Jessica Hockett, PhD
On 23 October 2026, I sent the following email, in English and a German machine translation, to the official editorial contact address for Berliner Zeitung (leser-blz@berlinerverlag.com).
Dear Editors,
I am an independent researcher in the United States, and I have a question about your article “Ein Test aus Berlin identifiziert das neue Sars-Virus,” published on 20 January 2020:
I believe the article was previously published at:
When I last consulted the article in August 2025, it began with a paragraph that does not appear in the current version. My English translation of that paragraph reads:
“BERLIN – What could be read on Twitter shortly before the turn of the year reminded the virus experts at the Charité of an old acquaintance. In Wuhan, a metropolis of eleven million in central China, a novel viral disease had apparently broken out. There was no official confirmation or detailed information about the type of virus, only rumors on social media. But the team around Christian Drosten, director of the Institute of Virology, suspected that this could be a Sars-like virus. And he and his team are experts in Sars-like viruses.”
An archived copy is available at https://archive.is/rtJgc, and I have attached screenshots.
In the original version, the phrase about a Sars-like virus linked to your article “Neuer Erreger in China ist Sars-Virus” (li.4864). That link now appears separately at the top of the article as a “Lesen Sie hier” teaser.
I would be grateful if you could:
- confirm that this opening paragraph was removed from the article.
- tell me when and why it was removed, if possible; and
- let me know whether any other changes were made to the article since publication, and if so, what they were.
Thank you very much for your time and assistance.
Kind regards,
Jessica Hockett, PhD
I received an automated response but no human staffer has responded yet. I sent a slightly different version of the inquiry to briefe@berliner-zeitung.de on 15 October 2026, with no response.
It’s possible the lede was simply “lost” during a website upgrade or transition. If so, it should be restored immediately.
If removed deliberately, the article should include an editorial note explaining when and why — especially given that the piece has been cited by a number of COVID-19 analysts and researchers (including me, most recently in “Did Marion Koopmans Lie Under Oath?”).
What “the removal” changes
The missing lede is the article’s only statement that the Charité team suspected a SARS-like virus before any official information about virus type was released, on the strength of social-media rumors.
With the paragraph in place, the chronology described is as follows:
- Shortly before the turn of the year, rumors of a new disease in Wuhan appear on Twitter.
- There is no official confirmation or detailed information about the type of virus.
- Christian Drosten’s team at Charité suspects a SARS-like virus anyway.
- The team asks whether they can do something.
- The answer is “yes” at the latest when virologists in Wuhan whom Drosten and colleagues know and trust themselves express the suspicion that it is a SARS-like virus.
Without it, the narrative begins with the 2002/03 SARS epidemic and jumps to step 4. A reader could reasonably infer that the SARS-like idea came from the Wuhan virologists and that Charité responded to it. The word “spätestens” (“at the latest”) now points to an earlier suspicion the article no longer mentions.
The missing lede also leaves the Berlin virologists’ question without its immediate context. Shortly before New Year’s Eve, they ask, “Können wir da was machen?” (“Can we do something about that?”).* In the original, the question follows the account of Twitter rumors and Charité’s suspicion of a SARS-like virus. Without that account, readers encounter the question without being told what had prompted it.
If you live in Germany or have connections to Berliner Zeitung, please contact the editorial staff, ask when and why the lede disappeared, and let me know what you learn.
* I don’t speak German, am relying on machine translations, and welcome corrections to any misapprehensions.
Leave a Reply