Journalists like to copy. From Wikipedia, from press releases, from colleagues. That makes sense when it comes to banal facts that have already been documented and reported dozens of times. You don't necessarily have to spend two days researching yourself to tell readers that the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.
It becomes more difficult when it is not undisputed facts but rather categorizing and evaluative terms that are simply adopted by one another. The prime example of this is "diffuse fears". A sample switzerland rcs data shows that on every single day of the last few weeks at least one German-language article has appeared in a newspaper in which diffuse fears are mentioned, for example on Watson , in the " Tagblatt ", " Tagesanzeiger ", " Blick " and in the " Tageswoche ".
According to the definition, diffuse means something like unclear, fuzzy, blurred. The "diffuse fears" are almost always cited in editorial offices when the topic is migration, racism or crime (or a mixture of these). Often the trigger for such an article is a real event. Everything that happens after that - demonstrations, barroom rants, editorials in rival media - is then no longer real, but somehow diffuse.