And it’s not just on social media. “Emil Hellerud is lying to all of us straight to our faces” I was told when I opened a news site. Yes, I thought. It was really news to me. On another news page I was told that I hung innocent pensioners as SD trolls and on a third that I “admitted” that it was not possible to connect any troll accounts to SD. Of course, both of these statements cannot be true at the same time. In fact, both are wrong. Can you write like that without evidence? Yes, but no serious newsroom would do that. The news sites in the examples are so-called alternative media that were created in revolt against the fact that the traditional media are considered to raise the wrong issues (read: write too little about immigration). Serious media have rules Several of these alternative media have chosen to stand outside the media ethics system, a self-regulating system in the Swedish model that protects the rest of society from the media’s power. If they fail in their ethics, you can report to bodies such as the Media Ombudsman and have them convicted. One reason why several alternative media have left the system is that they have been repeatedly shut down. They cannot handle being audited because they behave unethically and publish incorrect information. The fact that some people still choose to get their information through these channels makes the truth lose its relevance. Now Jimmie Åkesson and the radical right are trying to stick the “leftist” label on all independent media with the help of the dehumanizing category “clägget”. The context is important One of the lies that fly in the air is that I want to limit freedom of speech because I have noticed that humor and satire can be used to spread misinformation. It’s not really me who claimed that, but I have referred to the Swedish Agency for Community Protection and Preparedness, which explains that there are several different techniques in disinformation. It says that “Satire and parody are usually harmless forms of entertainment. In information influence, however, humor can be used as a tool to spread misleading information and ridicule or criticize individuals, narratives or opinions. Humor can also be used to legitimize controversial views”. So it’s not the humor itself that’s the problem, if anyone has been fooled into thinking I implied that. The problem is how the humor is used. If a bunch of bullies make fun of a guy in the school yard and laugh at him, there is probably some kind of humor involved, but that’s not the problem. If a political party uses humor to manipulate the opinions of young people, the humor is not the problem. Humor is used because it is effective. Again, I am not the one making this claim. I am retelling how it has been explained by one of the Sweden Democrats’ online warriors. Everything has been recorded with a hidden camera. Other rules of the game By violating ethics and the requirement that everything published must be correct, alternative media outside the media ethical system play by other rules of the game. They can cheat. The Sweden Democrats have acted in a similar way after our review. Party representatives spread at best misleading and at worst incorrect information in social media. Even the serious media are involved. According to ethics, the Sweden Democrats must be given the opportunity to respond to the criticism. It is good. But when they do it with false accusations against Cold Facts, we also have to answer. Suddenly the reporting starts to be about something else and what is true or false is rarely clarified. This is an understatement for journalism. One of the latest measures is that the party secretary of the Sweden Democrats, together with a local party representative, submits debate articles and submissions in a large number of small local newspapers where they attack the Cold Facts. They probably know that many Swedes have the local newspaper as their primary source of information. When I read the debate article for the first time, I was struck by the fact that basically not a single statement was correct. We need the truth In school we learn about source criticism. Most people agree that we should consult two different sources and then form our own opinion. The problem that many forget is that two sources are rarely of the same quality. Good journalism is based on principles and processes that strive for objectivity and presenting both sides. It can never be objective, but it can strive to be. Black propaganda, on the other hand, is based on deliberate deception, hidden senders who cannot be held accountable, and repetition, repetition, repetition until people begin to believe it is true. Neither you nor I want to admit it to ourselves, but that’s how our brains work too. This is why we as a democracy need good journalism and common rules of the game. After Trump was elected president of the United States, the American media has built databases of thousands of political lies. This is a new age and we need to do something similar. Politicians from all political parties need fact-checking. Otherwise, the truth will soon not matter.
t4-general