A young man lights a candle on January 28, at a makeshift memorial to a young Syrian man then believed to have died | Sean Gallup/Getty Death, lies and migration fears in Germany Syrian refugee’s death caused an outcry. But no one checked to see if it was true.

BERLIN — The story had all the makings of a major scandal: A 24-year-old Syrian refugee, riven with flu and fever, succumbed in the small hours of Wednesday after days spent waiting for help in the cold outside Berlin’s notorious refugee center.

There was just one problem: There was no body.

A volunteer aid worker told police late Wednesday he had made up the story. By then, the damage was done. What he had portrayed as an eyewitness account of the refugee’s plight spread like wildfire over Facebook. At the end of a string of dispatches, the aid worker reported that the Syrian had died of heart failure in an ambulance on the way to hospital.

German media seized on the Dickensian tale early Wednesday. Social media exploded in outrage. In the U.K., the Daily Mail ran the headline: "Migrant dies after queueing for DAYS outside overworked registration offices in Berlin."

By mid-morning, scores of mourners had gathered near the refugee center, known by its German acronym Lageso, to light candles and lay flowers at a makeshift memorial.

A local aid group printed a black-bordered death announcement dripping with pathos.

“You survived so much,” it read. “You didn’t survive Lageso …We cry.”

The biggest casualty in the affair might be the media’s credibility; most Germans already think the press has a one-sided view of the refugee crisis. Also On Politico German push for extension of Schengen border controls

The episode is emblematic of Germany’s tortured public debate over the refugee crisis. What was initially heralded as a Wilkommenskultur, or culture of welcome, in the early fall, quickly shifted into a fear of being overrun by foreign masses, followed by guilt that many refugees weren’t being treated well.

For pro-refugee groups, the supposed death seemed to confirm their persistent warnings over dire conditions in some of the refugee centers. Lageso, in particular, had become synonymous with bureaucratic ineptitude. Every day, hundreds of refugees — including many small children and their mothers — were forced to queue in the cold outside Lageso’s dingy headquarters to receive basic services.

The report of the dead Syrian fit perfectly into the long-running narrative about Lageso’s dysfunction.

For the swelling ranks of German populists and nationalists, the affair served as an affirmation of their suspicion that the aid groups have a hidden political agenda.

Yet the biggest casualty in the affair might be the media’s credibility; most Germans already think the press has a one-sided view of the refugee crisis. Just weeks after underreporting and downplaying reports of mass sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve in Cologne, some of the very same outlets seized on the Lageso story with missionary zeal.

Along the way, they ignored many of the basic tenets of responsible reporting. Not only did the press not wait for official confirmation of the death, they also implied that the man died from being left out in the cold. Usually in such cases, the media leave it to a medical examiner to determine the cause of death, especially when it involves such a sensitive case as this one.

Instead of waiting, the German press relied on a spokeswoman for a local aid group, known as Moabit Hilft, and what turned out to be a fictitious Facebook chat. While most outlets mentioned that authorities had yet to confirm the account, they didn’t stress the point.

A day later, few in the press were apologetic. “It fit into the picture,” explained a news anchor on German radio’s main news program.

Der Spiegel’s online version, for example, one of most-read German-language sites, led with the story during the busy lunch hour, quoting an aid worker who said the man’s death was “a direct result of the long wait at Lageso.” The piece, which catalogued the history of problems at the refugee center, didn’t mention there was no official confirmation of the death until more than halfway through.

Matthias Streitz, managing editor at Spiegel Online, said: "In our coverage of the alleged death at Lageso, we were careful from the start to emphasize that this story was based on two connected sources only — a Facebook post and an interview with a Moabit Hilft representative — and official confirmation was lacking."

"The story was judged newsworthy even at this early stage because the situation at Lageso has long been notorious and the report of a deadly incident seemed entirely plausible. In retrospect, we should have emphasized our doubts even stronger (headline wording included), and publishing this story on the very top position of our page, if only for an hour, now looks like a misjudgement. We've discussed this at some length internally and will strive to be more careful in comparable situations."

Dailies including Die Welt — owned by Axel Springer, which co-owns POLITICO Europe — and public television and radio ran with the story as well. Some outlets featured video interviews with indignant aid workers demanding consequences.

A day later, few in the press were apologetic. “It fit into the picture,” explained a news anchor on German radio’s main news program.

The real culprits, Germany’s media agreed, were the aid worker and the charity, neither of which had apologized.

Authors: