2 August 2006
Written by Rainer
Self-censorship in Finland
A Finnish journalist writes of self censorship in Finland [FIN] in the light of her own career and I’ll translate the column here to English. If the author has anything against it I’ll be happy to remove this
She writes:
I lived abroad for 18 years and got a good taste of it. Living abroad I could find a whole spectrum of views from one and the same subject. Not just one and the same view of all subjects like in Finland.
I look at my work archive and see row after row of folders. Accounting, Material from Turkey I-VI, My Articles, radio stories of BBC:ÉA, The Occupiers’ human rights violations in Iraq, Background material, etc…
One folder I’ve named “Censored”. It should be “The media’s self-censorship in Finland in the light of my own stories, years 1986-2006″.
I browse a pile from the folder. A story from London of how some parents refused to vaccinate their children. Not published. I recall the explanation for it: “The health officials won’t like it.” A chatty article of former Finnish President Ahtisaari’s visit to London. Unpublished. “Ahtisaari will be angry.” A story how super-markets affect on the nature. Not published. “The chain won’t like it”.
I wasn’t allowed to investigate many issues, let alone write of them.
I was never allowed to investigate the truth behind references that some of the UMTS money ended up to London. I wasn’t allowed to write to the main newspapers of new investigations, which tell of possible health inflictions. I wasn’t allowed to write how British officials advice the parents to restrict children’s usage of mobile phones for same reason.
No one explained why they were rejected. They probably assumed that they don’t need. I can pronounce the company’s name in my mind all by myself.
I moved from London back to Finland on 2004. Glasnost and perestroika had been able to defeat the Soviet Union long time ago. In the year 2006 they hadn’t been able to defeat the self-censorship of Finnish media.
I agreed with an editor that I’ll write a story of alternative explanations for the September 11th strike. After hearing of it the editor’s boss forbid all stories of the subject.
In one of my stories I told how they have used genetically manipulated bacteria in the process of Sana-Sol vitamin product. They refused the revelation of the genetical engineering because I would then “incriminate the parents”.
I’ve made my living as a journalist for 25 years. Other – hundreds if not thousands – of my stories have been published. I often get feedback of my work. It pisses me off. It would be more convenient for the Finnish media if I would be a no-good journalist.
Like you probably noticed of my folders, I know Turkey quite well. I’ve been living in the country. In Turkey many of the journalists have actual danger of being target of violence if they dare to publish differing views – they are not threatened just with insults and belittlement, like in Finland. But the Turkish journalists dare, and I value and respect them. That is the reason why I have to tell the following.
Nadire Mater leads an independent BIA-news agency in Istanbul and I quoted this from her to one of my stories.
“We have no more things that I couldn’t write of. The only thing left is the self-censorship. And self-censorship is the worst enemy in every country – for example I’m aware of the story about the Nokia’s CEO’s shoulders.”
One of the papers where my story was published the quote was pressed, but the reference to Nokia was removed.
categorised as » Finland
ShortURL for linking: http://lime.rahina.info/?p=122
3 Comments currently posted.
Jakob says:
Rainer says:
I try to find the story of Ollila’s shoulders (shouldn’t be too hard) but the UMTS-money to London sounds bit harder… At least it will give me something to do on work day ;)
Rainer says:
Unfortunately I couldn’t find any English article and even only one in Finnish from Google’s Cache, but all the media attention for Ollila’s shoulders came when a journalist of Yliopisto-lehti’s (the Newspaper of University) wrote that “Jorma Ollila’s shoulders look quite narrow when you take a look close to him” which according to the editor suited quite well (not undermining or slanting) to the context. Ollila didn’t want this to be published because “it didn’t suite his public image”. It was published anyway and the principal of the university gave a warning (which the editor framed) to the editor after Ollila had reacted to the disobedience of the newspaper. Of course this raised an larger scale issue in Finland and the debate was is are newspapers allowed to criticise Nokia or not. No one had looked (or published anything of) Nokia in a critical view before…
The Nokia CEO’s shoulder? The UMTS money ending up in London? Are these things I should know about? The self-censorship indeed seems to work, since I’ve not heard of anything along these lines…