Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark are consistently ranked highest in the world for both freedom of the press and participatory democracy. The Scandinavian population has among the highest news readership in the world, and can choose among the world’s greatest number, per capita, of local and national newspapers. Why? What are these countries doing right?
These countries are all relatively rich, and have not been hit as hard by the global financial crisis as many other places. And all have traditionally been comfortable with high governmental spending on public services—services that include both higher education and the media.
But beyond the most obvious explanations, there are many other reasons why the Scandinavian media is so healthy and successful. I spent two months last fall traveling through Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark, researching and reporting on the media there. Here are a few lessons that I think the American media could learn from our colleagues across the ocean.
1.) PBS and NPR should go big or go home. When Eva Hamilton, CEO of Sweden’s public television network SVT, hears about the budget cuts and political controversies plaguing her American counterparts, she nods in sympathy. Hamilton and many of her colleagues say that staying ambitious with a wide range of programming is the only way to ensure relevance in the cultural conversation—and, therefore, the best way to ensure funding. That’s why, in addition to the types of shows you’d expect from public TV (like high-brow costume dramas and news-analysis roundtables), SVT also shows all kinds of things that you wouldn’t expect (like sports games and HBO imports).
“As long as the population more or less daily is using the services that public service provides, then you can keep a strong position,” says Hamilton. “But as soon as you start to go downhill, and big groups of society don’t use your services, then you can’t count on any political support, and then you can’t count on the will to pay.”
2.) Simple and fast can trump flashy and confusing. One of the most popular news services in Scandinavia is also one of the oldest. Teletext is a primitive, pre-Internet digital technology that broadcasts small bursts of text onto a television screen. It has developed since the late 1970s into a whole menu of information, like weather reports, sports scores, and traffic. Despite the fact that its interface is about as sophisticated as an Atari game, it’s simple, and fast, and millions of people in Scandinavia use it every day.
Executives and producers at the public broadcasters who put out the most popular teletext channels say they are baffled by its continued success. “This is a peculiar thing,” says Heikki Lammi, head of online news at Finland’s public broadcast company YLE. “Teletext has not developed at all for thirty years…. It is ugly if you compare it even to the most simple website.” But, Lammi adds, this just demonstrates that the quality of the content is much more important than the interface. So instead of shutting it down, as the BBC did to Ceefax just last month, Scandinavian teletext providers are updating it for younger audiences and newer devices. Case in point: the teletext iPhone app.
This can serve as a reminder that, as American media companies continue to experiment with new online technology and app platforms, they don’t have to start from scratch. Flashy graphics, interactive features, and social-media integration can all enhance the reader experience. But when it comes to a daily or hourly news habit, if the readers’ main motivation for visiting a site or opening an app—whether it be checking a sports score, or getting an overview of the world’s headlines—isn’t easily and quickly satisfied, they might not be back. Many news readers crave simplicity and speed above all else, even above pretty design.
Sure, public outlets are successful: it's easy to stay afloat when govt-granted privileges shield you from competition. But watch what happens when you curtail or abolish the govt's absolute powers to subsidize, license, and "regulate." No firm would be too big to fail, and you'd come that much closer to a free press and a free, prosperous, and well-informed society. Are we brave and honest enough to face that lesson?
#1 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Mon 2 Jul 2012 at 03:03 PM
Why are these all-white, monolingual, monocultural, Protestant-ethic societies so often held up as models for a much more complicated country like the US? All my life I've heard irony-impaired people, who pay lip service to multi-culturalism and diversity here, praise exactly the opposite societies overseas.
Scandinavia's consensus-based characteristics cited above would not for very long survive an influx of non-Western immigrants. And I question whether the Scandinavian press has much to teach US journalists, especially in the age of the Internet.
#2 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Tue 3 Jul 2012 at 10:21 AM
@#2 Mark Richard: What Scandanavian countries are you thinking of? Clearly you have not been there as they are HIGHLY multicultural, with many different nationalities calling those countries home.
And, for the record, I'm sure even a lowly, backyard operating Sudanese journalists could teach US journalists a thing or two. Most definitely.
#3 Posted by Miles Q, CJR on Thu 5 Jul 2012 at 01:06 AM
To Miles, Sweden's population is about 91% ethnically 'Scandinavian' (and 87% nominally Lutheran in religion. No other ethnic group even reaches 1%. I don't have ethnic stats for Norway, but I do have nominal religious affiliation, which has Lutherans at 84% and Muslims a distant second at 2%. In Denmark, 90% of the population is native-born. Finland features 95% of the population who are native Scandinavians. In all of these countries there are sprinklings of south Europeans, mostly from the Balkans. People Asian or Hispanic descent are almost non-existent; there are 1% or 2% of the citizenry who are African-descended. By the standards of US 'multi-culturalism', these statistics are very pale indeed.
The countries of Europe have simply been sheltered babies compared to the US when it comes to dealing with the hard issues raised by genuine multi-culturalism within one civic cultures. (The French stopped long ago lecturing the US about its racial difficulties, thank goodness.) Well do I remember how upset my long-ago Norwegian au pair, otherwise conventionally 'progressive' in the European style, got when she learned that a temple was being constructed by a handful of Vietnamese refugees in her home town. The increasing 'multi-culturalism' of Europe is a big issue there, as seen by events ranging from the sizable poll received by the National Front in the France elections, to the power wielded by Geert Wilders' party in the Netherlands, to the massacre of those Swedish kids by that madman a few months ago. The European countries have had the luxury of being 'consensus' societies which produce practices and institutions such as outlined in the CJR article above - but the consensus is under severe pressure due to demographics. That's why I believe the Scandinavians don't have much that is practical to teach the US, in journalism or public policy.
#4 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Thu 5 Jul 2012 at 05:12 PM
At Free Press we've compared public media funding levels, press freedom rankings and civil society metrics like the Economist Democracy Index and created a graphic that captures some of these same points: http://jcstearns.tumblr.com/post/27060532095
However, we've also worked with researchers at NYU on a first of its kind inventory of 14 democratic nations and the policies they use to fund and protect the autonomy of public media. Some of the lessons from that research resonate with those outlined above, but there are others that I think speak to some of the concerns expressed by the com mentors here. You can read an executive summary and download the full report here: http://www.freepress.net/blog/11/02/10/public-media-and-political-independence-lessons-future-journalism-around-world
#5 Posted by Josh Stearns, CJR on Thu 12 Jul 2012 at 01:48 PM
Swedish media is everything but impartial or objective. The vast majority of Swedish journalists are oriented to the left of the political scale and its consequences were clearly seen for example during parliamental elections in 2010.
The newest party to take seat in the Riksdag was treated in a manner no other party was even close to. Much of this is of course something Swedish media is aware of but highly unwilling to admit. A new book called the "Problem Party" highlights many of the tactics that were used, for instance by SVT with Mrs Hamilton, to scandalize and manipulate. In Sweden you will find hegemonial medial and political correctness in its purest form. Sure, the rest of the world has something to learn but not as it is described in this article.
#6 Posted by sune, CJR on Sat 14 Jul 2012 at 10:39 AM
@Mark Richards. You are a troll. You know nothing of the Nordic countries. As someone living in Finland, I can tell you that the ethics and democratic practices of the public media services here put most other countries to shame.
How much media from this side of the world have you seen or heard?
Perhaps if you could get out of your insular, American exceptionalism, you might learn a thing or two. The countries of Europe are sheltered babies? Please.
#7 Posted by dee, CJR on Wed 28 Nov 2012 at 04:09 PM