typically, most Americans who witness these situations don’t get involved. In one episode, in which a caregiver in a park berates the elderly man for whom he’s supposed to be caring, and refuses to take the elderly man home when asked, only one-quarter of the people who witnessed the interaction intervened. Other episodes typically have similar statistics of intervention.
“Always room for improvement”
The political barometer of the German television station ZDF regularly gauges the country’s political sentiments. As a part of this, the country’s top ten politicians are shown with their approval ratings. The scale ranges from -5 to 5.
In July 2014, the political barometer was titled “After the World Championship: Angela Merkel sees highest approval ratings.” This clearly meant that amongst the persons polled, Angela Merkel, with a score of 2.8 took first place amongst the most important politicians.
2.8 out of a possible best of 5.0 points demonstrates how deflationary grades are given in Germany, even when one is quite satisfied with the overall performance.
As the Germans like to say: “Es gibt immer Luft nach oben” – “There is always room for improvement”.
matter-of-fact
Tatort (since 1970). Context: Germany’s most iconic and long-running police procedural. Illustration: Police officers and detectives routinely evaluate each other’s work, discuss cases, and give feedback in a direct, matter-of-fact manner. Criticism and praise are focused on investigative results and adherence to procedure, not personal attributes.