____no5
Free Man
I have no idea where you're going. You are just quoting stuff. And, to be very clear, "free press" is not about journalists doing what the hell they want and has never ever been. The editor-in-chief os the one that is the defacto publisher, not the journalist, and the one that acts as the director...
Where I'm going? That freedom of speech has been compromised in Sweden since the war. But not only in Sweden. Everywhere in the West when one's trying to say something different, immediate smearing as Russian propaganda. Does it look healthy to you?
I take it for granted that Putin spreads propaganda. But I also take it for granted that West spreads propaganda. This is the difference. I have no illusions.
If you read between the lines of what the editor-in -chief explains, you'll see that he is afraid for the future of his newspaper, that many people complained about that article for KI and he also laments that 2022 is not 2014 in anyway.
And what does he tells us about the KI article? First he says that "It was my decision to publish the article on Kyiv Independent. I have not changed my mind on that point" only to add in the next line that:
"Would I have chosen to write it now, when Russia is grinding down the eastern parts of Ukraine with unimaginable human consequences?
No." It doesn't struck me as a free minded decision.
It's Manufacturing Consent they are both describing.
To remind you the KI article was about the suspicious or even clear cut neo-nazi background of some of the editors in a time that all Sweden (and West apparently) was taking their information from there without challenging it.
The article was written when KI was 4 months old thus Ides of March 2022, the earliest. He fired her mid April. What changed in between? Invasion had started 24 February, by middle of March Russia had occupied 20% of Ukraine already. So it's a BS excuse that "he wouldn't have chosen to write it now, when Russia is grinding down the eastern parts of Ukraine"