Reporting on the Middle East | Judith Scheytt: First honored, then canceled with AI

In January, the Association of Friends of the Adolf Grimme Prize awarded Judith Scheytt the "Donnepp ​​Media Award" as a "special honor." The then 17-year-old had created "a new and contemporary form of media journalism" on Instagram, according to the press release , which was also distributed by the Grimme Institute. The jury praised Scheytt's "wealth of knowledge and analytical brilliance" in devising a detailed deconstruction of misinformation about the Gaza War. Her "pointed and challenging analyses" opened "open spaces" for discussion.

Then, three months later, the about-face: Scheytt's mother received notification that the prize was being revoked. Her media criticism was "structurally anti-Semitic," according to a 39-page "analysis" that association chairman Jörg Schieb sent to the now 18-year-old after a phone call. His assessment is based on the IHRA definition—which suspects rigid criticism of Israel of anti-Semitism and is therefore controversial, especially among the left .

Scheytt's Instagram channel backs up such criticism with studies and sources, as stated in the tribute. She speaks of genocide, apartheid, war crimes, and explains boycott campaigns against companies in occupied territories. She accuses German media of marginalizing Palestinian voices – something journalist and author Fabian Goldmann has proven in a study.

The Friends of the Adolf Grimme Prize are an independent association that supports the Grimme Institute, which in turn awards the prestigious Grimme Prize annually. Formally, the two are separate. However, the association occasionally provides the institute with organizational or financial support.

Scheytt has published Schieb's "analysis" of the revocation of the "Donnepp ​​Media Award." It concludes that Scheytt's videos "at first glance do not contain any explicitly anti-Semitic statements." Nevertheless, they "reproduce subtle anti-Semitic patterns through omissions, unequal standards, and distorted representations." Many arguments, however, are scientifically questionable—and even anti-Semitic, for example, when Schieb equates Jews with Israel.

The association subsequently had Scheytt's videos "extensively examined legally," said Schieb – so also by an AI?

The paper argues that the accusation of genocide before the International Criminal Court ignores Israel's "precision weapons use rate," which is why "hardly any civilians" are affected. Ninety-three percent of all civilian casualties in the Gaza War were the result of Hamas's "human shield strategies," such as the establishment of command centers beneath hospitals – this claim is based solely on "IDF documents," but Schieb cites no source. It is equally unsubstantiated that many of the minors killed were Hamas fighters, as two-thirds of Hamas's combatants are "16- to 17-year-olds."

Schieb also does not consider settlement construction—which even the German government criticizes—to be contrary to international law: it is legitimized by the Oslo Accords. He argues that apartheid in Israel cannot exist because of Arab voting rights—even though Arabs are marginalized, persecuted, and persecuted in many ways by the government in Tel Aviv.

After Scheytt made the revocation public on Instagram, the media magazine DWDL reported on it. It was speculated that Schieb had used an AI language model for his "analysis" – something he only admitted for "photos or the formatting of the pages." However, spelling errors such as "Schieferkrankenhaus" (Slate Hospital) for the al-Shifa clinic in Gaza and the Denglisch word "Blutlibel" (Blutlibel), which refers to an anti-Jewish ritual murder legend, also point to an AI as the author.

Schieb, himself a journalist and self-described "AI enthusiast," did not comment on the possible machine-generated creation of his "analysis"—he said the "nd" newspaper was asking "completely the wrong questions." In a second email, he stated: "Of course, I use all modern tools for research, analysis, and knowledge processing, and that certainly includes AI." The association subsequently had Scheytt's videos "extensively reviewed by a legal expert," Schieb told the media service—so also by an AI?

Apparently, the board members' decision to revoke the award was a solo effort: The award was decided by a six-member jury, including three external members. Two of them – Nadia Zaboura and Steffen Grimberg – explicitly opposed the revocation of the prize from Scheytt. They were overlooked.

Schieb doesn't seem to recognize any errors in his approach. "The crucial point is that we felt compelled to withdraw the award, as we do not want to recognize activist or, at least, anti-Semitic content." The award ceremony sounded quite different: Scheytt was explicitly honored for "media criticism, activism, and democracy education."

At least the Grimme Institute admits mistakes: "Even though the prize founder and we have repeatedly emphasized that the association and the institute operate completely independently of each other, this separation has not been made clear enough – we must do better here," said director Çigdem Uzunoglu to "nd".

Meanwhile, the Grimme Prize's support association has gone into hiding – press inquiries are landing on Schieb's mailbox. "The fact that an institute that claims to be committed to media responsibility continues to remain silent on this is, in my opinion, the real scandal and makes me doubt whether the prize from such an association is even worth anything anymore," journalist and author Goldmann told "nd."

On Wednesday, however, the association's chairman, Schieb, told the epd news agency that the Cologne Society for Christian-Jewish Cooperation was behind the campaign: the small association, which is also invited to address anti-Semitism in schools, had complained about the high school graduate.

"It's another case in an incredibly long list of cases over the past two years where discourse has been thwarted," Scheytt explains to "nd." Small lobby groups systematically exerted pressure on voices that might oppose the Israeli government's narrative on the Gaza war. The 18-year-old doesn't regret going on the offensive: "Unlike others, I can talk about it because I'm not dependent on public funding."