No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

With the implementation of ‘the Swedish model’ and the new Rehn-Meidner-system, active labor marketpolicies became an important part of Swedish social democracy in the 1950-and 60s. With the term ‘active’ onerefers to direct methods of improving labor market conditions funded by the state, such as education and supportof the unemployed. In contrast, passive labor market policies only refer to state funded allowances. With acontinued rise of interest regarding these policies, this study aims to investigate and map out the politicalattitude of three Swedish parties regarding their own labor market policies. These are then compared to theviews of the traditional labor market policies, which presents us with interesting similarities and differences.The parties which are treated in this research are the Social Democrats, the Centre Party and the Moderate Party.In order to analyze how these parties actively frame their preferred policies, this study develops an appliancebased on the principles of framing as a rhetorical method, which then is used to analyze three kinds of officialtexts published by the parties themselves. One then finds that while the Social Democrats share a lot ofimportant similarities to their traditional values, some interesting differences appear regarding the importance ofnational businesses and entrepreneurship. Moreover, the Centre Party proves to have some important values incommon with the reference point, although it pushes more policies in line with economic liberalism whichwould prefer less involvement from the state. Lastly, the Moderate Party proves its liberal-conservative core as itgoes against most active labor market propositions. This study therefore concludes that, while there are sometraces of tradition left, Swedish labor market policy seems to be affected by a more liberal view of the marketand its actors.

Should a democracy defend itself against disinformation? This paper investigates how thedebate surrounding this issue is conducted in Taiwan during the buildup to the two mostrecent elections, in 2020 and 2024. This is done by a systematic text analysis that categorizesarticles in to two different frames based on the two sides of the ‘disinformation-dilemma’.The material analyzed is newspaper articles from the Taiwanese newspaper Taipei Times thatwere published in the year leading up to the elections and included statements fromTaiwanese politicians on the subject. The results show that disinformation, in 2020, wasframed as a necessary evil, and democracy should not be limited to protect it. In 2024,however, it was framed as a threat to democracy and that measures must be taken to defendit. This provides us with a good understanding of how the Taiwanese debate has looked, andalso changed, over time.