TTIP-Fehlanalyse im SPIEGEL Heft 6. Mai 2016

In the 7th of May 2016 print edition of DER SPIEGEL, an article (also available on May 6th in digital form) under the headline "Free trade: "We're not commodities" - An unprecedented counter-movement has brought the TTIP Agreement to the brink of collapse, their success based on a new professionalism" was published, which promulgated a view that certain non-governmental organizations, supported by a study from Tufts University, were developing a professional and sound refutation of TTIP which claims to show negative welfare, income and employment effects for Germany and indeed the EU as a whole. The expert opinions referred to in the DER SPIEGEL article are Mr. Thilo Bode, Chairman of (German) foodwatch, who has written an anti-TTIP book, the so-called Tufts TTIP paper which shows negative income effects for the EU (in reality this paper is from Capaldo, who's only indirectly connected to Tufts University) and the "secret" paper from the London School of Economics which, it is alleged, also shows negative effects for the United Kingdom as a result of TTIP. The LSE paper does not show negative effects as a result of TTIP as a whole as the article in DER SPIEGEL would suggest. What is withheld from the readers of DER SPIEGEL is that there is an official TTIP-analysis for the UK from CEPR. The claim made by the article that even the most optimistic TTIP studies show real income growth of only 0.5% is wrong by a factor of 10. The TTIP-study Jungmittag/Welfens (EIIW Paper 212), which has been available to DER SPIEGEL for months, was not referred to, despite important findings. An internet paradox is formulated here as a hypothesis, under which the quality of reporting sinks in the digital age, which in turn weakens the quality of decision-making in democracies putting them at a distinct disadvantage in an ideological competition with autocracies.