[ad_1]
Five red-green newspapers run away with most of the press support. In all, Klassekampen and Dagsavisen have received billions from the state.
In the draft of a new party program for the Conservatives, there is a proposal that is overdue: phase out the support of the press for national newspapers and transfer this money to local media and to a fund for investigative journalism and digitization. .
No wonder the leftist newspapers are shaking their pants.
The proposal is good and future-oriented, especially since many of the newspapers that have garnered the most state support for several years have also been the worst at converting to digital reality. And why should they, when the real business models are actually getting a check from the Storting once a year?
RED-GREEN: The main recipients of press support are on the left in Norwegian politics. And they receive more than half of all subsidies for Norwegian paper newspaper production.
Photo: Norwegian Media Authority
In 2019, NOK 316.2 million were distributed in support of production to several hundred Norwegian newspapers. But the distribution key is completely unreasonable from the district’s point of view. The vast majority of newspapers receive no more than 300,000 to 500,000 crowns a year. State support for most newspapers barely covers one journalist position.
So the situation is completely different for the newspapers above. Last year, the top six on the list received NOK 177.4 million. Thus, just over a handful of newspapers receive nearly 60 percent of all press support, while small amounts of money seep past the newspapers, which are the end result of local democracy across the country. .
ALARM: The class struggle sees the father and does journalism about the court proposal.
Photo: Facsimile (Class struggles September 10, 2020)
The Conservatives’ program proposal follows the Media Diversity Committee (of which I participated), which recommended such a reorganization of support for the press.
But when Klassekampen calls out to left politicians, there is great resistance. – For the love of God, we must keep our own political evaluations at bay when deciding which newspapers will be supported or not, says Freddy André Øvstegård (SV).
It’s easy to say when the entire national newspaper industry is on the left side of Norwegian politics. Following the split of the Christian People’s Party, Vårt Land has also chosen to support the left side of the party in both leadership and commentary. The class struggle, Dagsavisen and Nationen have such close connections with the red-green parties that they must indisputably be counted on that side of politics.
Nationen editor Irene Halvorsen (received NOK 21.9 million last year) tells Klassekampen that she cannot identify with the proposal because Norwegian media policy is very successful and media diversity is very important.
She thinks it’s hard to imagine how a newspaper like Nationen will manage without the support of the press. You’re probably right about the second: to do so, you have to adapt to a digital future. The online newspaper now has around 900,000 daily readers and we have lived 24 years without the support of the press. Then it is possible!
In the same way that small local newspapers across the country manage to get the wheels rolling with good cost control, even if they only receive pocket trash in support of support barons in the capital.
What is discouraging in the debate on supporting the press is that politicians do the opposite of what the SV representative recommends: they have called for a failed plan to support the press because they support their own newspapers: Rødt (Klassekampen), Arbeiderpartiet and SV (Dagsavisen), Senterpartiet (Nationen) and more. now the Christian People’s Party (Vårt Land og Dagen).
Conservatives have my full support in the proposal to redistribute the support of the press and guarantee less inequality. Money will not be lost if you take money from large recipients and give it to local newspapers. Rather, it will ensure greater journalistic power in the many local communities in which people live.
Previously, opinion at the national level was important because it ensured access to different opinions throughout the country. But anyone who thinks it’s so necessary today must have missed Facebook, social media, and the Internet.
P.S! What do you mean? Is it time to change or remove the press holder, or do you think the system works quite well? Write a reader letter!
[ad_2]
