Many query marks surrounding MPF’s actions in opposition to Kalla faktas SD assessment

The authority for psychological protection (MPF) has notified TV4 Kalla fakta’s SD assessment to the Evaluate Board. “I am shocked,” says TV4’s Fredrick Malmberg. MPF refuses to reply the Journalist’s questions.

On Thursday, the Psychological Protection Company notified TV4’s Chilly Details programme Undercover within the troll manufacturing facility to the Evaluate Board for Radio and Tv (GRN).

The report issues two collages that illustrate the Swedish debate round disinformation, propaganda and troll accounts. The collage consists of brief clips the place completely different individuals describe the issues with misinformation in Swedish society. Two of MPF’s workers, Andrea Liebman and Mikael Tofvesson, seem with a complete of three citations that they made in numerous contexts relating to improper informational affect directed at Sweden from a overseas energy.

Within the notification, MPF’s director common Magnus Hjort writes that the interviews that Kalla fakta used don’t relate to situations and expressions inside the Swedish data atmosphere and considers that there’s cause to worry that many viewers who’ve seen this system assume that their statements had been made “in interviews associated to Kalla fakta’s examination”.

Commercial

That is how director common Magnus Hjort writes within the report:

“MPF considers that TV4’s motion to intentionally use recorded materials from different events, an motion that misleads viewers into believing that the authority would have commented on the assessment Chilly details presents, is, to say the least, exceptional, inappropriate and in clear violation of present media ethics. Particularly because the intention appears to be that the statements ought to validate the assessment carried out.”

In social media, MPF’s report is used as proof for the declare that TV4 has unfold misinformation.

Fredrick Malmberg, writer answerable for TV4’s Kalla fakta, finds it obscure why the authority has made a report.

– IM suprised. I believe it is vitally clear that it’s a collage the place we depict the way it has sounded up to now within the Swedish debate on disinformation. We needed to place the topic in context, says Fredrick Malmberg.

MPF writes within the report that they “don’t decide what actors categorical within the Swedish data atmosphere as a result of it’s protected by the Freedom of Expression Act”, whereas on the identical time they’re now making judgments regarding TV4’s assessment as “unfair, deceptive and opposite to present media ethics”. What do you consider it?

– I wish to level out that the report just isn’t regarding what emerges in our assessment, however solely regarding how the clips have been utilized in collagen. There aren’t any claims in MPF’s notification that there can be any inaccuracies. You may ask them how the authority acts.

The journalist has contacted MPF’s director common Magnus Hjort by way of his secretary, and has known as and emailed inquiries to MPF’s press division. The press division declares that the authority is not going to make any feedback except the authority’s place is obvious from the notification to GRN.

Listed here are the questions the journalist needs solutions to from MPF director common Magnus Hjort:

Within the notification, you state that MPF doesn’t register or assess what “actors categorical within the Swedish data atmosphere, as it’s protected by the Freedom of Expression Act and the Freedom of the Press Ordinance”. Your report incorporates judgments regarding what TV4 expresses. How does that work?

Why does the authority’s notification comprise an evaluation of TV4’s media ethics and the way has the authority made that evaluation?

How has MPF made the evaluation that there’s cause to worry that many viewers understand it as the present recordings being made in relation to Kalla fakta’s assessment when it seems that it’s regarding recordings which were made in different contexts?

Does the MPF not see that there’s a threat that the report might result in a deterioration of belief in TV4 and different impartial media? In that case, is not it counterproductive based mostly on the authority’s mission?

Along with MPF, 22 personal people have reported TV4’s SD assessment to the Evaluate Board.