After my chronicle last week, about the polarization in the debate and our commitment to the Sweden Meetings project, I received several emails. Someone thought I was arrogant and that I was discrediting people. Please read my previous chronicle again and tell me where I am arrogant or discredit people in that text.
I don't really get it.
But then came an email that triggered some thoughts in my head.
"You at SVT should actually examine themselves," he writes.
His thesis is that we who work at the Public Service are too homogeneous when it comes to political opinions and lifestyles, and that it sometimes shines through in what we publish. He wants us to examine ourselves "how homogeneous one might be on the editorial boards and how this could possibly affect the content."
I think the letter printer is right. And hopefully a little wrong.
Right when it comes to us working here (now I talk about my own editorial office in Värmland in the first place, although it looks similar everywhere) is quite the same. We have grown up with about the same conditions, have gone about the same schools, we have leisure interests that are similar, we are many who are about the same age - and we spend quite a lot of time with each other and live in the same neighborhood. Or at least in areas that are very similar.
This is probably the case for quite a few professional groups. People who work in libraries have about the same background, as do people who work in the school.
But of course, it becomes a little extra problematic when it comes to a professional group that exists to review and reflect a society with all sorts of residents, and with all kinds of people as viewers and readers.
Can we handle that mission, then?
Pretty good, I'd say. And this is where I think the mail printer probably has a little bit of an error in how the fact that we are the same at work affects what we publish.
We try at least as much as we can. We measure and monitor how many women and men are included in our reports, how the spread across the county looks, what topics we choose to raise, which parties' representatives are included in our elements. We regularly check in and think about it. We have a lively discussion about how to choose in the news feed, who we should talk to and how to present the news so that we do not fall into the trap that what we are telling is most interesting to ourselves.
But. We are nothing more than people.
For example, sometimes we may have a superstition about how interesting a news about a political conflict is. For us, who are probably more interested in the political game than ordinary people, it is exciting. But for many others, such a news goes by without a trace.
And on the contrary: Something that is the world's topic of discussion at workplaces and around dinner tables around Värmland, we may miss completely. We don't have our tentacles out there right now.
But there is a way that is unbeatable for our news to be multifaceted and interesting to many.
It's that the tips come from you.
We are there for all warm-up countries, and the more tips we get about what you think would be important and interesting to see in our app and on the TV, the better we will be.
So keep in mind - what do you want to see reporting about? What are you and your friends talking about? What is important right now?
Send me an email!