* Frps Per Sandberg demanded that SAS remove its aircraft magazine after analysis of award-winning Swedish commentator. SAS complied with the desire for a hint of money from Finance Minister Siv Jensen. – Lovely by SAS, says the Journalist editor.
* No party complains as much as Frp to the Press's Professional Committee (PFU). Half of the party complaints in the past year have been from Frp. The party and Sandberg have lost all the last three cases. For the past 15 years, Frp has only been successful in 9 of 25 complaints. – We are tired of ignorant journalists, says Per Sandberg.
(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Self-censorship. In a Christmas edition of the newly launched SAS magazine Scandinavian Traveler, a longer analysis of Scandinavian right-wing populism was printed. The author of the analytical article "Rise of the far right" was the award-winning Swedish Sydsvenskan commentator and former Expressen culture editor Per Svensson. The text starts with the Swedish Democrats and deals with the Danish People's Party, as well as something about Frp and the True Finns.
In a look at the TV 2 news 5. In December, Frps Deputy Per Sandberg strongly attacked SAS and the magazine. The reason was that he did not like the historical analysis and a timeline: "Frps Deputy Per Sandberg demands that SAS withdraw the latest edition of its travel magazine immediately," TV 2 reported on its website. Sandberg, like Carl I. Hagen, pointed out that the FRP leader was now Norway's finance minister and put on money that SAS could possibly wish for.
On the same night, SAS reported that they regretted the article to Frp. They started immediate collection of "Scandinavian Traveler"
This caused Frp Per Sandberg's deputy leader to respond. After a powerful Sandberg performance in TV2, the SAS management decided to withdraw all the magazines, which reach 1,4 millions of readers and have cost an unknown million.
Journalist-editor Helge Øgrim calls the SAS / Frp case an "embarrassing collusion". He believes Sandberg's strong reaction is an attempt at a deterrent tactic, which succeeded here.
- FRP is an outsider party that instinctively defends when they are criticized. But the FRP can blow their trumpets as much as they want, as long as it does not get through. It was pathetic of SAS to let them have it this time, says Øgrim.
None of the other Scandinavian parties mentioned in the article, the Danish People's Party and the Swedish Democrats, have responded to the mention in the SAS magazine. Øgrim thinks it may seem like these parties are less hairy, but also adds that the Swedish Democrats in particular have a clearer origin in fascism.
- The FRP does not have the same, and now they strive to avoid comparison with the Sweden Democrats, says Øgrim.
5 out of 10 cases in 2013
Geir Ramnefjell, cultural editor of Dagbladet, writes in the comment «Help, we fly» that Svensson's text is rather of the more FRP-friendly: «The timeline itself is not problematic. FRP must find themselves being placed in such a landscape – seen with history glasses on their noses. And if you read the text further, it will be even better. For Frp's part. Per Svensson points out the fundamental difference between the Sweden Democrats (SD) and Frp. SD has its origins in the 1980s in the racist organization Bevara Sverige svenskt, while Anders Lange's party and Mogens Glistrup's Fremdskridtsparti were a reaction to a strongly growing welfare state with associated taxes and fees. This is more like an acquittal, than an attack on Frp. "
FRP is known for going down the throat of its critics. In 2013, the FRP accounted for half of the processed complaints from parties in the Press' professional committee (PFU), 5 out of 10 cases, the PFU database shows. Among the complainants was FRP deputy leader Per Sandberg, who complained at Night and Day for breach of good press practice, after a notice in which the free newspaper had a slanderous remark about Sandberg and his adviser. PFU came to the conclusion that Night and Day had not done anything wrong. Also in the other recent PFU cases, from FRP politicians such as Dag Erik Rasmussen and Willy Wiksaas, reject.
The Conservatives complained to the PFU only once in 1, as the Democrats, Labor Party two. For the past 2013 years, the FRP has also distinguished itself as a very active press complaints party.
Secretary General of the Norwegian Press Association Kjersti Løken Stavrum states on a general basis:
- Politicians must endure more and find themselves in a sharper spotlight. It is a consequence of the journalistic assignment, says Løken Stavrum.
64 percent acquittal
Ny Tid's review of PFU judgments in the last 15 years, since 1999, shows that Frp has only won in 9 of its 25 contested cases. In 16 out of 25 FRP complaints, it is concluded that the Vær Varsom poster was not violated. This means that PFU concludes that the media have not violated good press practice in 64 per cent of the respondent FRP cases.
Complaints from Carl I. Hagen, Jarle Veigvåg and Troms FpU have also been rejected as unfounded by PFU. A couple of times where Frp has won, are in cases with Terje Søviknes a decade ago – and in a couple of cases against Nordlys / Finnmarken last year.
Ny Tid, the PFU base cannot find that any of the national media have been convicted in PFU for journalism against Frp or named Frp members in the last 15 years. The closest is Carl I. Hagen for upholding the presentation of a column in 2011 – in return, PFU criticized in another case the same autumn that NRK had not let those affected by FRP criticism speak.
- Ominous
- I think it is ominous that a Scandinavian company makes such a dramatic decision after pressure from a government party, says the commentator who wrote the article, Per Svensson, Ny Tid.
Svensson, who writes daily in Sydsvenskan, believes that Frp believes they have the exclusive right to write the party's history.
- One can not dictate how the story should be written. It is taking too big a mandate, and it is dangerous because it can affect what people dare to say and not say, says Svensson.
Svensson thinks he sees a pattern among dark blue parties.
- These are champions of freedom of expression when it comes to themselves, but as soon as someone disturbs their picture of reality, it must be weeded out. It is very inconsistent, says Svensson.
Shortly after the case became known, Carl I. Hagen told NTB: "A company that is in perhaps an economic crisis needs equity, and then they place the party of Norway's finance ministers together with Vidkun Quisling and fascists. I think it's very unwise '.
- The fact that Hagen indicated that it could have financial consequences for SAS is a form of blackmail. When such parties gain real power, they tend to overplay it. I have not seen similar cases in this country, but I do not rule out that we can see the same tendencies from the Sweden Democrats as they become more confident, says Svensson.
unclear
The journalist-editor Helge Øgrim believes that SAS may have several motives for withdrawing the magazines.
- A motive can be a market adaptation. SAS is afraid of insulting passengers. Another may be that SAS is anxious about its financial backers, the Nordic states. Sandberg and Hagen are playing on that, says Øgrim.
Dagens Nyheter and Sydsvenskan have translated and published Svensson's SAS magazine article this week (Ny Tid printed the Swedish text in paper edition no. 44, 12 December, editor's note).
New Time No. 44, December 12, 2014
- We are very tired of ignorant journalists, says FRP deputy leader Per Sandberg to Ny Tid.
BY AURORA HANNISDAL
Owners. The Norwegian state owns 14,3 percent of SAS. Both FRP leader Carl I. Hagen and FRP deputy leader Per Sandberg reminded of this ownership share, and that the FRP leader is now sitting on the money bag as Minister of Finance, when they went out and criticized the SAS magazine's article last weekend.
- It is a bit strange that SAS indirectly believes the owner is related to Hitler and Quisling, Per Sandberg writes in a text message to Ny Tid.
The Progress Party's deputy leader is the main critic of SAS. He was quick to demand an apology from SAS and that the magazine be withdrawn. He apologized. In a press release, SAS wrote: "We note that parts of the text are unvarnished and generalizing, and that the image selection creates links that SAS really regrets."
- What is it in Svensson's article that you actually react to?
- I do not react to the article, it is the timeline where the FRP is put in a family with Hitler and Quisling I react to. In addition, I am reasonably upset about the level of knowledge about the content of the policy. There would be uproar with such a timeline on the Labor Party and the Socialist People's Party!
- But neither the Danish People's Party nor the Sweden Democrats reacted to the article. Is Frp more hairy?
- The question must be asked to SD and DF, Frp always answers. We're tired of ignorant journalists, that's probably the answer. Had Frp been hairy, we would have put in the years long ago, Sandberg writes to Ny Tid.
- How would you react if a Norwegian newspaper had printed the article?
- If a Norwegian newspaper had printed this, it would be nothing more than normal false allegations about Frp. Then we would have had a right of reply and the editorial poster would have been valid. The SAS magazine is not a newspaper, Sandberg answers.
New Time No. 44, December 12, 2014
Frp on the press complaint top
10 processed PFU complaints from political parties in 2013:
Progress Party: 5
Labor Party: 2
Right: 1
Center Party Youth: 1
Democrats: 1
SOURCE: PFU.no
FRP AND PFU COMPLAINTS LAST 15 YEARS:
Case 1/055: Dag Erik Rasmussen against Agderposten: No breach of good press practice. (VVP 2014)
Case 2/251: Eileen and Willy Wiksaas v Namdalsavisa: No breach of good press practice.
Case 3/250: Eileeen and Willy Wiksaas against Nettavisen: No breach of good press practice – - (2013)
Case 4/200: Kristoffer Kanestrøm, City Councilor for Health and Care Tromsø Municipality, against Nordlys: Violation of good press practice
Case 5/154: Per Sandberg and André R. Kolve against Natt & Dag: No breach of good press practice
Case 6/082: Gamvik FrP by Johnny Olaussen against Finnmarken: Violation of good press practice
Case 7/164: NN against Adresseavisen: No breach of good press practice
Case 8/221: Rolf Tjernes v. Sarpsborg Arbeiderblad: No breach of good press practice.
9. Case 051/2010: Per Arne Olsen v Tønsbergs Blad: No breach of good press practice
10. Case 018/2009: NN v VG Nett: Violation of good press practice -
11. Case 256/2008: Adv. Toril Wik (pva Jarle Veivåg) against Bergens Tidende (BT): No breach of good press practice.
12. Case 249/2007: Per Otto Borgen v Drammens Tidende (DT): No breach of good press practice.
13. Case 096/2007: Odd Jostein Zazzera against Stavanger Aftenblad (newspaper and online): Violation of good press practice.
Case 14 021/2007: Terje Søviknes v NRK P3 (radio): Violation of good press practice.
15. Case 007/2006: Narvik Progress Party v. Torgeir Trældal against Forward: Violation of good press practice.
16. Case 211/2006: Troms FpU v. County chairman Kristoffer Kanestrøm against Radio Tromsø: Violation of good press practice
17. Case 210/2004: Troms FpU v. Kristoffer Kanestrøm v Tromsø: No breach of good press practice
18. Case 081/2003: Telemark Frp v. Chairman Thorleif Vikre against Telemarksavisa: No breach of good press practice.
19. Case 177/2003: Magne Hjeltnes v. Tønsbergs Blad: No breach of good press practice -
20. Case 073/2003: Os municipality v / mayor Terje Søviknes against TV 2 Nettavisen: Violation of good press practice
21. Case 171/2001: Mayor Terje Søviknes against Os and Fusaposten: Violation of good press practice
22. Case 032/1999: The Progress Party v. Leader Carl I. Hagen against Dagsavisen: Criticism.
23. Case 037/1999: The Progress Party v. Leader Carl I. Hagen v. Aftenposten: No breach of good press practice
24. Case 038/1999: The Progress Party v. Leader Carl I. Hagen v. Dagbladet: No breach of good press practice
25. Case 039/1999: The Progress Party v. Leader Carl I. Hagen against the Nation: No breach of good press practice
