This is followed by a further task of keeping the research very meticulous and, especially in the case of victim stories, questioning whether . It is tempting to "spare" victims by sparing them from asking critical questions - and the "Hingst case" is by no means the only case where this led down the wrong path. When her fantasies were exposed, the blogger apparently no longer saw any prospects for her life. This has sparked a controversy online.
This leads to the second question: What netherlands rcs data responsibility do journalists have for the consequences of their reporting? The decisive factors are the public relevance of the topic - in this case the public's deception - and the solidity of the research. Both of these are evidently present at least in the "Spiegel" exposé: The reporter had previously confronted Maria Sophie Hingst with the allegations and reported in his text that she had initially reacted defensively and then had her lawyer inform her that this was literature - in other words, not fully committed to factual accuracy.