reports that Luxembourg does not intend to weaken its banking secrecy and that the German 
tax affair 1s spreading to Switzerland. 
On Wednesday, /9 March, these topics are taken up in the daily press, especially the results 
of LLB, which are positive despite the blackmail affair. The focus of the German and 
Austrian media, however, is on Reigning Prince Hans-Adam II's statements in an interview 
with Radio Liechtenstein about the BND, in which he accused the BND of "sloppy work". 
Especially FAZ reports on this interview ("Prince Hans-Adam criticizes Steinbriick and 
BND", 6). The international dimension with suspected tax evaders in Austria, Switzerland and 
Italy is reported more frequently in short reports. 
Also on the Thursday before Easter, 20 March, the focus of coverage in the German media is 
on the expansion of the tax affair to further countries. The media pay particular attention to 
the "data theft" and the offer by an unknown perpetrator to sell new Swiss tax data. In the 
Swiss media, the Swiss Minister of Finance says, "You will find this banking secrecy a hard 
nut to crack" (infer alia Neue Zurcher Zeitung, 20.3, 2). 
6.5 Identification of the actors 
6.5.1 Basic considerations 
Building on the above overview of the media reporting on a daily basis, the actors will be 
identified and documented on the basis of the quotes in the underlying media reports. 
Actors are groups who want to see their interests realized. The model of social framing of 
issues by Eichhorn used in this paper helps to identify the actors in an investigated case study. 
It divides the actors into five general groups: interest groups, mass media, active audience, 
passive audience, and political actors (for details, see Chapter 2.4.3). The present paper aims 
to extract the actors operating in this tax affair on the basis of these five groups. Using 
knowledge about various actors, it should in future be easier to address the various actors in 
external communication as well and hence to communicate more effectively. 
What we will do below is clarify the question of whether, and if so which, effects are caused 
by the fact that the actors are located and act in two different countries. Do the actors in one 
of the five abovementioned groups have the same interests — e.g. the active or passive 
audience expressing its opinion in the form of letters to the editor, op-eds, or interviews — or 
conflicting interests — e.g. the political actors in Germany and those in Liechtenstein? We 
would then find different interests even within the five individual groups that would have to 
be taken into account. Within the general group of the mass media, however, this paper 
exclusively looks at the German media, since the Liechtenstein print media are classified — as 
already mentioned in Chapter 4 — as party organs of the two political parties and do not have 
any impact beyond Liechtenstein's national borders. 
For reasons of space and clarity, the actors on both the Liechtenstein and German sides will 
be aggregated at a relatively high level of abstraction. Especially detailed and complex 
particular interests will not be taken into account here. The paper assumes a set of shared 
interests with which the various actors can be aggregated into larger collectives or publics, 
without interfering with the result of this examination. Similarly, only those actors will be 
46