Ferrada de Noli, Giocco di carte in campagne, 1983
In March 2012 a polemic did arise between WikiLeaks and the Swedish newspaper Expressen around accusations of a purported campaign of WikiLeaks versus Sweden.
Against
this backdrop
Traci Birge published in Professors blogg a piece comparing international awards bestowed to Expressen, respectively WikiLeaks / Julian Assange. In her present comment she gives an update around that subject. Traci is a PhD
candidate with a solid research background with, among other merits,
peer-reviewed and expert scientific publications. Following Traci's text, a Note by Professors blogg.
Submitted contribution
by Traci Birge
Back in March, and during a controversy stirred up by Expressen that WikiLeaks was to embark on a "campaign against Sweden", I reported in Professors blogg on Expressen's extensive emphasis on their paper as "an award winning daily". Expressen’s reporting on their awards came amidst the paper being challenged for a series of unsubstantiated claims they made against Wikileaks - mainly the referred "campaign" against Sweden. The award narrative was repeated both in their articles and on Twitter by Expressen's editor Thomas Mattsson during the time when critics demanded Expressen either prove the allegations they were making or withdraw their libel and apologise to Wikileaks and readers.
Mattsson never disclosed that the awards he was referring to had nothing to do with journalism and that they were not independent. In fact, the awards were for marketing. Further, Expressen or its owner, Bonnier, had its own people on the boards of the organisations or panels handing out the awards. These facts seriously call into question the independence of these awards.
It is said there “is nothing new under the sun”. Expressen has just won at the INMA marketing awards
again, and they are very proud of it. On May 10, Editor Mattson wrote, "We won an Oscar
last night" He is most proud of the "2nd best in
show" for the "Expressen Bus" which was a real hit with the jury
because "...it has become a brand engine to connect
readers with Expressen's employees - a clear symbol of active
journalism that has strengthened the brand.."
Conveniently, Expressen is
represented on the Board of Directors of INMA by Bengt
Ottosson, President/CEO of Expressen.
Perhaps
an "Oscar" is an accurate description when the awards entail throwing
a party for yourselves and handing out awards to each other in Los Angeles.
Based
on the awards received, Expressen has increased its success in marketing and
has been recognised for those achievements. There are two important points to
understand in Expressen’s awards narrative, however. The first is that
Expressen’s CEO is on the Board of Directors of the organisation that handed
out the INMA awards and this calls into question the independence of the awards.
The second is that Expressen’s success in marketing should not be used to
obfuscate the fact that their reporting of such issues as Wikileaks and the
case of Julian Assange in Sweden has been sensationalist and biased at best. There
are strong concerns over the motivations behind the unsubstantiated claims the
paper made in their last series about Wikileaks. Expressen never produced
evidence of a “Wikileaks campaign against Sweden”, nor did it retract their
statements of one.
It
will be great if Editor Mattsson or someone else takes Expressen in the
direction of becoming an (independent) award-winning newspaper for journalism.
So far, however, its successes are primarily in the field of marketing.
Professors blogg’s NOTE:
Expressen’s
Editor-in-Chief Thomas Mattsson has – to the best of my knowledge - never claimed
that the referred awards were for journalism. On the other hand, several
Expressen’s journalists have been bestowed major Swedish journalist prizes,
among others Micke Ölander, Cecilia Hagen, Mats Olsson, Peter Kadhammar, and
legend Sigge Ågren. Besides,
the eventual role of Expressen's CEO in the awarding process as such is
not signalled, and in fact there is a strict Swedish ethic praxis: if a
member of a committee or Board of Directors would face the reviewing of a
work representing any conflict of interests (recusing), he would have
to abstain participation in such deliberation. Finally, Mattsson has himself
declared that the paper is owned by Bonniers and Expressen’s bourgeoisie ideological
profile is not occult behind a “leftist” pose -- as prevalent in other Swedish
papers while in the main defending the same status quo. I mean, ideological affiliation is not the issue, but the facts in analyzing journalism endeavours is./ M Ferrada-Noli
Addenda by Traci Birge:
Thanks, Professor Marcello de Noli, for
your comment at the end of my post. I have a few additions to make in response.
Firstly, thank you for pointing out
that there are good journalists at Expressen. It has not been my intention to
give any other impression. I hope that the good journalists at Expressen are
able to lead the way in improving the quality of the journalism at the
newspaper as a whole. Unfortunately, a few good articles or journalists cannot
by themselves undo the damage of bias endemic to some of Expressen’s reporting,
including on Wikileaks/Julian Assange. It requires real structural change and
implementation of stronger journalistic standards at the newspaper.
Secondly, I bring your attention to the
ample evidence via social media (Twitter in this case) that Expressen actively
sought to deflect public demands to produce evidence of the so-called
“Wikileaks internal memo” by insisting that they were above reproach as a
reputable news organisation. The awards narrative was a part of this strategy.
The misleading way in which the “award winning newspaper” narrative was
constructed and presented (especially to the international audience) is evident
in these examples:
For more examples, take a look at
@expressen for late February-early March 2012. More Tweets on the Wikileaks
topic are found for the same period on @ThomasMattsson.
Thirdly, I draw your attention to the
recent comments by Editor Mattsson on his Twitter account. It is easy have a
look at his account but I will give one example he Tweeted today in which he
promotes a photo of the awards ceremony in which Expressen CEO Bengt Ottosson
et al receive their INMA awards http://lockerz.com/s/207579135
. What he fails to mention is that Bengt Ottosson is also on the Board of
Directors of INMA. Many people would see this as a clear conflict of interest.
At the very least, full disclosure of such connections (however awkward) should
be made.
Media organisations shape public
opinion and awards are part of what forms people’s opinions about the
legitimacy of organisations. All awards are not equal in quality. That
Expressen failed to disclose these potential conflicts-of-interest and
presented the “International Awards” as awards for political coverage indicates
to my mind that it has a long road to trod towards transparency, fairness and
accuracy.
In contrast, the awards
Wikileaks and Julian Assange have received are from independent and highly
respected media and human rights NGOs. A list of those awards is illustrated
here https://twitpic.com/9jb1pl
.
1 comment:
Post a Comment