The journalist’s responsibility to the public is to deliver objective and impartial news, but during the height of the societal and feminist Metoo-movement, the content of newspaper publications varied significantly. This variation was influenced partially  by the human factor, ownership, and established guidelines regarding the publication of names at the newspapers.  This study aims to clarify the ethical deliberations behind the publication of names in the news media, specifically at four of Sweden's largest newspapers, Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet, Aftonbladet and Expressen. For this, a qualitative interview and a qualitative text analysis method has been used, the answers were subsequently analyzed based on the agenda setting-theory, consequence neutrality and the social responsibility methodology. One respondent was chosen from each newspaper and was asked about ethical deliberations, what makes a name publication viable, what consequences might come of it and how they interpret the newspapers’ actions surrounding the publications about Benny Fredriksson. The case of Benny Fredriksson is used as a concrete example whereas it led to extensive ethical discussions in the Swedish press. The study also examines how newspapers’ publications and ethical deliberations differ from each other. The conclusion comes to that there is a difference between them, not only in how they published 2017, but additionally how they argue now. Dagens Nyheter, Aftonbladet and Svenska Dagbladet, all base their arguments in a social responsibility theory, while Expressen lean towards a consequences neutrality perspective.