5 ms·

"Sweden has a fairly free press" That's so wrong it hurts! All our press are dependent on government "presstöd" aka handouts.

Swenrekcah 5y ago
The press can be free regardless. If the allocations are according to some objective metrics then I don’t see a problem.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Objective metrics can be as biased as subjective metrics.
  - Swenrekcah 5y ago
    I disagree. The complaint was that a grant from the government makes the press less free to criticise the government. If the grant is clearly and legally bound to be determined according to a set of objective and publicly available metrics I do not see that it would be such a big problem. Of course a vindictive government could do what they can to negatively affect the press outlet in question but similarly could a supporting public affect them. In any case it can all be accounted and prepared for as long as the process is objective and transparent.
  - 1cvmask 5y ago
    The selection of arbitrary objective metrics and the weight associated to them is subjective by nature. Every ranking system is subjective by definition even if the outcomes are measured objectively. Every ranking system is by definition mathematical garbage that we use to evaluate whatever we feel the need to evaluate. We still need them as filters and for other reasons.
- fallingknife 5y ago
  If the government has the power to grant money and set metrics, it also has the power to take it away, and change the metrics. So if you are getting a grant based on "objective metrics," it might be a good idea to not piss of the people defining them.
  - Swenrekcah 5y ago
    Of course but that is a move that costs the government something in political capital. There are always dangers in criticising the powers that be, but I can not see that these kinds of press grants are a big problem. If the country is a democratic one to begin with, the grants do more good by insulating the press from commercial powers than they do bad in this way, in my opinion.
    - fallingknife 5y ago
      It may well be a good trade off. I'm just pointing out that there is never a way to be completely free from whoever is paying the bills.
quelsolaar 5y ago
According to Reporters without borders, Sweden ranks 4th in the world, in press freedom. I think that would qualify as "fairly free". https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table
- 1cvmask 5y ago
  Always be wary of such (and for that matter any) rankings and take them with a massive amount of salt. These NGOs are often fronts for agendas. https://rsf.org/en/our-supporters https://rsf.org/en/our-supporters They have the CIA vehicle for regime change as one of their sponsors, the amusingly named National Endowment for Democracy that specializes in overthrowing non-white democracies and regime change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democra... https://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/trojan-horse-the-national-endowment-for-democracy https://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/trojan-horse-th...
  - freeflight 5y ago
    > National Endowment for Democracy that specializes in overthrowing non-white democracies and regime change. They also don't mind white regime change, NED, along with NATO, the US DoS, and a couple of other rather relevant names, where openly sponsoring [0] "Yat's our man" [1], who ended up becoming PM of Ukraine after Euromaidan escalated into a full blown coup. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20200328203654/https://openukraine.org/en/about/partners https://web.archive.org/web/20200328203654/https://openukrai... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957
pa7ch 5y ago
Independent and free are not the same thing. You could say sweden's press is free despite its dependance. However, maybe the sweden gov values free press and the press is free via this relationship.

Swenrekcah 5y ago

The press can be free regardless. If the allocations are according to some objective metrics then I don’t see a problem.

whatshisface 5y ago
Objective metrics can be as biased as subjective metrics.
- Swenrekcah 5y ago
  I disagree. The complaint was that a grant from the government makes the press less free to criticise the government. If the grant is clearly and legally bound to be determined according to a set of objective and publicly available metrics I do not see that it would be such a big problem. Of course a vindictive government could do what they can to negatively affect the press outlet in question but similarly could a supporting public affect them. In any case it can all be accounted and prepared for as long as the process is objective and transparent.
- 1cvmask 5y ago
  The selection of arbitrary objective metrics and the weight associated to them is subjective by nature. Every ranking system is subjective by definition even if the outcomes are measured objectively. Every ranking system is by definition mathematical garbage that we use to evaluate whatever we feel the need to evaluate. We still need them as filters and for other reasons.
fallingknife 5y ago
If the government has the power to grant money and set metrics, it also has the power to take it away, and change the metrics. So if you are getting a grant based on "objective metrics," it might be a good idea to not piss of the people defining them.
- Swenrekcah 5y ago
  Of course but that is a move that costs the government something in political capital. There are always dangers in criticising the powers that be, but I can not see that these kinds of press grants are a big problem. If the country is a democratic one to begin with, the grants do more good by insulating the press from commercial powers than they do bad in this way, in my opinion.
  - fallingknife 5y ago
    It may well be a good trade off. I'm just pointing out that there is never a way to be completely free from whoever is paying the bills.

quelsolaar 5y ago

According to Reporters without borders, Sweden ranks 4th in the world, in press freedom. I think that would qualify as "fairly free". https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table

1cvmask 5y ago
Always be wary of such (and for that matter any) rankings and take them with a massive amount of salt. These NGOs are often fronts for agendas. https://rsf.org/en/our-supporters https://rsf.org/en/our-supporters They have the CIA vehicle for regime change as one of their sponsors, the amusingly named National Endowment for Democracy that specializes in overthrowing non-white democracies and regime change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democra... https://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/trojan-horse-the-national-endowment-for-democracy https://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/trojan-horse-th...
- freeflight 5y ago
  > National Endowment for Democracy that specializes in overthrowing non-white democracies and regime change. They also don't mind white regime change, NED, along with NATO, the US DoS, and a couple of other rather relevant names, where openly sponsoring [0] "Yat's our man" [1], who ended up becoming PM of Ukraine after Euromaidan escalated into a full blown coup. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20200328203654/https://openukraine.org/en/about/partners https://web.archive.org/web/20200328203654/https://openukrai... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

pa7ch 5y ago

Independent and free are not the same thing. You could say sweden's press is free despite its dependance. However, maybe the sweden gov values free press and the press is free via this relationship.