The purpose of this essay was to investigate how Quran burning is portrayed in Aftonbladet's reporting. The study is intended to examine three Quran burnings with each other in order to compare Aftonbladet's reporting. In addition to the portrayal of Quran burning, the study has investigated how the practitioners of Quran burning are portrayed in Aftonbladet. Using a thematic content analysis, the study's text material has been analyzed to produce a result. How an event is portrayed in the media in turn affects how the news is perceived by its audience. ​Therefore, we believe that it is socially relevant to investigate how Quran burning is portrayed, because in Sweden everyone has the right to express themselves freely. Based on the study's thematic analysis, we can see a connection in Aftobladet's reporting on Quran burning. Generally, violent protests and reactions are presented as a consequence of the Quran burnings. In Aftonbladets culture-, editorial- and commentary texts, the Quran burnings are portrayed as a hate crime, more than the right to express oneself freely. As Quran burning appears as a hate crime, the audience's attitude towards Quran burning tends to become more negative In the reporting about Rasmus Paludan and Salwan Momika, who both burned the Quran, Aftonbladet has made different choices in its presentation. Paludan is portrayed as a provocateur who uses freedom of speech in Sweden to provoke. His political affiliation is prominent in Aftonbladet's reporting and his gatherings are portrayed as provocative. Salwan Momika's nationality is not prominent and his Quran burning is not portrayed as provocative.

The aim of this paper is to examine how the Swedish political parties the Sweden Democrats (SD), Social Democrats (S), and the Moderates (M) relate to the principle of freedom of expression and the burning of the Quran, which has sparked a Koran crisis as well as a security crisis in Sweden in 2023. The analysis methodology applied in this study is a descriptive idea analysis, which aims to identify values, descriptions, and prescriptions conveyed by the parties during their speeches and debates. The paper also applies three theoretical perspectives:Sociological institutionalism, rational choice institutionalism and John Stuart Mill's harm principle, to explain and evaluate the parties' arguments and positions through institutional factors, rational choice, and moral principles. The study reveals noteworthy disparities in the perspectives of the parties concerning the significance of freedom of expression, the causes and consequences of the Koran burnings, and the appropriate measures to deal with the situation. This research facilitates comprehension of the political discourse and the course of action associated with a contentious and delicate topic that impacts the democracy and security of Sweden.