Order the autumn edition here

The Holberg debate: Essential falsehoods and immaterial truths

Why do ordinary journalists react so strongly to media criticism of the kind Assange and Pilger bring to square one? Dagbladet and Bergens Tidende were quick to call the two "conspiratorial".

That trumping is the new hitling has long been an established fact. Not long ago, Dagbladet's Marie Simonsen had Kjetil Rolness reviewed on Facebook because he – hold on – had called mainstream media mainstream media! To do such a thing "is trump". Thus, it should come as no surprise that Inger Merete Hobbelstad from the same newspaper claims that Julian Assange and John Pilger during this year's Holberg debate "preached a conspiratorial view of the media similar to Donald Trump", or that commentator in Bergens Tidende Eirin Eikefjord in his mention of the debate characterizes Assange as "Trump-like". For not only was the term mainstream media used in the debate. The picture Assange and Pilger drawn by the media was also not very flattering, to say the least. Is there anything the media dislikes,. . .

Dear reader.
To continue reading, create a new free reader account with your email,
or logg inn if you have done it before. (click on forgotten password if you have not received it by email already).
Select if necessary Subscription (69kr)

Øivind Nygård
Nygård has a master's degree in Nordic language and literature.

1 comment

Give an answer

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn about how your comment data is processed.

- Advertisement -spot_img

You may also likeRelated
Recommended