[ptype]

Ironically coming from DN, who under current editor Wolodarski has lost a huge amount of credibility among Swedish intellectuals. What used to be the premier journalistic publication of Sweden now runs a highly biased agenda, and has been involved in a number of journalistic scandals (cover ups etc).

[willvarfar]

Up vote from me, because the image of DN has definitely changed. Used to be quality, now tabloid. That is the feeling I get from reading it off and on until the slide downhill.

[Steer]

I find it interesting and telling that you don't present any sources for your argument. Which paper in Sweden does the "Swedish intellectuals" read now? I think it is still DN, but would be interested to hear your sourced argument why this isn't true.

[ptype]

If you read my post again, you will see that I did not actually say that the Swedish intellectuals (for the lack of a better term) are not reading DN, just that DN has lost a lost of credibility. It is my observation that this is becoming more and more of a wide spread view, based on discussions with friends and colleagues. You are right - I'm busted! - I have not conducted a market study of this. But then again, do you have any sources why they still read DN as you claim?

[jahaja]

What scandals are you referring to?

[ptype]

I was on my phone earlier.

DN under Wolodarski has received a lot of criticism, which I suspect you are actually aware of. Please find a few examples below.

Aftonbladet: Journalists question the truthfulness of a series of DN's articles: http://www.aftonbladet.se/kultur/article23755207.ab

Alice Teodorescu of GP has criticised DN and their journalistic methods on numerous occasions, e.g. "DN on collision course with reality": http://www.gp.se/ledare/teodorescu-dn-p%C3%A5-kollisionskurs... Also worth seeing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRivdUJO1ls

National economist Tino Sanandaji often uncovers errors in DN's journalism, e.g. this example of DN using incorrect statistics: http://tino.us/2014/06/p1-medier-granskar-dn-dn-star-bakom-h...

The DN cover up scandal (their rebuttal): http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/fragor-och-svar-om-dns-hant...

[jahaja]

This is blatant cherry-picking an I'm saying that as a person with left-wing ideals (DN is a right-wing newspaper). These are not "journalistic scandals" in any sense of the words you're making them out to be.

Furthermore, using the same measurement standards as yourself, some of your sources are questionable at best in this matter. Especially GP which has taken a _sharp_, even populist, right turn since the appointment of Teodorescu, for which they've been much more criticized than DN. Sanandaji is not much better than an opportunist, gaining publicity by fueling a sense of media cover-up among right-wing populists. Lately he's been calling the lack of orders from public libraries for his newly released book about the costs of immigration censorship.

This doesn't not even come close to "lost a huge amount of credibility among Swedish intellectuals" nor "has been involved in a number of journalistic scandals (cover ups etc)". You're simply being dishonest.

[ptype]

Your claims of cherry-picking are nonsense. I have picked a few examples to support my argument of deteriorating journalistic quality. Aftonbladet and GP are mainstream newspapers. GP is not right wing by international standards. For international readers, it is worth pointing out that DN is definitely not a particularly right wing publication by any international standard. Sanandaji is a frequent commentator in Swedish media with a best selling book out.

To me it seems that you are letting your own self-confessed political views influence your ability to evaluate the quality of the journalism and fall back on ad hominem rather than presenting your counter arguments.

[jahaja]

Your argument was not made towards "deteriorating journalistic quality". You made two wildly inaccurate statements and are simply not backing them up beyond presenting opinion - rather than scandal exposing - articles where most sources, at the very least, have been more criticized than DN.

And while trying to prove your statements you link to a _tv-debate_, like who's the best tv-debater would matter. That video seem to come from a blatant right-populist account which leaves a bad taste as well, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.

[ptype]

Firstly, my comment regarding DN losing credibility was swiftly clarified elsewhere in this thread as an observation and in fact we have seen other commentators agreeing. I would welcome any observations, or even your personal opinion, you have made to the contrary. The development of DN actually saddens me.

Secondly, in my book, ofcourse being accused of lying, misusing statistics and covering up are journalistic scandals if you strive to be a premier journalistic publication. Maybe we have different expectations of journalism, but perhaps a softer term could have been used to save us both some excitement.

The TV debate was in a well known debate program on state television, and I'm sure you agree that it is very rare for a DN editor to openly receive such strong criticism from another journalist. I have no idea who posted that video on YouTube (I just remembered the debate and googled it) but the original source is state television, so that's an odd comment of you to make.

I haven't seen any sources from you either proving that the mainstream sources I provided as examples have been more criticised than DN.