Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Trimeresurus
Topic Author
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:06 pm

Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:44 pm

SOURCES: 1.

2.

3.(In Swedish)

This is something quite unexpected from countries that were on the Western Bloc. Was this implemented to prevent "undesired" ways of political thinking from flourishing? What did the US and the rest of the NATO(granted, Sweden wasn't NATO but Norway and Denmark were) think of this? Were there any underground/illegal broadcast stations or printing houses and if caught how severe was the punishment?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 6:24 pm

Monopoly and "State Media" are not the same, and the monopoly only existed for radio and TV in any case. Just like in plenty of other European states. The US is rather the exception to this than the norm.

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14412
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 6:29 pm

In France there was no private TV until 1984. And no private radios until 1982. There were "pirate radios" broadcasting from all the countries bordering France, most of them are still big radios today (RMC from Monaco, RTL from Luxembourg, Europe 1 from Germany, Sud Radio from Andorra...).

Interestingly enough it's the first left wing government since the 50's that ended this public monopoly.

Newspapers had (mostly) freedom of speech anyway.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2234
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 6:56 pm

Tommy is right though. There was in no way a state monopoly for all media. Private news papers i Sweden have existed since mid 17th century.
And in the mid 1980:s my family got cable TV. I think it was more about that advertisements wasn't allowed in Swedish radio and tv rather then a desire to have a monopoly.
Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 11231
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 7:03 pm

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
Tommy is right though. There was in no way a state monopoly for all media. Private news papers i Sweden have existed since mid 17th century.
And in the mid 1980:s my family got cable TV. I think it was more about that advertisements wasn't allowed in Swedish radio and tv rather then a desire to have a monopoly.

So the issue is more connected with "free to access" publicly owned radio and TV broadcast spectrum?

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Mon Mar 01, 2021 7:34 pm

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
Tommy is right though. There was in no way a state monopoly for all media. Private news papers i Sweden have existed since mid 17th century.
And in the mid 1980:s my family got cable TV. I think it was more about that advertisements wasn't allowed in Swedish radio and tv rather then a desire to have a monopoly.


Plus the newspapers owned 40% of the monopoly TV system, same as the government, and the system owned 20% of itself, so no one could control content.

Tugger wrote:
Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
Tommy is right though. There was in no way a state monopoly for all media. Private news papers i Sweden have existed since mid 17th century.
And in the mid 1980:s my family got cable TV. I think it was more about that advertisements wasn't allowed in Swedish radio and tv rather then a desire to have a monopoly.

So the issue is more connected with "free to access" publicly owned radio and TV broadcast spectrum?

Tugg


Sort off. Think TDD instead of FDD for diversity, in the netherlands that was literally the case with different broadcasters sharing timeslots on the same infrastructure. Basically European countries each found their own way to follow the BBC example to ensure:

Universal geographic accessibility
Universal appeal
Attention to minorities
Contribution to national identity and sense of community
Distance from vested interests
Direct funding and universality of payment
Competition in good programming rather than numbers
Guidelines that liberate rather than restrict

Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Trimeresurus
Topic Author
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:44 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Monopoly and "State Media" are not the same, and the monopoly only existed for radio and TV in any case. Just like in plenty of other European states. The US is rather the exception to this than the norm.

Best regards
Thomas


It's still interesting for me as an American. Was the rationale for monopoly on (broadcasted, not printed) media economic or ideological? Because I assume that by the forties radio, and by the seventies the TV had replaced the good old newspaper as the primary means of public news. Sure a state can keep it's channel entirely neutral, but if the same political establishment has ruled the country for a long enough time, sycophants and yes-men will fill a lot of positions. A lot of Southern and Eastern European countries are rife with corruption as a result.
 
SamAdama
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2020 11:18 am

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Tue Mar 02, 2021 9:48 pm

Trimeresurus wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
Monopoly and "State Media" are not the same, and the monopoly only existed for radio and TV in any case. Just like in plenty of other European states. The US is rather the exception to this than the norm.

Best regards
Thomas


It's still interesting for me as an American. Was the rationale for monopoly on (broadcasted, not printed) media economic or ideological? Because I assume that by the forties radio, and by the seventies the TV had replaced the good old newspaper as the primary means of public news. Sure a state can keep it's channel entirely neutral, but if the same political establishment has ruled the country for a long enough time, sycophants and yes-men will fill a lot of positions. A lot of Southern and Eastern European countries are rife with corruption as a result.


The state of the media in the US should be testament alone to the fact that unregulated and unsupervised private and competing media outlets do not equate quality in news. Quite the contrary actually. Ditto the comment about "sycophants" and "yes-men".

Ethical conduct in journalism and a factual approach to events should not be dependent on the markets. Yet today in the US (and to a great extent in the UK), the news have become merchandise: something that needs to be attract a customer base as large and as loyal as possible. Feeding the trolls, if you will.

I'm not saying it's not the case in Europe either, but media subsidised by the state can be free of this capitalist logic and focus on the facts, even if nobody watches because facts are boring and it's much more fun to spin and exaggerate.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14563
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:46 am

Trimeresurus wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
Monopoly and "State Media" are not the same, and the monopoly only existed for radio and TV in any case. Just like in plenty of other European states. The US is rather the exception to this than the norm.

Best regards
Thomas


It's still interesting for me as an American. Was the rationale for monopoly on (broadcasted, not printed) media economic or ideological? Because I assume that by the forties radio, and by the seventies the TV had replaced the good old newspaper as the primary means of public news. Sure a state can keep it's channel entirely neutral, but if the same political establishment has ruled the country for a long enough time, sycophants and yes-men will fill a lot of positions. A lot of Southern and Eastern European countries are rife with corruption as a result.


Broadcast was considered a public service, and expensive to realize. The idea of TV and Radio paying for itself by for example advertisement was just far out there. And because of that, Newspaper stayed the main source of news. Up and till the internet came along everyone had a newspaper subscription, or often two (one local, one national) and a buying different papers sunday edition was the norm too..

US media was differently organized, but in principle not all that different. Until the same time where European countries opened up broadcast markets the US still had the FCC watching over the fairness rule, and Indecency Regulations are still a thing, and while Europe opened up, where made stricter in 1987. That is why "nipple-gate" was so ridiculed here, because pretty much no one here cares about nudity even in family shows. And the only thing that i can ever recall being *beeped* over where names considered private information.
I do recall sitting in on a Lansing Community Collage German class a couple of years back where an episode of "Türkisch für Anfänger" was shown, and the professor pointed out that, if she wanted to show that family program in her High-School she would need permission slips from all her students parents, because the shows dad walks out of a bathroom and down the hallway butt-naked for about 2 seconds, and it couldn´t be aired on TV before the watershed.

Now while there certainly was a potential for abuse, if you look at content form the 70´s or 80´s you´d be surprised how diverse reporting and entertainment was. The benefit of not needing to have ratings does have an upside.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5947
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Why did the state have a monopoly on media/press in Scandinavian countries until the 1990s?

Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:15 am

Trimeresurus wrote:
SOURCES: 1.

2.

3.(In Swedish)

This is something quite unexpected from countries that were on the Western Bloc. Was this implemented to prevent "undesired" ways of political thinking from flourishing? What did the US and the rest of the NATO(granted, Sweden wasn't NATO but Norway and Denmark were) think of this? Were there any underground/illegal broadcast stations or printing houses and if caught how severe was the punishment?


Some interesting reads on the subject

European Broadcasting Union

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ting_Union

Television in Norway

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_Norway

Mass media in Norway

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_media_in_Norway



I might add that:

* Reporters Without Borders ranks Norway 1st in its Worldwide Press Freedom Index. Freedom of the press in Norway dates back to the constitution of 1814. Most of the Norwegian press is privately owned and self-regulated; however, the state provides press support.

* Cable TV came in the mid 80's to Norway and in 2013, almost 100 % of Norwegian population had Access to the Internet

* Internet for the common man came in the early 90's in Norway. However the development of the Internet technology itself was led by Robert E. Kahn and took place from 1973 in a collaboration between a dozen research environments, one in England, led by Peter Kirstein at University College London, and one in Norway, led by Yngvar Lundh at The Armed Forces Research Institute. 1973, Norway became the first non-English speaking country and the second country on the ARPANET. NORSAR (Norwegian Seismic Array) at Kjeller just outside Oslo was connected by satellite to the SDAC (Seismic Data Analysis Center) in Virginia, US as part of ARPANET in order to monitor nuclear test-ban treaties with the Soviet Union. The UK was hooked up about a 20 min. later

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], MarcoT, proest, ThePointblank and 29 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos