On december 7, 2017, launched the daily News a series of articles about former president Urban Ahlin. The first was published on the newspaper’s website. In the months that followed, the newspaper a large quantity of articles on the same topic.
the Articles concerned, for instance, if the former employee to the president, who testified about how he abused, threatened and harassed them. It purported to be about sexual harassment, intimidation and bullying.
DN told about a woman who in 2008 worked together with Ahlin, when he was the chairman of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee. The woman stated that they have received several sms from Ahlin with sexual innuendo and felt sexually harassed by him. The woman was transferred at his own request to another service.
Urban Ahlin was indicated by several anonymous sources engage in systematic abuse of power and use of härskarteknik. Ahlin was interviewed by DN and denied all accusations. He said that it was the malicious rumors that were spread about him by people who wanted him badly.
Publiceringarna notified to the Public press ombudsman, PO, of the Urban Ahlin. He considered that the magazine’s articles featured accusations, rumors and gossip. They had a serious impact on his professional future, pulled his honor in the dirt and caused him and his family great suffering. How he handled the mission as president would, of course, be able to be examined, but DN’s articles was not a factual review, considered Ahlin.
Ahlin also pointed out that the riksdagsstyrelsen after DN’s first article decided to appoint a arbetsmiljöutredning, carried out by the occupational health service. The investigation, however, found no indication of sexual harassment, other harassment, discrimination or degrading treatment.
Ahlin turned also strongly opposed to the DN in an editorial on december 8, 2017, among other things, had written that he ”of party colleagues described as a maktmissbrukande pigs”.
Today’s News refuted that Urban Ahlin been subjected to an unjustifiable publicitetsskada. The newspaper pointed out that the reporting on him has followed in the wake of the #rnetoo-the appeal and was based on several independent data on Urban Ahlins leadership style.
the Newspaper had also been entrusted with new information about the sexual harassment, Urban Ahlin was accused of in 2008. It concerned, among other things, the text Ahlin sent and who initiated the sources said for the DN that they had seen, and considered that they constituted sexual harassment.
the DN stated that they have sources in the president’s vicinity with knowledge of the facts. The image was consistent and confirmed the major elements of the criticism. DN also pointed out that the newspaper consistently in each article reported that the Urban Ahlin denied the allegations.
DN felt that the ledarsidans task to Ahlin behaved like a ”maktmissbrukande pigs” had support in the newspaper’s backing and coverage of occupational health care investigation.
PO observes that, in the case there is an extensive argument from both sides. Much is about issues which have an interest if you want to clarify the facts. But the press ethical system makes no investigations of what is true or false, without assessing if it is actually published meant an unjustifiable publicitetsskada for the notifier.
It is certainly so, says PO, that both lies and truths can lead to an injury for the person concerned. At the same time, it is easy to see that with a lie reaches the magazine very quickly level, where a publicitetsskada may be judged as unjustifiable. To clarify in detail how one thing related is a difficulty at the press ethical assessments.
This dilemma handles pressetiken by protecting the party concerned has the right to be heard, to defend himself and, for example, be able to point out the data lies. In this case, the notifier received a significant amount of space to give their version. The newspaper has also on several occasions reiterated that Ahlin denied the allegations. Therefore, there is no reason to criticize the magazine, in the issue of treatment, consider the PO.
the PO mean that DN’s wording could be interpreted to mean that a number of women are victims of sexual harassment by Ahlin, there was a lack of evidence. A benevolent interpretation of DN’s wording on this issue could be that the magazine made a linguistic mistake, ”several” and ”a large number” refers to those who had suffered for his / her tough leadership style, and that magazine with the ”sexual harassment” only concerned the woman from 2008. But when it comes to a very serious allegation of a designated person, however, it is the newspaper’s obligation to formulate precisely, but linguistically room for misunderstanding, believe the PO.
Sweeping data works as pejorative descriptions of the character, that it is so here he is: the one that sextrakasserar, bully and threaten. Claims that are very difficult to defend against. Further such a description – ”maktmissbrukande pigs” – are to be found in the editorial from the december 8, 2017.
According to the DN’s publisher, the description of ”maktmissbrukande pigs ‘ coverage of the investigation made, even if no more than ledarskribenten used exactly that expression. By using the word ”pigs” goes to the newspaper to criticize his / her occupation to a highly derogatory karaktärsbeskrivning. It is pressetiskt embarrassing for the magazine to allow the type of descriptions, which the victim can hardly defend itself, mean PO. To formulate stark criticism against a politician act is an integral part of a ledarsidas mission, a completely different thing is to use epithets such as ”pigs”.
the PO considers that the newspaper’s review of the Urban Ahlin, in essence, been pressetiskt acceptable. It comes in first hand accounts of the events around the woman of the year 2008 and the description of his management style. In these questions, there is sufficient evidence. To the assessment to the audit, in essence, is acceptable belongs to the notifier is given an opportunity to be heard.
the Weakness is the sweeping allegations that several women over many years would have sextrakasserats, and the concept of the ”pigs”. It is true that the one who has a high position in society can get to tolerate a more intrusive scrutiny in the media than a private citizen. But even those who have a leading role should be treated in a fair way, especially if it concerns serious or sensitive allegations.
By that, without evidence, assert that Urban Ahlin sextrakasserat several women for many years, and call him a pig, the newspaper has, according to the PO, crossed the border for the pressetiskt acceptable.
The notified publiceringarna relates to a pressing issue that has great public interest. The board parts of the PO’s assessment that the newspaper’s review of the Urban Ahlin, in essence, been pressetiskt acceptable and that there is no reason to criticize the newspaper in bemötandefrågan.
When it comes to the publication on 8 december 2017 under the heading ”President accused of intimidation, bullying and sexual harassment” can be both the headline wording in the text is interpreted as it relates to sexual harassment against several women. The same applies to the publication in an editorial on 9 January 2018, under the heading ”Quiet in S, if the president”, which states that the behavior lasted for ten years.
the Board share the assessment that the PO made when it comes to the use of the word ”swine” in an editorial on december 8, 2017, under the heading ”Lot’s of moves zero tolerance”.
because of The use of the word ”swine” in the description of the Urban Ahlin and because of that the magazine, without evidence, pronounced the statements that could be perceived as that more women would have sextrakasserats and that the harassment continued for many years, find the board that Today’s News should be blamed for having violated good journalistic practice.
