Archive post: »Venstre uses JydskeVestkysten as a state-subsidised beating squad« · 2020-06-19

• Halldor Henriksen — Mentioned in the current archived text
• Mads Sandemann — Mentioned in the current archived text
• Trine Lindén — Mentioned in the current archived text

Source title: Venstre bruger JydskeVestkysten som statsstøttet tæskehold

Text version dated 27 Oct 2023

Venstre bruger JydskeVestkysten som statsstøttet tæskehold JydskeVestkysten har nu skrevet mere end et halvt hundrede artikler om Skansegården og dens ejer. I langt de fleste af artiklerne har omdrejningspunktet været at støtte lokale Venstre-politikeres synspunkter. Det er en kampagne, hvor JydskeVestkystens enorme interesse for en, i den store sammenhæng, ret ubetydelig sag, mangler fortilfælde.

Til gengæld er det ikke vanskeligt at finde tidligere sager, hvor Venstre også har haft fri adgang til journalistiske ressourcer fra det heftigt statsstøttede JydskeVestkysten. Jysk Fynske Medier, som ejer JydskeVestkysten (og pt. 15 dagblade, 63 ugeaviser, 5 radiostationer og en lang række digitale nyhedsmedier), er den koncernmæssig største modtager af mediestøtte i Danmark med 64,4 millioner kroner årligt. I 2019 gik de 17,5 millioner til JydskeVestkysten.

I indeværende år har koncernen desuden fået del i hjælpepakken i forbindelse med COVID-19. Derfor er der midler til at sætte store ressourcer ind, når vennerne i Venstre har brug for muskler. Opskriften, der er lige så brutal som den er effektiv, har været brugt før.

Her er den punkt for punkt: - Venstre har et problem med en sag eller en politisk modstander… (lad os kalde ham/hende for X). - De beder JV om at ‘grave smuds’ frem om X. - JV sætter alle ressourcer ind på at finde smuds. - Hvis det ikke lykkes, skriver de alligevel en beskidt forsidehistorie om X… – der perifert lyder til at kunne have hold i virkeligheden. Hvis ikke historien lever op til journalistfagets etiske retningslinjer, fremsætter Mr. Fake News, lokalredaktør Halldor Henriksen, den blot i form af en kommentar (så er der ingen etiske regler). - Venstre udtaler, at det er chokerende og forkasteligt, at X opfører sig så svinsk. - X afviser historien – og dokumenterer måske endog, at den er forkert. - JV beklager i en lille notits på side 12.

Chefredaktør Mads Sandemann sidder i Pressenævnet og ved præcist hvor grænsen går. Samtidig fortæller han gang på gang, at Venstres mand i Jysk Fynske Mediers bestyrelse ikke har indflydelse på mediets redaktionelle linje. - X er i teorien renset, men skaden er sket. Alle har set, at han/hun er en skurk, men meget få har set, at det er løgn.

Falske anklager betaler sig Skansegårdens ejer er stadig i ilden, men han er ikke den første. Mange husker sikkert den såkaldte notat-sag tilbage fra kommunalvalgkampen i 2017 om direktør for kommunikationsbureauet Commocean, Trine Lindén, som også var politisk aktiv i Det Konservative Folkeparti i Sønderborg. Trine og Commocean blev også udsat for ovenstående opskrift – punkt for punkt.

Alle anklagepunkter mod hende blev pure afvist, og Pressenævnet udtrykte en delvis kritik af JydskeVestkysten for deres rolle i sagen. JVs egen pligtfortælling om pressenævnets afgørelse blev skjult i bunden af en artikel, der var så lang og kedelig, at ingen nåede derned. Kampagnen havde ikke et gran af sandhed, men alligevel virkede planen.

Commocean mistede en stor kunde, og Venstre fik svækket en politisk modstander. I den offentlige gabestok er det ikke medierne, der skal bevise, at X er skyldig. Det er X, der skal bevise sin uskyld.

Og da Jysk Fynske Medier sidder tungt på mediemarkedet, er man nødt til at fortælle om det gennem egne kanaler. Det fortsætter vi naturligvis med at gøre. Synes du, at det i orden?

På Jysk Fynske Medier website kan man se følgende citat: ”Vi når ud til 679.000 læsere hver uge med vore dagblade, 973.000 læsere på vore ugeaviser fra Limfjorden til grænsen og på Fyn og Sjælland. Dertil regionale og lokale nyhedssites med 360.000 daglige brugere. Den nationale Radio4 med JFM som hovedejer, når 362.000 ugentlige lyttere.

Foruden Radio4 har koncernen fire kommercielle radiostationer med 823.000 ugentlige lyttere.” En rigtig stor del af Danmarks befolkning er repræsenteret i disse tal. Med Venstres nuværende status i det politiske billede er det næppe sandsynligt, at alle mediets brugere støtter de beskrevne journalistiske metoder – eller den partipolitiske indflydelse på, det der burde være uafhængig journalistik. Hvis du selv er abonnent, lytter eller læser, kan du jo stille dig selv disse spørgsmål: Føler du, at dine synspunkter bliver tilgodeset?

Støtter du politiske kampagner forklædt som ansvarlig journalistik? Synes du, at Jysk Fynske Medier på forsvarlig vis forvalter deres ansvar som landets største modtager af redaktionel produktionsstøtte fra Kulturstyrelsen? Venstre-vælgere kan måske også overveje fornuften i at visse lokalpolitikere bruger deres mandat og skatteyderfinansierede midler på personligt motiverede kampagner, samtidig med at der netop i øjeblikket er brug for ekstra store ressourcer til blandt andet ældreplejen, sundhedssektoren og et presset erhvervsliv. https://www.pressenaevnet.dk/mads-sandemann/ Bestemmer avisens bestyrelse, hvad vi skriver? https://jv.dk/forside/bestemmer-avisens-bestyrelse-hvad-vi-skriver (Opslaget har tidligere været bragt på vores Facebook side)

This is an automatic reading translation. The source’s allegations and assessments have not been independently confirmed through translation. Check wording, qualifications and meaning against the preserved Danish original. Some retained numbers may use Danish separators: a dot for thousands and a comma for decimals. Check amounts against the Danish original.

Venstre uses JydskeVestkysten as a state-subsidised goon squad JydskeVestkysten has now written more than fifty articles about Skansegården and its owner. The vast majority of the articles have focused on supporting the views of local Venstre politicians. It is a campaign in which JydskeVestkysten's enormous interest in a case that is fairly insignificant in the greater scheme of things has no precedent.

On the other hand, it is not difficult to find earlier cases in which Venstre also had unrestricted access to journalistic resources from the heavily state-subsidised JydskeVestkysten. Jysk Fynske Medier, which owns JydskeVestkysten (and currently 15 daily newspapers, 63 weekly newspapers, 5 radio stations and a wide range of digital news outlets), is Denmark's largest recipient of media subsidies at group level, receiving 64,4 million kroner annually. In 2019, 17,5 million went to JydskeVestkysten.

This year the group has also received a share of the COVID-19 relief package. There are therefore funds to deploy substantial resources when their friends in Venstre need muscle. The recipe, as brutal as it is effective, has been used before.

Here it is, point by point: - Venstre has a problem with a case or a political opponent… (let us call him/her X). - They ask JV to ‘dig up dirt’ on X. - JV deploys every resource to find dirt. - If that fails, they still write a dirty front-page story about X… – that sounds as though it might have some tenuous basis in reality. If the story does not comply with the ethical guidelines of journalism, Mr. Fake News, local editor Halldor Henriksen, merely as commentary, so there are no ethical rules. – Venstre says it is shocking and reprehensible that X behaves so disgracefully. – X rejects the story and perhaps even documents that it is wrong. – JV apologises in a small notice on page 12.

Editor-in-chief Mads Sandemann sits on Pressenævnet and knows exactly where the boundary lies. He repeatedly says Venstre’s man on Jysk Fynske Medier’s board does not influence editorial policy. – In theory, X is cleared, but the damage is done. Everyone saw that he/she was a villain; very few saw that it was a lie.

False accusations pay. Skansegården’s owner is still under fire, but not the first. Many will remember the so-called memorandum case from the municipal election campaign in 2017, concerning Trine Lindén, director of communications agency Commocean and politically active in Det Konservative Folkeparti in Sønderborg.

Trine and Commocean also faced the recipe above, point by point. Every accusation against her was flatly rejected, and Pressenævnet expressed partial criticism of JydskeVestkysten’s role. JV’s own required account of the decision was hidden at the bottom of an article so long and dull nobody reached it.

The campaign contained not a grain of truth, yet the plan worked. Commocean lost a major customer, and Venstre weakened a political opponent. In the public pillory, the media need not prove X guilty.

X must prove innocence. Because Jysk Fynske Medier dominates the media market, one must communicate through one’s own channels. Naturally, we will continue doing so.

Do you think this is acceptable? Jysk Fynske Medier’s website states: “Our daily newspapers reach 679,000 readers each week, and our weekly papers 973,000 readers from Limfjorden to the border and on Funen and Zealand. In addition, regional and local news websites have 360,000 daily users.

National station Radio4, with JFM as its main owner, reaches 362,000 weekly listeners. Besides Radio4, the group has four commercial radio stations with 823,000 weekly listeners.” These figures represent a very large proportion of Denmark’s population. Given Venstre’s current position in the political landscape, it is hardly likely that all the media outlet’s users support the described journalistic methods or party-political influence over what should be independent journalism.

If you are a subscriber, listener or reader yourself, ask yourself: do you feel your views are represented? Do you support political campaigns disguised as responsible journalism? Do you think Jysk Fynske Medier responsibly manages its role as the country’s largest recipient of editorial production subsidies from Kulturstyrelsen?

Venstre voters might also consider the wisdom of certain local politicians using their mandate and taxpayer-financed funds for personally motivated campaigns, while especially large resources are currently needed for elderly care, healthcare and a business sector under pressure.

This is an automatic reading translation. The source’s allegations and assessments have not been independently confirmed through translation. Check wording, qualifications and meaning against the preserved Danish original. Some retained numbers may use Danish separators: a dot for thousands and a comma for decimals. Check amounts against the Danish original.

Venstre uses JydskeVestkysten as a state-subsidised beating squad

JydskeVestkysten has now written more than fifty articles about Skansegården and its owner. The focus in the vast majority of the articles has been to support the views of local Venstre politicians. It is a campaign in which JydskeVestkysten’s enormous interest in a case that is fairly insignificant in the broader picture is unprecedented.

On the other hand, it is not difficult to find earlier cases in which Venstre also had unrestricted access to journalistic resources from the heavily state-subsidised JydskeVestkysten. Jysk Fynske Medier, which owns JydskeVestkysten (and currently 15 daily newspapers, 63 weekly newspapers, 5 radio stations and a wide range of digital news outlets), is Denmark's largest recipient of media subsidies at group level, receiving 64,4 million kroner annually. In 2019, 17,5 million went to JydskeVestkysten.

This year the group has also received a share of the COVID-19 relief package. That is why funds are available to deploy substantial resources when their friends in Venstre need muscle. The formula, which is as brutal as it is effective, has been used before.

Here it is, point by point:

Venstre has a problem with a case or a political opponent… (let us call him/her X).

They ask JV to ‘dig up dirt’ on X.

JV deploys every resource to find dirt.

If they do not succeed, they write a dirty front-page story about X anyway… – one that sounds vaguely as though it might have a basis in reality. If the story does not meet the ethical guidelines of journalism, Mr. Fake News, local editor Halldor Henriksen, simply presents it as a comment (then there are no ethical rules).

Venstre states that it is shocking and reprehensible that X behaves so disgracefully.

X rejects the story – and perhaps even documents that it is incorrect.

JV apologises in a small notice on page 12. Editor-in-chief Mads Sandemann sits on Pressenævnet and knows exactly where the line is drawn. At the same time, he repeatedly says that Venstre's representative on the board of Jysk Fynske Medier has no influence on the outlet's editorial line.

In theory, X is cleared, but the damage is done. Everyone saw that he/she was a villain; very few saw that it was a lie.

False accusations pay off
Skansegården’s owner is still under fire, but not the first. Many will remember the so-called memorandum case from the municipal election campaign in 2017, concerning Trine Lindén, director of communications agency Commocean and politically active in Det Konservative Folkeparti in Sønderborg. Trine and Commocean also faced the recipe above, point by point.

All the accusations against her were categorically rejected, and Pressenævnet expressed partial criticism of JydskeVestkysten for its role in the case. JV's own mandatory account of Pressenævnet's decision was hidden at the bottom of an article so long and boring that nobody reached it. The campaign did not contain a grain of truth, yet the plan worked.

Commocean lost a major customer, and Venstre weakened a political opponent. In the public pillory, it is not the media that have to prove X is guilty. It is X who has to prove their innocence.

And as Jysk Fynske Medier has a firm grip on the media market, one has to tell the story through one’s own channels. Naturally, we will continue to do that.

Do you think that is acceptable? Jysk Fynske Medier’s website states: “Our daily newspapers reach 679,000 readers each week, and our weekly papers 973,000 readers from Limfjorden to the border and on Funen and Zealand. In addition, regional and local news websites have 360,000 daily users.

National station Radio4, with JFM as its main owner, reaches 362,000 weekly listeners. Besides Radio4, the group has four commercial radio stations with 823,000 weekly listeners.”
These figures represent a very large proportion of Denmark’s population. Given Venstre’s current position in the political landscape, it is hardly likely that all the media outlet’s users support the described journalistic methods or party-political influence over what should be independent journalism.

If you are a subscriber, listener or reader yourself, you can ask yourself these questions:
Do you feel that your views are being taken into account? Do you support political campaigns disguised as responsible journalism? Do you think Jysk Fynske Medier responsibly fulfils its role as the country’s largest recipient of editorial production subsidies from Kulturstyrelsen?

Venstre voters might also consider the wisdom of certain local politicians using their mandate and taxpayer-financed funds for personally motivated campaigns, while especially large resources are currently needed for elderly care, healthcare and a business sector under pressure.

Pressenævnet // Mads Sandemann

Does the newspaper's board decide what we write?