Picture: The fall of the Berlin Wall on the 9th of November 1989. For 28 years it had divided Germany in two. The East German government called it the “Anti-Fascist Rampart“
The political landscape in Sweden is changing from the ground up. It isn’t happening over a few hours time, like when the Berlin Wall fell on the 9th of November in 1989. But it’s happening. And what we are seeing now is only the beginning. How will the corrupt media adapt to the change? The question is if and when they will realize that the battle is lost and that an epoch of lies, whitewashing and agenda journalism has come to an end.
The change will be painful for journalists
Whether journalists like it or not the political shift in conjunction with the swift & subsequent decay of important areas of society (schools, elderly care, healthcare, criminality, unemployment, housing shortage) will gradually force journalism to mirror reality instead of the opinions of individual journalists or the political agenda of editors. It simply isn’t possible to lie about the blessings of multiculturalism or mass immigration forever when citizens clearly see with their own eyes how their country is being dismantled in front of them. The change will be painful for journalists. The media’s final stand is proportional to the losses journalists make when their lies are unveiled. It won’t be pretty.
Sweden Democrats break new record – 18,7% in Demoskop
In the latest Demoskop/Expressen poll, support for the Moderates had reduced by 3% to 23,1%. The Sweden Democrats increased by the same amount and broke a new record with 18,7%. Only 4,4% now separates the Sweden Democrats from the Moderates. All of the remaining parties have either increased or decreased within the margin of error
”It’s a dramatic development of the public opinion. SD’s continued rise has without comparison been the biggest element of change in Swedish politics. In just a month the party has halved the gap between the two parties.” – says Peter Santesson, Head of Public Opinion Analysis at Demoskop.
Not even K-G Bergström dares be certain
”This survey will probably send shockwaves through our biggest political parties.” writes Karl-Gösta Bergström, who up until now has never missed an opportunity to write something negative about the Sweden Democrats. Now he doesn’t dare be certain about anything.
”Neither Stefan Löfven nor Anna Kinberg Batra seem to have accomplished anything there which has made voters who went over to SD regret their decision.”
”In the eyes of many, Jimmie Åkesson was arrogant in Visby when he unhesitatingly proclaimed that the Sweden Democrats will become Sweden biggest party. To that end seven percentage remain. It’s a lot, but legitimately less than ever than ever.”
”The safety margin to SD is insecure to say the least”
”Even now the safe bet is that SD won’t catch up to S, but I can no longer be certain when saying that. The distance to M is only 4,4 percentage points. Seeing as Kinberg Batra hasn’t been a success, so far in any case, and it is there where the biggest discontent towards the December Agreement exists, it seems that the safety-margin to SD is, to say the very least, unsafe.”
I note that K-G Bergström describes the safety margin between the two parties as ”unsafe”. SD’s successes thereby threaten the Moderates illusion of safety that rests on the December Agreement. The Moderates treating the Sweden Democrats as pariah is coming under heavy fire from their own voters.
Corrected SD result in Demoskop: 21,8%
When it comes to measuring the support SD has amongst the public Demoskop is one of the least accurate opinion institutes. In the 2014 election Demoskop predicted that SD would get 11,2%. The election result was 12,7%. The Norwegian opinion institute Sentio were the only one to make the correct prediction.
If you correct Demoskop’s current SD poll using previous deviations they now have 21,8%. That corresponds better with the party’s June result from Sentio (22,1%), YouGov (20,1%) and Novus (18%). Demoskop showed 15,7% for SD in June.
”The government is paralyzed by haphephobia”
(Haphephobia (n) = fear of touching or being touched)
”With regards to the refugee question the red-green government is paralyzed by haphephobia. Prime Minister Stefan Löfven has simply abdicated from responsibility. The Social-Democratic party congress this year symptomatically decided to not even bring up the migration question. The Green Party lives in a parallel universe where economic resources are infinite” – writes Jenny Sonesson in a leader for Dagens Industri.
The Alliance parties have tied their hands behind their back with the December Agreement and now pretend to be in opposition with unparalleled acting. The opinion polls show that voters are calling their bluff.
Public opinion is no longer possible to ignore
Prior to the 2010 election the goal for large parts of the journalist corps was to use any means necessary to prevent SD from entering the Riksdag.
Two years later, in 2012, and the methods hadn’t improved much. In one particularly distasteful case Jimmie Åkesson, party leader of the Sweden Democrats, was depicted as a cockroach in need of gassing.
But the latest opinion poll should get the journalists who for years have systematically covered up facts and have acted as propagandists for multiculturalism, mass immigration and radical feminism to tremble in their boots. Many years of desperate attempts from journalists and others to stop SD have failed. It is simply not possible to ignore 1/5th of the electorate.
”We know it’s true, but we don’t publicize it”
How will the media handle it? It’s going to be a painful process. Björn Hägers book ”The problematic party” (written prior to the 2010 election) reveals the strained relationship between journalists and SD. In the chronicle ”The Journalist Party and Democracy” I quoted some journalists who were interviewed in the book.
Pontus Mattsson, then political reporter at Sweden Radio’s Eko editorial office, now at Sweden’s Television:
”I think that many would think it a relief if they had a bad election result and ended up under 2 percent, then we wouldn’t have to deal with them.”
Jan A Johansson, chief editor at Skånska Dagbladet
”They (SD) have a number of claims regarding immigration groups, criminality, in Malmö especially, where they go out with claims that we know are true. We can control them, we know about them, but we don’t publish them anyway because we know that it causes social development a shitload of harm.”
”Journalists are biased in favour of the current norms and values – and a party that deviates will therefore get the media against them.”
”SD is the obvious alternative for conservatives”
”As early as 2001 the first article on how to stop the Sweden Democrats was published and printed in DN Debatt. 15 years later and the list of more or less worthy attempts to halt the party’s growth is long. ”Don’t talk to them!” ”Talk about them but not with them!” ”Insult them!” The list of successful countermeasures is nonetheless empty. Nothing seems to have helped.” writes the political scientist Andreas Johansson Heinö in Borås Tidning.
”SD have rewritten the political map in Sweden on their own. As a result of this the traditional bourgeois debate regarding liberalism vs. conservatives is becoming obsolete. SD is already the obvious conservative option in Swedish politics.”
Aftonbladet and public service are the last bastions
After the incestuous debauchery at the Almedalen Week between political rulers and the those (journalists) who are appointed to scrutinize them, a couple of weeks of vacation remain. But in August reality will rear it’s ugly head at the editorial offices.
It will be a tough struggle for Aftonbladet and Public Service in particular, the most prominent fortresses of entrenched medial liars. A veritable Berlin Wall of one-eyed left-wing fanaticism. Writers like Aftonbladets Anders Lindberg, Karin Pettersson, Lena Mellin, Daniel Swedin, Jan Guillou, Somar Al Naher, Åsa Linderborg, Fredrik Virtanen, and Oisin Cantwell are beyond saving. The more one has invested in an ideologically controlled and inaccurate worldview, the greater the fall once it all comes crashing down.
More than 80% of state media employees vote Red-Green
Journalists residing in the left-wing fortresses have crafted a unique world view which has little to do with reality. In the world outside of the editorial offices it could be seen as verging on deranged. Which is why most people don’t recognize the world as described by Aftonbladet or Dagens Arena. Or SR:s (Sweden’s Radio) and SVT:s (Sweden’s Television) propaganda which is broadcast across the country from morning to evening.
Professor Kent Asp has in his investigations shown that at Sweden’s Television and Sweden’s Radio a majority sympathize with the Green Party. 52% and 54% respectively and over 80% of journalists working with the Public Service Media sympathize with the Red-Green parties (Left Party, Social-Democrats, and Green Party).
In the election said coalition received a mere 43% of the votes which says a lot about the ideological gap between the journalists working for the public service media and the Swedish people.
”Neutrality is regarded as complicity”
Jasenko Selimovic, formerly the Minister of Integration’s Secretary of State (Peoples Party and previous head of a section at Sweden’s Radio, writes in the periodical Axess about how journalism is gradually changing. He takes the left-wing propagandists working at Aftonbladet and Dagens Arena as an example of political activism as opposed to journalism:
”Previously journalism (and art) was about mirroring, showing voters reality from different perspectives, to make them understand people who don’t think like them, creating an open debate. Nowadays journalists act like escorts, helpers and advocates and less like journalists (…) The idea is anchored in conviction that citizens are weak, entrapped in overbearing structures, unable to oppose the power of the elite and media. That’s why they [the people] need help, interpreters, escorts, rather than journalists.”
“The Left at Arena- and Aftonbladet’s culture pages mock the unwillingness to take a stand. Neutrality is regarded as complicity. Because if citizens are weak and the danger of racism is real, everyone must, including journalists, act, they seem to mean. That’s how citizens and democracy is defended. Activism instead of journalism, taking a stance instead of being neutral, impact awareness instead of impact neutrality.”
Menstruation, transsexuality, unrestricted Immigration and masturbation
“Summer on P1” is one of the most popular shows on Swedish Radio. It is broadcast every day. I switch on my radio at random. On the 30th of June the blogger Clara Henry, 21, talks. ”In autumn her book on menstruation is being released”. Wow! It’s time for a menstrual festival with tampon throwing and drinks with blood clots. I turn it off.
On the 3rd of July transsexual Saga Becker, 26, explains how hard it is to come out of the closet and live like a tranny. I couldn’t care less. I turn it off. On the 4th of July the author and multi-millionaire Liza Marklund, 52, pleads for open borders and unrestricted immigration”.
”For example I think people should be able to live wherever they like in principle. Get rid of all the borders. If Sweden was as densely populated as South Korea 180 million people would live here. And that works well for South Korea, so why not?” – she asks.
I’m pretty sure it’s only on Swedish state radio where people can blurt out such idiocy. I turn it off.
On the 6th of July I turn on the radio at around 14.00. The cartoonist Nina Hemmingsson, 43, discusses masturbation and her orgasms. I turn it off.
Summer – a platform for vagina introspection and multiculturalism
I long for the time when ”Summer” was a program you could listen to. Prior to 1997 when Bibi Rödöö turned it into a platform for vagina introspection and orgasm exhibitionism.
I am dead tired of narcissistic artists, conversations lacking substance and the most perverted hate imaginable being spewed by flipped out screw ups on the extreme-left (Athena Farrkohzad, 21, July 2014) But this is State Radio in its prime. Listeners are to be spoon fed immigration and radical feminism till they puke or choke.
I miss Torsten Ehrenmark and Lars Ulvenstam
I miss Torsten Ehrenmark and Lars Ulvenstam. The longing is unbearable. The foreign correspondent and columnist Torsten Ehrenmark (1919-1989) did ”Summer” for more than 20 years, 1963-84. Lars Ulvenstam, born 1921, hosted “Summer” 1978-2005 and was the one who traditionally always ended the season. Nothing was allowed to get in the way of listening to ”Ulven”. His ”Summer” were holy moments.
Thank God for Tom Alandh. He doesn’t bathe in egocentricity, he talks about important stuff without nagging about politics, he offers recognition in the form of music and what he says. And neither he, Torsten Ehrenmark nor Lars Ulvenstam ever dicussed their genitals during prime time.
Drop in quality and left-wing bias in SR:s news programmes
In Sweden Radio’s news programmes – ”P1 Morgon”, ”Ekot”, ”Studio Ett”, and ”God Morgon Världen” – a devastating drop in quality has been underway for many years. ”Why?” wonders Ulrika Knutson in the magazine Journalisten.
”The newspaper industry is in free fall, the money is running dry, the homogenization is increasing, the editorial culture is eroding. But why has public service radio also hopped on the emergency train, without anyone directly forcing them? Some of the quality decline in the daily flow is starting to become a little too noticeable” writes Knutson
Interview techniques suffer from a lack of follow-up questions.
It is also sparser between self-produced news
”More and more programmes refer to extra material, long interviews – and pictures! – on the web, whilst the actual transmissions are sparser, chattier and less pressing.”
That the clear left-wing bias amongst Ekots foreign correspondents Cecila Uddén (Kairo), Lotten Collin (Rio de Janeiro) and the South Europe correspondent Beatrice Janzon (Paris) is allowed to go on year after year is a mystery. Or not, because they obviously have their bosses blessing. Beatrice Janson sounds like she’s telling fairytales and bursts with joy when she interviews African boat migrants on Lampedusa or Sicily who say that they want to come to Sweden. Then Beatrice Janzon feels selected and honoured.
Why is information siphoned via Cecilia Uddén year after year?
The historian Eli Göndör went about reviewing P1 ”Konflikt”, one of SR:s most prominent left-wing fortresses, the results were published on Timbro. He reviewed the program presentations of “Konflikt” between 2008 and 2010 during the Arab Spring years. A grand total of 113. The USA is mentioned 42 times, Sweden 20, and Israel 15. Egypt was mentioned 2 (two) times – Syria not at all
”When Arab countries are mentioned they are rarely or not at all protagonists of their own fate” said Eli Göndör when he presented the study at a Timbro seminar. The Seminar can be seen here.
And why are SR:s listener forced year after year to get information about the Middle East siphoned via one and the same person, namely Cecilia Uddén? asks Eli Göndör.
Nina Benner, head of ”God morgon världen”, ”Konflikt” and ”Ekots Saturday Interview” refused to take the criticism to heart. She vigorously denied that there was a left-wing bias in ”Konflikt”. Then former ”Konflikt” employee Negar Josephi stands up in the audience, takes the microphone and says. (approximately 50 minutes in)
”I would like to firmly claim that ”Konflikt” is a very left-wing program. And that is a big problem. I could not sit there and listen to their opinions about Israel, Jews and the conflict in the Middle East. It was bloody tough for me as a Jewess (…) When everyone who make programs about the situation abroad has the same opinion about the Middle East it’s the same angle year after year after year.”
”It’s as if the establishment is on steroids”
A friend writes an e-mail to me:
”It’s as if the establishment is on steroids right before it all falls apart. It’s like a last feeble attempt to hold on to the good times they have enjoyed. The crack in the facade is Alice Teodorescu and a couple of others.”
On the 8th of July the biggest news story in both SVT Rapport and Aktullt is a sob story made by Fabian Sturm. It’s about a 16-year-old gypsy beggar Beatrice Vidrascu and her boyfriend, 21-year-old Ysak Pruteanu who have been staying illegally in Sweden for more than the three months allowed by the EU’s freedom of movement. They should have gone home to Rumania long ago.
The sixteen-year-old is pregnant. Neither of them have work, accommodation, or income. They have no insurance cards, because they haven’t worked in their home country. As EU-citizens they don’t have grounds for asylum either. They choose to have a child either way. No critical questions are asked. Not a single question. The reportage is supposed to be ”shocking” and upsetting that Gypsy beggars aren’t allowed to give birth to their children for free in Sweden (and thereby get free accommodation and lifetime support in the form of taxpayer-sponsored welfare)
And only in Sweden’s Television can a professing Stalinist (Sven Wolter) praise Stalin and North Korea during prime time for a full hour without bothersome questions from the interviewer Anna Hedenmo.
You don’t mess with people who have 30 seconds to the microphone
How can it go on like this in public service? Jasenko Selimovic writes from his own experience of working at Sveriges Radio:
”Few think that public service couldn’t get better. Probably not a single politician, regardless of affilliation. Not even those who work there. So why isn’t the subject broached? Why are there so few political proposals? Why does so little change? Because politicians, like the higher ups at public service, aren’t that suicide prone. You don’t mess with people who have 30 seconds to a microphone with one million listeners. Ask Peter Örn.” (CEO of Sweden’s Radio 2004-07 – my note)
”Why don’t things change from within? Because the field of journalism have few advancement opportunities, lots of competition, relatively few opportunities to make money and few alternative routs. You only have your job, your ”inslag”, reportage, dokumentär and that gives you everything: status, position, substitutes for a good salary. You don’t take that from people. Because then you take everything from them.”
”Internally political bias is a non-issue”
Political bias of public service is a non-issue internally. Jasenko Selimovic writes:
”During my five years at SR we occasionally discussed bias in some broadcast, but we never discussed from which political perspective our programs reflected the world. Nor did we talk about the possibility that our political sympathies might affect the program. The survey which showed an overrepresentation of Green Party- and Left Party sympathies was dismissed with the argument: ”Just because journalists vote for MP or V doesn’t mean that their programs will reflect those views.”
”The real problem here isn’t (political) sympathies for certain perspectives but a lack of understanding for others. Hence some questions are rarely asked. Perspective isn’t featured and concretization rarely occurs. If you ask employees at public service to concretize the advantages of equality many concrete, funny program ideas come forth. If you ask them about the cons of equality things will stand still. Because you don’t know about them, and don’t know how that could be concretized as personal stories.” ”Very few would today dare, or even want, to do a real Susanne Björkman-documentary about SD-voters, where you without caricaturing or patronizing make listeners identify, sympathise and feel understanding for SD’s supporters.”
Left-wing journalists think they are mainstream
Left-wing journalists are often unaware of the fact that they are biased. Their own opinions are so obvious to themselves that they think they are mainstream and that nobody could think in a different way. This is because they live in a small protected world where they rarely experience corrective feedback from outside, a sectarian lifestyle of sorts where they solely socialize with people who have the exact same opinions as themselves and cultivate the same (left-wing) ideals.
Every time they experience the reality of others, outside of the own bubble, it becomes a shocking experience. As an illustration I strongly recommend one of the journalistic nadirs at Almedalen, Belinda Olsson’s interview with Jimmie Åkesson right after his party leader speech. Her shock and incomprehension at facing an audience that she herself hadn’t hand picked couldn’t have been greater than if she’d inexplicably landed on Mars.
For decades Kjell Albin Abrahamson worked as an Eastern Europe correspondent. Now he is 70-years-old, retired, and sits at a summer place in the village Truvbacken, Jämtland, and is interviewed by Länstidningens Pelle Zackrisson. He calls the Swedish debate climate ”terrible” and says that it is one of the reasons he doesn’t move home to Sweden on a full-time basis and nowadays lives in Northern Germany.
”The second someone doesn’t have an opinion which doesn’t fall within the Overton Window you get a fascist stamp. It’s a very intolerant climate today in Sweden. I don’t know how we are going to get out of it.”
A long list people in public service need to be purged
Yes, how are we going to get out of it? How is the Overton Window going to be torn down? How is the media going to start producing material that the public can trust again? Journalism built on facts that allow people with diverse opinions come be heard. If an improvement shall be made possible a long list of managers, middle-managers, and journalists at all levels of public service must be purged, taking their inveterate left-wing opinions with them and seek other employment. Besides, the left seems to like purges.
I won’t mention any names, but we all know who they are. They who entered Swedish radio and TV-houses in 1968 and latched onto the walls since. Enough is enough.
The market forces will take care of Aftonbladet.
Originally written in Swedish by Julia Caesar
Translated to English and posted on Swedish Surveyor by yours truly.
Other chronicles by Julia Caesar