[ad_1]
When I am attacked by Niklas Källner of Assignment Review, I have cold sweats.
– What could I have done wrong? I wonder.
I get so stressed out that I get out of my car without applying the parking brake.
The last episode of Assignment Review this year was an anniversary show featuring many of the best reports. Niklas Källner makes a parody of an alleged “ambush”, an assault on a person who refuses to answer questions. He appears with a photographer and I am the one who is exposed.
I finally understand which is not real. Asks me:
– How is a good UG structured dramaturgically?
I answer spontaneously: it starts with “Can it be that damn?” And it ends with “Yeah, it’s so damn.”
It can be good to be in situations that we expose others to. The journalists, who are in power, achieve impact, appreciation and perhaps prices, but the person being interrogated suffers a public execution.
Can you defend yourself? Yes, I mean it can, but it must be “fair play” and carefully thought out. Two people I met after we disclosed the activities that created negative publicity were Antonia Ax: her son Johnson, who was president of the City Mission in Stockholm, and Ingvar Kamprad of Ikea. They were both subjected to interviews for assault because they did not want to answer our questions.
They have both in hindsight invited me to dinner at home. Antonia considered that she was subjected to what she called “a violation” and could not see her own responsibility for the irregularities in the organization. Ingvar had concealed that he transferred large fortunes to accounts in Liechtenstein. He really had no criticism of the show.
For those who have something to hide, the show is an object of hatred that many public relations and communicators have been able to earn money from. At the same time, I can understand that people may not be sure if they will present their best arguments and if we are independent and impartial.
The big impact of SVT’s new community investigation program was in the autumn of 2001. Hannes Råstam and I reported on the EU meeting in Gothenburg where the Swedish police nearly shot a protester to death. We were able to reveal amazing things that other media avoided or overlooked. Many viewers were suspicious and critical. DN’s main page was titled “Mapping Distortion” with a large image of me. A poorly trained lead writer took away our honor and glory.
But people began to watch and more and more people gained confidence in us and the journalism we represent did not settle for task against task but went to the bottom with stories. Concrete shocking social reports for global revelations in collaboration with journalists from other countries. This can lead the program to create so-called “units”. People can be hunted like animals.
It’s power which means responsibility, consideration and requires that there be a “devil’s advocate” in the editorial office. The show generally executes a thesis that can easily blind you into an overly one-sided picture of reality. I have done this myself at least twice. Once with a director and the second with two young people on the outskirts. I wanted to tell you something important, but I didn’t do it right. And then there was the humiliation television. It was easier to cross that line than I thought. Can’t blame anyone else. And the terrible thing about television is that it is irreversible.
Assignment Review today is rightly in a really strong position and great confidence. For me, who has been involved from the beginning, it is something of “Rolls Royce” journalism. And I am grateful for the trip.
Read more texts by Janne Josefsson:
When I see the hoodies, I immediately think: criminals
So I “tricked” Jan Myrdal into being responsible for the dictatorship.
That is why I highlighted Hamid Zafar
They called me the radio manager when I said the forbidden word
Barbed wire between neighbors is our new Sweden
