This study aims to examine the ongoing debate about the content subscription service Onlyfans and its creators. This is to make visible which discourses may be the basis for the reasoning in the Swedish media today and what consequences this may have for our understanding of the phenomenon. The study was conducted via discourse analytical theory and method based on a selection of 13 web articles published in Swedish media during the current period 2020 - 2021. The material has been updated with the help of previous research, and analyses based on discourse analytical concepts, social constructionism, Gayle Rubin theories of sexuality, Julia Long's ideological framework and with support in Winther Jørgensen's discoursive relationship of structure and agent. The results of this discourse analytical study show that, based on our material, it has been possible to distinguish two overarching positions in the debate. A pessimistic position and an optimistic position which emerge in the discoursive construction of Onlyfans and its creators, as the reasoning can be thought to be based on different worldviews. While the pessimistic position associates the phenomenon with discourses such as sexnegative discourse, pornografisation discourse, generationdiscourse, radikalfeminist discourse, heteronormative diskurs, victimized discourse, the optimistic position has instead associated the phenomenon with discourses such as sexworkerdiscourse, heteronormative discourse, empowerment discourse, entrepreneur discourse. The result also shows that the two positions converge at certain points. This is because it is possible to distinguish between what it applies to call the platform as a site which distributes sexual material as well as there is a consensus in the discoursive construction of creators as women and fans as men.

Infrastructure projects frequently exceed their budgets in both time and cost, which often burdens the taxpayers. A significant percentage of these projects are neither complex nor unique, where the contract sum is a fraction of the contract sum of known megaprojects however has a higher percentage of cost overruns. The purpose of this study is to identify the cause, particularly the explanation behind these small and uncomplicated infrastructure projects' time and cost overruns, and to propose methods to avoid this wastage of taxpayer money. To achieve this purpose, a qualitative case study has been conducted within the scope of the Swedish Transport Administration's (Trafikverket) Investment division in the Eastern region in Uppsala, with a focus on pedestrian and bicycle paths. Empirical data has been gathered using Trafikverket's tools for deviation management, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with forecasters at Trafikverket's Investment division in Uppsala. A literature review has been made and were used to better interpret the empirical results. The identified causes are manifold but can be summarized as legal, political, and bureaucratic obstacles, communication issues, working methods, lack of experience and bad luck. The explanations for time and cost overruns can solely be attributed to the phenomenon of optimism bias, as this encompasses the forecaster's role as a decision maker in the project and the extent to which they could anticipate emerging situations. To mitigate optimism bias, the method of reference class forecasting is proposed. Furthermore, it is suggested to Trafikverket to reconsider the intervals of forecasting to be reviewed and adjusted according to the industry's way of setting forecasts on time. In conclusion, this study states that this is an important topic for future research in cost overruns in infrastructure projects. The recommendation is to focus on small and uncomplicated infrastructure projects. In addition, research must find the explanations for the causes of cost overruns before addressing the problem with appropriate methods.