Aim: This study examines the discursive construction of medical cannabis in Swedish newspapers, with the aim of understanding how the news media recontextualise the medical potential of cannabis.

Design: The study is centred on the concept of recontextualisation, which focuses on how discourses are reinterpreted and reshaped when moving from one context to another, with a special focus on recontextualisation in relation to the media. Methodologically, the study uses critical discourse analysis to qualitatively analyse 134 articles of different subgenres, published in four Swedish newspapers between 2015 and 2020.

Results: The study shows that medical cannabis is constructed around myriad topics and contexts, ranging from news that focuses on the medical potential of cannabis to articles where medical cannabis is mentioned in passing and constructed in a more abstract form. The media have difficulties retaining a conceptual boundary between medical and recreational cannabis. Moreover, the study shows that the medical potential of cannabis is discursively constructed using three different discourses: patient discourse, strong science discourse, and weak science discourse.

Conclusions: The study suggests that there is a widening of the debate on cannabis in the Swedish public sphere, giving more recognition to the potential medical use of cannabis. The media, however, show difficulties in refining discourses on medical cannabis, which results in an altering between constructions that are strongly connected to science, and those that are not.

By applying the methods of Critical Discourse Analysis this paper aims to explore how ideology works within the discursive construction of class, in the representation of the supporters and opponents of the government of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. News items from New York Times (US), El País (Uruguay) and Dagens Nyheter (Sweden) constitute the analyzed material. The paper argues that class-markers are important in the representation of government supporters, whom many times are constructed as belonging to the poorer sectors of society. Class is however less explicit in the representation of Chávez-opposition, which in fact is lead by elite groups. It is therefore argued that class in this context becomes a marker of deviance, which in turn works ideologically in legitimizing oppositional groups and disqualifying the support for Chávez’ government.

By applying the methods of Critical Discourse Analysis this paper aims to explore how ideology works within the discursive construction of class, in the representation of the supporters and opponents of the government of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. News items from New York Times (US), El País (Uruguay) and Dagens Nyheter (Sweden) constitute the analyzed material. The paper argues that class-markers are important in the representation of government supporters, whom many times are constructed as belonging to the poorer sectors of society. Class is however less explicit in the representation of Chávez-opposition, which in fact is lead by elite groups. It is therefore argued that class in this context becomes a marker of deviance, which in turn works ideologically in legitimizing oppositional groups and disqualifying the support for Chávez’ government.

Despite scholarly consensus about the importance of the media for democracy, scant attention has been paid to what democracy means to journalistic discourse and how discourses on democracy are interrelated with legitimacy. The aim of this paper is to explore how (il)legitimate democracy is constructed in newspaper discourse. By using critical discourse analysis (CDA), this paper examines foreign news items about Venezuela, a country that under the presidency of Hugo Chávez has challenged the dominant global political and economic orders. The analysis section focuses on two discourses about the Venezuelan government: the constructions of populism  and power concentration, which serve to mark deviance from what is perceived as a legitimate democracy. This paper argues that a liberal perception of democracy constitutes a central framework for the construction of (il)legitimate democracy, which is revealed not least by news discourse’s focus on what is morally unacceptable political conduct according to liberal democratic norms. In this respect, the media discourse serves to denounce potential abuses of governmental power but fail to recognize democracy in the context of a social struggle against the effects of neoliberalism and capitalism. In this case, the news media is hegemonic in the Gramscian sense, because it provides a framework of democracy that remains within the dominant economic and political structures.

Despite scholarly consensus about the importance of the media for democracy, scant attention has been paid to what democracy means to journalistic discourse and how discourses on democracy are interrelated with legitimacy. The aim of this paper is to explore how (il)legitimate democracy is constructed in newspaper discourse. By using critical discourse analysis (CDA), this paper examines foreign news items about Venezuela, a country that under the presidency of Hugo Chávez has challenged the dominant global political and economic orders. The analysis section focuses on two discourses about the Venezuelan government: the constructions of populism  and power concentration, which serve to mark deviance from what is perceived as a legitimate democracy. This paper argues that a liberal perception of democracy constitutes a central framework for the construction of (il)legitimate democracy, which is revealed not least by news discourse’s focus on what is morally unacceptable political conduct according to liberal democratic norms. In this respect, the media discourse serves to denounce potential abuses of governmental power but fail to recognize democracy in the context of a social struggle against the effects of neoliberalism and capitalism. In this case, the news media is hegemonic in the Gramscian sense, because it provides a framework of democracy that remains within the dominant economic and political structures.

This study examines the media discourse on the 2002 coup d’état against the government of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, with the aim of exploring how ideology in media discourse helps construct democracy in a Latin American political context. Critical discourse analysis is used to examine written pieces from Dagens Nyheter (Sweden), El País (Uruguay), and the New York Times (US). The study finds that the discourse on the overthrow and the events preceding it constructs the coup as a potential victory for democracy and as the definitive end of Chávez. However, after the failure of the coup and the reinstallation of Chávez one can perceive discursive renegotiations, such as the publishing of non-fundamental criticism of the overthrow. The study argues that the media discourse on the coup displays a highly relativistic attitude towards democracy, which serves the interests of the elite classes in Venezuela and of US hegemony in global politics. The article also argues that the flexibility of the discourse at hand shows the need for a detailed analysis of how ideology is (re)formed in media discourse.

This study examines the media discourse on the 2002 coup d’état against the government of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, with the aim of exploring how ideology in media discourse helps construct democracy in a Latin American political context. Critical discourse analysis is used to examine written pieces from Dagens Nyheter (Sweden), El País (Uruguay), and the New York Times (US). The study finds that the discourse on the overthrow and the events preceding it constructs the coup as a potential victory for democracy and as the definitive end of Chávez. However, after the failure of the coup and the reinstallation of Chávez one can perceive discursive renegotiations, such as the publishing of non-fundamental criticism of the overthrow. The study argues that the media discourse on the coup displays a highly relativistic attitude towards democracy, which serves the interests of the elite classes in Venezuela and of US hegemony in global politics. The article also argues that the flexibility of the discourse at hand shows the need for a detailed analysis of how ideology is (re)formed in media discourse.

Denna studie undersöker hur svenska nyhetsmedier rekontextualiserar kunskapsläget om konstgräsets miljöpåverkan och hur de skapar expertis om detta. Syftet med detta är att utveckla förståelsen för mediernas roll som förmedlare och skapare av expertkunskap om miljöfrågor och miljörisker. Material från nio svenska nyhetsmedier studeras kvalitativt genom kritisk diskursanalys. Resultaten visar att en central utgångspunkt för medierna är att konstruera konstgräs som en miljörisk, speciellt gällande risken för spridning av mikroplaster i vattenmiljöer. Emellanåt främjas en alarmistisk diskurs om konstgräsets miljöpåverkan. Viktigt för konstruktionen av denna risk och för att förmedla expertkunskap i fråga är en rapport om källor till mikroplast där konstgräs rankas som den näst största mikroplastkällan. Medierna uppvisar svårigheter i att problematisera denna källa, vilket bland annat leder till att mediediskursen emellanåt slår fast konstgräsets negativa effekter på miljön, men också till konstruktioner av ovisshet. En viktig strategi, både för att konstruera konstgräs som miljörisk och för att säga emot en sådan diskurs, är att knyta argument till en vetenskaplig diskurs. Studien visar också att medierna har svårt att hantera kunskapsosäkerhet, vilken emellanåt blir en drivkraft i befästandet av konstgräset som miljörisk. Studien avslutas med en diskussion om hur journalistiska villkor och rådande tankemönster om miljön bidrar till att främja riskdiskurser framför ett helhetsperspektiv på miljön.

Denna studie har som mål att undersöka hur svenska nyhetsmedier gestaltar konstgräs som miljöfråga. Detta görs i syfte att dels öka kunskapen om hur medierna rapporterar om mikroplastrelaterade miljöfrågor, ett forskningsområde som är outforskat i både svensk och internationell kontext, dels bidra med kunskap om hur miljövinsterna med konstgräs (återvinning/cirkulär ekonomi) porträtteras gentemot de miljörisker som det ger upphov till (utsläpp av plast och gummi). Rapporteringen från 15 nyhetsmedier och ett totalurval om 250 artiklar publicerade under perioden 2014–2018 studeras genom kvantitativ innehållsanalys. Resultaten visar att konstgräs som miljöfråga förekommer sparsamt i svenska nyhetsmedier, men att rapporteringen har ökat från och med 2016. Från och med detta år börjar konstgräs att allt tydligare kopplas till spridning av plast och gummi i naturen, vilket också är det vanligaste miljöproblemet som konstgräs kopplas till överlag. Detta kan, mot bakgrund av den traditionella medielogikens främjande av risker, i sin tur förklara mediernas ökade intresse för konstgräs som miljöfråga. Miljövinster med konstgräs framkommer inte i normalfallet, vilket betyder att denna aspekt överskuggas av de miljöproblem och risker som finns med konstgräs. Däremot konstaterar ungefär var tredje artikel som fokuserar på konstgräs och miljön i huvudtemat någon form av vetenskaplig osäkerhet kring konstgräsets miljöpåverkan. Gestaltningen av konstgräs som miljöfråga är till viss del formad av samhällsdebatten kring spridningen av plast i naturen, vilket ger medierna tolkningsramar för att förstå frågan, samt gör frågan nyhetsvärdig i sig.

Denna studie intresserar sig för förhållandet mellan medierna och andra intressenter i kommunikationen av miljön, och centrerar kring medieringen av mikroplastutsläpp från konstgräsplaner. Med hjälp av semistrukturerade intervjuer undersöks kommunikationsstrategierna hos centrala aktörer i medieringen av dessa miljöfrågor. Syftet är att bidra till teoretiseringen av hur kommunikationsstrategier och institutionella logiker hos olika intressenter möts och omförhandlas i den medierade kommunikationen om specifika miljöfrågor. Studien bygger på 14 intervjuer med totalt 15 journalister och redaktörer, myndighetsföreträdare, politiker, forskare och representanter för däckbranschen. En tematisk analys visar att konstgräsfrågan blir intressant för redaktioner på grund av konfliktytorna som kan exploateras i frågan, och osäkerheten som finns kring konstgräsets utsläpp av mikroplaster integreras i strategierna som styr det journalistiska hantverket. Studien visar också att kommunikationsstrategier som är i linje med den så kallade medielogiken möjliggör för intressenter att nå fram med sina perspektiv i medierna och vice versa. Detta mönster visar sig exempelvis i däckbranschens kommunikativa arbete i konstgräsfrågan. Studien visar också att Naturvårdsverket, som innehaft en nyckelroll i frågan om mikroplaster, har haft en ambivalent kommunikationsstrategi i denna fråga. Myndigheten både använder sig av och bortser från medielogiken. Studien diskuterar också riskerna med miljökommunikationens anpassning till medielogiken, där denna anpassning riskerar att bli ett problem ur ett hållbarhetsperspektiv.

This paper examines the representation of the then president of Uruguay, José Mujica, in a long-read feature story published in the Saturday supplement of the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter. This is done with the aim of contributing to the understanding of how international journalism constructs distance and proximity in the reporting of distant subjects, and more specifically, how such constructions connect the Swedish audience to (or disconnect it from) political processes and relations in Latin America. In this way, the study contributes to the field of media representation in general, as well as to research on the representation of Latin America, more specifically. Critical discourse analysis is used to analyze the text and visuals. Three result topics are presented. The first comprises discourses that construct difference, such as those highlighting personal characteristics that make Mujica different from other presidents. The second centers on discourses that construct proximity between Mujica and the audience, such as those addressing sustainability and the connections between Sweden, Uruguay and Mujica. The third highlights discourses that distance or downplay difference and revolve around constructions about Mujica’s political past. The paper ends with a discussion of how this representation is able to construct Mujica as a close other without, in the process, abandoning key tenets of contemporary capitalist ideology.

This paper discusses news journalism about inequality from a critical point of view, with the aim of contributing to the critical theorization of the relationship between journalism and sustainability. Sustainability and journalism on social inequality are perceived as intersecting in at least two ways. On one level, journalism can serve sustainable development by providing high-quality content that can help citizens to better understand the causes behind social inequality and how it can be overcome. On another level, journalism would itself gain much from sustainable development on a global level, since that would provide a good ground for a high-quality journalism characterized by its professional and democratic ethics rather than one that is strained by market-logics. The paper focuses on reification and problematizes the ways in which social inequality is reified in news journalism. Basing the argumentation on examples from international journalism, it is argued that although the existence of social inequality in a specific country can be acknowledged in the reporting – for example by the reference to rich and poor people and rich and poor geographic spaces – the social, political and historical causes of this inequality remain abstracted. In this sense, reification provides a rather objectivist account on inequality, which in turn limits the critique of the mechanisms that lie behind it. On the long run such constructions serve the legitimation of social inequality, which indeed ought to be seen as a sustainability problem. The paper also argues that for a more sustainable journalism to take place, a shift in the attitude towards social inequality and sustainable development must take place in the broader sociocultural context that surrounds journalism.

This study analyzes the journalistic construction of the ongoing international renegotiation of cannabis, with the aim of contributing to the theorization of how journalism mediates between hegemonic and counter-hegemonic positions at times of crisis of hegemonic values. The study perceives the many ongoing attempts of legalizing and decriminalizing cannabis for recreational use as providing a disequilibrium to the hegemonic view of the substance as a dangerous narcotic that is rightly banned, and as intensifying a hegemonic struggle over the meaning of cannabis. Swedish print news journalism about cannabis legalization in different countries and contexts is studied, using critical discourse analysis. The analysis shows that journalism allows for debate between positive and skeptic discourses about the effects of recreational cannabis consumption and its medical benefits, and that voices that argue for cannabis legalization to combat organized crime are given important framing power. This means that a measure of legitimacy is given to discourses that counter the prohibitionist hegemony in Sweden, which means that mainstream journalism in this specific case serves as an arena for challenging hegemonic values that are in crisis.

This study examines the reporting on legal cannabis in order to explore the operation of neoliberal ideology in journalistic discourse. Cannabis legalisation is here understood as a way for capitalism to create new market opportunities, besides being a turn away from the so-called ‘war on drugs’. The study understands neoliberalism as operating via market-based logics that are interrelated with other social logics, such as those pertaining to journalism (Phelan 2014). Critical discourse analysis is used for studying Swedish newspaper reporting on legal cannabis between 2013 and 2018. The study shows that a struggle between market-based logics and journalistic practices is visible, where journalism has difficulties in challenging core tenets of neoliberal ideology. The article concludes with a discussion of how the current conditions of journalism limit its ability to challenge neoliberal perspectives.

Rooted in ideology critique, this dissertation studies the construction of democracy in the coverage of Venezuela during the era of President Hugo Chávez. The aim of this endeavor is twofold. First, the dissertation aims to understand the relationship between ideology and the construction of democracy in journalism on foreign political phenomena. Second, it attempts to explore the ways in which the relationship between ideology and democracy in journalism serves to legitimize or delegitimize the struggle for social justice in nations in the global South vis-à-vis the political and economic fundamentals of global capitalism.

The dissertation comprises three articles that study the construction of democracy in depictions of the Venezuelan political system and its key political actors. Article I studies the construction of (il)legitimate democracy in relation to the Venezuelan government, Article II explores the construction of difference between Chávez’s supporters and his opponents, and Article III studies the coverage of the coup d’état against Chávez in 2002. All three articles are methodologically rooted in critical discourse analysis and rely on materials from a sample of three elite newspapers: Dagens Nyheter (Sweden), El País (Uruguay), and the New York Times (US).

Across the studies, there are four macro-strategies that in different ways serve to ideologically load the notion of democracy. Three of these strategies – the constructs of populism, of power concentration and of difference – serve to define political deviance and to (de)legitimize political actors in relation to democracy. The fourth macro-strategy, relativization, serves to justify actions that contradict established democratic principles but serve greater politico-ideological goals.

(De)legitimation in relation to democracy corresponds with the closeness of a group of actors to the dominant political practices and values within global capitalism. Journalistic reporting thus follows a post-political gaze; it is generally in accordance with the political consensus that characterizes the post-Cold War era. Through this gaze, any challenge to the political tenets of global capitalism fails on democratic grounds.

Despite that the notion of democracy has a central place in the Western self-image, and also in media studies, research that focuses on how democracy is ideologically loaded in journalistic content is still in its infancy. In recent times, democracy has been used with great enthusiasm by Western political leaders, while the meaning of democracy perhaps is more fuzzy than ever. In times of economic and political crisis, and of a weak Left in most European countries, it is important to examine how journalism constructs notions of democracy, and how such notions reflect specific political positions and interests. This study, which is theoretically rooted in ideology critique, and methodologically inspired by critical discourse analysis, examines how news journalism in the coverage of Venezuela and the Ukraine conflict constructs notions of democracy. The study is specially interested in exploring and discussing the ideological interconnections between imperialism and geopolitical interests, and the journalistic construction of democracy.

This study aims to explore the construction of difference in foreign news discourse on culturally similar but politically different non-Western subjects. Applying critical discourse analysis (CDA) together with a critique of Eurocentrism, the study examines difference in newspaper constructions of government supporters and oppositional groups in Venezuela. Discursive differences are evident in the strategies used for constructing the two groups with regard to political rationality and violence. Government supporters are associated with social justice, Venezuela’s poor, dogmatic behavior, and the use of political violence. The opposition, in contrast, is constructed as following a Western democratic rationale that stresses anti-authoritarianism. This group is primarily associated with victims of violence. While the opposition is conveyed as being compatible with Eurocentric values and practices, government supporters to great extent deviate from these norms. Such constructions serve to legitimize politico-ideological undercurrents of Eurocentrism, as the defense of liberalism.

This study aims to explore the construction of difference in foreign news discourse on culturally similar but politically different non-Western subjects. Applying critical discourse analysis (CDA) together with a critique of Eurocentrism, the study examines difference in newspaper constructions of government supporters and oppositional groups in Venezuela. Discursive differences are evident in the strategies used for constructing the two groups with regard to political rationality and violence. Government supporters are associated with social justice, Venezuela's poor, dogmatic behavior, and the use of political violence. The opposition, in contrast, is constructed as following a Western democratic rationale that stresses anti-authoritarianism. This group is primarily associated with victims of violence. While the opposition is conveyed as being compatible with Eurocentric values and practices, government supporters to great extent deviate from these norms. Such constructions serve to legitimize politico-ideological undercurrents of Eurocentrism, as the defense of liberalism.

We are witnessing the renegotiation of cannabis substances in many parts of the world. After being classified as narcotics and subjected to a worldwide ban for several decades, cannabis has now been legalized in Uruguay and in several US states, and decriminalized in some other countries. This paper aims to study how the ongoing renegotiation of cannabis, which involves the legalization of the substance in different parts of the world, is constructed in Swedish print news journalism. This is done with the purpose of understanding how news journalism in a context of a traditionally strong drug prohibition (de)legitimizes different positions and perspectives in the ongoing renegotiation of cannabis, and to what extent journalism in such a context offers challenges to the reigning prohibitionist hegemony. Although cannabis and the media has been researched extensively, very few studies have been conducted by media and communication or journalism scholars, and contributions have been placed mainly in areas as for example drug policy, drug use and misuse, and public health. The current study, in contrast, wishes to contribute to the critical study of drug journalism. The paper draws on critical theory, understanding the ongoing renegotiation of cannabis as bringing disequilibrium to the hegemonic view of cannabis as dangerous drug that needs to be banned. Journalism is perceived as playing a key role in this context, since journalism is an arena where different discourses on cannabis struggle for prominence. Journalism can in this sense serve the strengthening of counter-hegemonic discourses on cannabis or the reinforcement of the prohibitionist hegemony. The study uses critical discourse analysis as a method to study 49 print newspaper items. The results show that the studied media invites opposed discourses regarding the health risks and the medical benefits of cannabis to be part of the news pages, which creates a somewhat pluralistic view on cannabis. The study also finds that the construction of cannabis legalization as a means to combat organized crime is given significant framing power. These results suggest that the ongoing renegotiation of cannabis in different parts of the world invites Swedish journalism to broaden the debate on the substance and to provide certain legitimacy to positive discourses on cannabis that are otherwise considered deviant in the Swedish drug debate. This serves as an example of how changes in distant political contexts affect the ways in which journalism ascribes legitimacy to specific discourses on drugs.

As one of the leading countries when it comes to the access and use of ICTs (OECD, 2018), Sweden has also been on the forefront of the digitalization of government services. The Agency for Digital government, has launched the principal of Digital First, which means that digital encounters should, when relevant, be prioritized in the interaction between government agencies and citizens (Agency for digital government, 2023). At the same time, research has shown a divide in the diffusion and use of ICTs in Sweden, where increased age plays a negative role for access and literacy (Olsson et al, 2019). Against this backdrop, it is therefore important that the praxis of Digital First, thus the increased digitalization of the encounter between government and citizen, is inclusive also for the less digital savvy citizens, as some groups of elderly. This, in order for digitalization to enable rather than restrict citizenship.

The current study, which is part of a larger project on senior citizens’ encounter with the digital welfare system in Sweden, analyzes the affordances and constrains of government user interfaces. Using multimodal critical discourse analysis, the study focuses on how government agencies, through the semiotic elements of their online user interfaces, offer and limit engagement and interaction with citizens–both digitally and off-screen. Moreover, the analysis has the overall ambition to discern the explicit and latent characteristics that the user interfaces require the users to have. The user interfaces studied belong to the Swedish pensions agency, 1177 (the Swedish healthcare system’s official website), The municipality of Växjö, and the municipality of Älmhult.

The study discusses the affordances and constraint of the user interfaces in relation to digital citizenship (Schou & Hjelholt, 2018), a figure that is discursively construed by policy and the user interfaces themselves, but that is also materialized by the new forms of governance in advanced capitalist societies, where the slimming of government passes tasks to the citizen. The study argues that the naturalization of digital citizenship risks making senior citizens, an already vulnerable group, even more vulnerable, as the user interfaces require a certain level of digital literacy. Therefore, light needs to be shed on how user interfaces meet the needs of different groups of citizens, which in turn requires more empirical research on the actual encounters between citizens and government user interfaces.

Denna rapport studerar användarna av den digitala förvaltningen ur ett samhällsvetenskapligt perspektiv. Målet är att undersöka hur olika grupper av inskrivna vid den svenska Arbetsförmedlingen – formerade utifrån olika socialt strukturerande faktorer – använder och förhåller sig till såväl internet som den aktuella myndigheten och dess webbplats (www.ams.se).

Forskningen kring myndigheternas digitalisering domineras av studier som undersöker hur ny teknik implementeras i organisationer och vilka implikationer den har för dessa, medan användarstudier är sällsynta. Vår studie, som undersöker hur medborgare förhåller sig till internet i allmänhet och myndigheternas digitalisering i synnerhet, fyller därför ett tomrum på forskningsfältet.

Studiens material samlades in genom en enkät som skickades till 2000 slumpmässigt utvalda personer inskrivna vid Arbetsförmedlingen. Totalt erhölls 762 svar, vilket ger en svarsfrekvens på 40 procent. I huvudsak rörde enkätfrågorna de arbetssökandes användning av och attityder till såväl internet som Arbetsförmedlingens webbplats, men även frågor om gruppens attityder till myndigheten i allmänhet ställdes.

Resultaten visar att sociala faktorer, inte minst utbildning, är av stor betydelse för medborgarnas förmåga att använda Arbetsförmedlingens webbaserade tjänster. Lågutbildade använder myndighetens webbplats mer sällan än högutbildade, samtidigt som de även upplever den som svårare att använda. Vidare fann vi ett tydligt samband mellan de arbetssökande medborgarnas användning av och attityder till internet och Arbetsförmedlingens sajt. Grupper med en gynnsam relation till internet (i termer av tillgång, användning, erfarenhet och attityder) – framför allt högutbildade, tjänstemän och storstadsbor – använder också myndighetens webbplats flitigare, samtidigt som de tenderar att ha en mer positiv attityd till densamma (och vice versa). Följaktligen är det nödvändigt att tala om digitalt resursstarka och resurssvaga grupper.

De ojämlika relationerna till internet i allmänhet och Arbetsförmedlingens webbplats i synnerhet indikerar inte bara att digitaliseringen av förvaltningen är mer gynnsam för digitalt resursstarka grupper, utan också att den stänger ute digitalt resurssvaga grupper. Detta nya slags exklusion får implikationer för de arbetssökandes möjligheter att både ta sig in på arbetsmarknaden och agera som medborgare. Om myndigheternas digitalisering dessutom medför en omformering av medborgarskapet, i termer av ökat individuellt ansvar gentemot förvaltningen, kommer den digitala klyftan, såvida inget görs, befästa de digitalt resurssvaga gruppernas redan existerande utanförskap.

I föreliggande rapport studeras vilka sociala värden som elitidrotten och kulturen genererar för invånarna i landsortspräglade län som Blekinge, Halland, Kalmar och Kronoberg. Studien syftar till att lämna ett bidrag till den samhällsvetenskapliga idrottsforskningen, och ge ökad kunskap om idrottens och kulturens betydelse för den regionala utvecklingen.

Studiens material vilar på en postenkät skickad till 1500 slumpmässigt utvalda personer i respektive län. Det sammanlagda antalet besvarade enkäter uppgick till 3181 stycken, vilket ger en nettosvarsfrekvens på 54 procent.

Rapporten visar bland annat att både idrott och kultur värderas relativt högt och konsumeras i relativt stor utsträckning. Beträffande idrott konsumeras främst breddidrottsliga evenemang, och vad gäller kultur besöks bibliotek och biografer oftare än exempelvis teatrar.

Studien visar också att de kultur- respektive idrottsintresserade skiljer sig åt vad gäller demografi, men även vad gäller livsstil. De idrottsintresserade har en mer folklig och lantlig prägel, medan de kulturintresserade är att betrakta som en välutbildad kosmopolitisk grupp. Med tanke på de sistnämndas ökade rörlighet är satsningar på kultur ej att förringa. Denna typ av satsningar kan få denna resursstarka grupp att dels stanna kvar i landsorten, dels flytta in till densamma.

This article addresses how class as a category of conflict and struggle is understood and shaped discursively in mainstream media today. We utilise a case study of how Swedish news media represents the long-lasting conflict in the Swedish labour market between the Swedish Dockworkers’ Union and the employer organisation, Sweden's Ports. Using critical discourse analysis, we show two ways in which class relations are recontextualised in three Swedish newspapers. One is through obscuring class and centring the conflict around business and nationalist discourses, which in the end legitimise a corporate perspective. The other, more marginalised, way is through the critique of class relations that appears in subjective discourse types. This handling of class, we argue, serves the reproduction of a post-political condition.

This study examines the construction of media literacy in a special issue on source criticism of the Swedish children's comic Bamse – Världens Starkaste Björn [Bamse – The World's Strongest Bear]. This is done with the purpose of understanding what values, perspectives, and practices are promoted when media literacy is communicated via children's edutainment media. Using narrative and discourse analysis, we problematise how notions of truth (such as post-truth) guide much of the discourse on digital media in today's post-political society, and how that and individualisation shape notions of media literacy. This is visible in the analysed case in how source criticism is constructed in relation to notions of truth and falsehood, and as moral lessons aimed at the individual media user. We argue that such an individualised, decontextualised, and depoliticised take on media literacy is problematic and an expression of neoliberalism and a middle-class gaze.

This study aims to contribute knowledge about how an environmental issue is discursively forged notwithstanding the prevalence of significant scientific uncertainty. This is done by studying the production of news about artificial turf as a microplastic pollutant in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 journalists and editors, public officials, politicians, industry representatives and experts, all involved in the issue of artificial turf. The study shows how media logic, among other factors, informs the interpretations of the uncertainties surrounding artificial turf as an environmental problem and concludes that the power of media logic needs to be considered also in the construction of other scientifically charged issues.

This study aims to contribute knowledge about how an environmental issue is discursively forged notwithstanding the prevalence of significant scientific uncertainty. This is done by studying the production of news about artificial turf as a microplastic pollutant in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 journalists and editors, public officials, politicians, industry representatives and experts, all involved in the issue of artificial turf. The study shows how media logic, among other factors, informs the interpretations of the uncertainties surrounding artificial turf as an environmental problem and concludes that the power of media logic needs to be considered also in the construction of other scientifically charged issues.