Publish and (don't) be damned
For Thomas Mattsson, editor-in-chief of Sweden's biggest newspaper, Expressen, freedom of speech is as relevant to a publisher's right to take advertising or write content about gambling as it is to political prisoners.
EDITING AN ESTABLISHED LIBERAL newspaper in a stable democracy like Sweden may seem like a walk in the park from a legal point of view, and certainly so given that our legislation for freedom of speech was formulated as early as 1766. Surely, governments pose no threat to journalism in Sweden? And surely, a newspaper like Expressen, with 1.4 million readers per day in print and online, is able to stand up to government if circumstances demand it? True, but much is still at stake.
Expressen campaigns for Dawit Isaak, a Swedish-Eritrean journalist who was imprisoned by the regime in Asmara in 2001 without trial. His three children in Gothenburg have now been waiting for their father for almost 3,000 days, and Dawit Isaak is the only Swede to have been adopted by Amnesty International as a prisoner they actively support. Expressen has actually been reporting about Dawit Isaak every day since 2005, through a dedicated news site.
To me, this campaign journalism is logical for a newspaper like Expressen and represents the very reason for publishing newspapers. But, oddly, there is another government that threatens Swedish journalism: its own.
Not only are we using our op-ed pages to campaign for Dawit Isaak, but also to
argue against the Swedish gambling monopoly. As we speak, Expressen is involved in
several court proceedings with the authorities in Sweden.
argue against the Swedish gambling monopoly. As we speak, Expressen is involved in
several court proceedings with the authorities in Sweden.
According to Swedish law, a newspaper like Expressen can not publish adverts for gambling companies other than the ones approved by the government. And that happens to be companies that the state itself owns or controls.
According to them, we can not even publish facts about what the foreign gambling companies offer their customers as part of our own content.
I strongly disagree with the idea that the government can impose censorship on ads for businesses which are fully legal in other European Union countries, but when it also tries to edit my paper’s stories, the issue really challenges me.
Since Expressen is struggling to convince the Eritrean officials about the importance of freedom of speech, must we also argue against the Swedish politicians?
I fully understand that the parallels between the causes against are not comparable, then again, freedom of speech is not about liking or measuring. It is there. For all and everything.
Or at least it should be, and editors like me have to defend it in many different ways. Expressen happily does that, it is part of our heritage to fight the power and represent the challengers, but surely we could focus on other issues were it not for the government defending its monopoly.
Expressen, though, still runs advertising and editorial content about gambling in its print edition every day.
Expressen‘s website, Expressen.se, also has a section for poker and updates its stories about gambling frequently and offers banner ads.
To me, as the editor-in-chief of a liberal newspaper, it is motivating to remember that the monopolies in Sweden are falling one by one. We now have private-owned kindergartens, schools, hospitals, pension funds and so on. Only days ago, pharmacies were also put on the market and will no longer be fully owned and controlled by the government.
Gambling will follow, of course, but it feels somewhat strange that I myself might be on the stand in a court about this before my colleague Dawit Isaak is given a chance to defend his right to publish what he wishes.