Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka hur två terrordåd har skildrats i Aftonbladet. De studerade terrordåden är attacken mot Charlie Hebdos redaktion i januari 2015 samt terrorattentatet i Köpenhamn i februari samma år. De frågor som ligger till grund för undersökningen är: Hur skildras de båda händelserna i Aftonbladet? Hur framställs offer respektive förövare? Hur yttrar sig diskussionen om yttrandefrihet? Finns det några likheter och skillnader i rapporteringen, exempelvis vad det gäller närhetsprincipen? Jag har dessutom valt att undersöka hur Aftonbladet har förhållit sig till de pressetiska reglerna. För att besvara mina frågeställningar har jag valt att utgå från de två första dagarna av rapporteringarna, samt två sammanhängande dagar en vecka efter rapporteringens första dag. Detta har motiverats med en tes om att diskussionen om yttrandefriheten ska vara tydligare en tid efter händelserna inträffat. Materialet omfattar såväl nyheter, ledare, krönikor och debattartiklar och har analyserats med en kvalitativ ansats. Samtliga 45 artiklar kommer först att analyseras med en övergripande tematisk analys. Därefter har en mer djupgående granskning genomförts, då med hjälp av Faircloughs kritiska diskursanalys där fokus har lagts på en lexikal nivå. De teoretiska ramarna för studien är journalistik och demokrati, yttrandefrihet, journalistisk etik samt teorier om hate speech. Jag har också valt att undersöka hur närhetsprincipen, domesticering och personifiering har yttrat sig i rapporteringarna. Min studie har visat att rapporteringen delar ett gemensamt fokus på de misstänkta gärningsmännen. Det är också främst i rapporteringen kring dessa som Aftonbladet har begått pressetiska snedsteg. Vad det gäller porträtteringen av offer får den svenska konstnären Lars Vilks en tydlig huvudroll i dramat då han personifierar alla offer. Här är det också tydligt att nyheterna har domesticeras. I fallet Charlie Hebdo får alla enskilda offer i princip samma utrymme, även om attacken huvudsakligen beskrivs som en attack mot det fria ordet. I fallet Charlie Hebdo genomsyras rapporteringen av en diskussion om yttrandefrihet, medan den i rapporteringen om Köpenhamnsdåden är mer implicit uttryckt. Däremot har analysen visat att det finns ett behov av att omformulera den journalistiska etiken i takt med att nyheter tenderar att bli allt mer globala.

Uppsatsen undersöker dilemman och strategier när minderåriga barn och unga ska få komma till tals i svenska nyhetsmedier, och på vilket sätt myndighetsgränsen ingår som en parameter när mediers ansvarighet (media accountability) ska tolkas på detta område. Frågorna diskuteras ur ett barnrättighetsperspektiv, och utgår från barndomssociologins tankar om barndom som en social konstruktion. En analys av de medieetiska kontrollinstansernas friande och fällande av anmälda publiceringar visar att ett flertal etiska övertramp begås i samband med att unga omtalas som brottsoffer eller anhöriga, medan etiska övertramp i samband med intervjuer är betydligt färre, och då framför allt när barn får personifiera sociala problem. Av en kvalitativ intervjustudie med utgivare inom olika typer av nyhetsmedia, varav flera branschdominerande, framgår att utgivare i stort sett helt vill undvika negativa reaktioner från vårdnadshavare. Försiktighetsprinciper och målgruppstänkande dominerar över mångfaldsprinciper. Flera tidningar har också prioriterat bort tidigare barn- eller ungdomssatsningar. Samtidigt visar undersökningen att sociala medier innebär nya möjligheter även för nyhetsmedier, med direktkontakt till unga källor och dialog där unga personer kan bidra med erfarenheter och åsikter i en bredd av frågor.

Sociala medier har fått en allt större roll i det svenska samhället och användarantalet ökar ständigt. I takt med att internetuppkopplingen blivit mer lättillgänglig genom exempelvis smarta telefoner har sättet som kommunikation idag sker på fått nya dimensioner. Privatlivet har således börjat gå in i arbetslivet och tvärtom, vilket har lett till att gränsen blivit otydlig och svårdefinierad. Vad arbetstagare får uttrycka i sociala medier är omdiskuterat och åsikter mellan arbetsgivare, Arbetsdomstolen och andra aktörer går isär. Den grundläggande Yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen inskränks i den privata sektorn av lojalitetsplikten och även rätten att kritisera arbetsgivaren begränsas. Hur långtgående arbetsgivares bestämmanderätt är i fråga om reglering av sociala medier är en annan problematik. Arbetsgivare har möjlighet att skapa olika typer av riktlinjer och policies och är relativt obegränsade i utformningen av dessa genom arbetsledningsrätten. Lagstiftningen har i vissa fall fått svårigheter med att följa den snabbt växande teknikutvecklingen, vilket därför har lett till att ändringar i exempelvis Yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen och Tryckfrihetsförordningen ofta måste göras. Sociala medier domineras av den yngre generationen och det har skapat klyftor mellan olika ålderskategorier. Hur dessa klyftor påverkas av att sociala medier får en större roll i arbetslivet studeras i uppsatsen genom ett åldersdiskriminerande perspektiv. Frågeställningarna baseras på arbetstagares skyldigheter, arbetsgivares bestämmanderätt, åldersaspekten samt vilka effekter regleringar av sociala medier har i samhället. / Social media has been receiving an increasingly important role in Swedish society and the number of users is constantly increasing. As the internet connection has become more accessible for an example by the smart phones, the way of communication has acquired the situation new dimensions. Personal life has now begun to go into work and vice versa, which has led to that the border has become unclear and difficult to define. What employees may express in social media is controversial and opinions between employers, the Labour Court and other stakeholders diverge. The basic Freedom of Speech is restricted in the private sector by the duty of loyalty and the right to criticize the employer is limited. How far-reaching employer's discretion goes in regulation of social media is another problem. Employers have the opportunity to create different types of policies and guidelines and are relatively unrestricted in the design of these through the labor management law. The legal regulation has in some cases had difficult to follow the rapidly growing technology development, which therefore has led to a lot of changes in for example, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. Social media is dominated by the younger generation and it has created a rift between different age categories. In which way this gap is affected by the fact that social media has received a larger role in work life is studied in this paper by an age-discriminatory perspective. The questions are based on employee’s obligations and employer discretion in social media. Age aspect constitutes an issue in the essay and the effects of regulations in social media in society are the final issue.

When is it acceptable to make fun of religion, and when does it become disrespectful? On January 7, 2015, the headquarters of the French satirical news paper Charlie Hebdo was subjected to a terrorist attack that claimed the lives of 12 staff members, due to the publishing of caricatures picturing the prophet Muhammed. The reactions that followed the attack circled around two perspectives; the importance of freedom of expression and the obligation to show respect for certain institutions and traditions in society. How come the caricatures can elicit such completely different reactions? This is the question that this thesis uses as a starting point for the examination of the subject caricatures and satire. The thesis examines caricatures and satire from a rhetorical perspective. It distinguishes four rhetorical aspects of caricature, and discusses if these rhetorical aspects can be what makes the difference regarding how provocative a drawing is considered. The thesis then uses the four rhetorical aspects found, to analyze two caricatures from the French satiric magazine Charlie Hebdo.

The aim of this thesis is to examine the debates and discourses in Swedish media about the collection development and handling of controversial content in public libraries 2016–2018. The debates broke out after a couple of libraries chose to refuse purchase proposals regarding books and newspapers considered as controversial. Some libraries and librarians were in turn accused of censorship and making decisions based on political views when refusing these proposals. Questions posed in this study are: What discourses can be found in the debates about controversial content and collection development in public libraries? What views of the public libraries are expressed in the debates? What views of collection development in public libraries are expressed in the debates? What concepts, arguments and expressions appears in the debates, and what significance and meaning do they get in the discourses? Which subject positions appears in the debate? The theoretical and methodological framework is based on Ernesto Laclau’s and Chantal Mouffe’s discourse theory. The empirical material consists of 22 articles derived from Swedish newspapers, news outlets and library journals. The analyze reveals three discourses: a freedom of information discourse, a profession discourse and a collection normative discourse. The freedom of information discourse represents a view that public libraries should be neutral and objective in their work with collection development and serve the users with whatever they ask for and not base their decisions on political views or other values. In the profession discourse they argue for the importance of librarian’s professional considerations and following policies, guidelines and laws when working with collection development. In the collection normative discourse, they question the imposed neutrality on libraries and argue for greater freedom of action when dealing with controversial content that might undermine human rights and the idea that all humans are equal.

This study investigates the professional, media-strategic practices that the requests by some users lead to, and how these practices can be understood and problematized in relation to the laws, regulations and governing documents to which the libraries relate. Thus, in this study, the media's media strategy choices are set in a context of judicial authority and legal principles. Based on four different concrete cases where a user reported the library's actions to JO, it is investigated what arguments users, libraries and JO use to claim their positions on the issue. In recent years, the various media strategy choices that the libraries make, about what books should be bought, moved, stored, or borrowed from other libraries, has increasingly been debated. In some cases this has led to reports to the judicial authority JO (Justitieombudsmannen), who has investigated the situation. In the center of investigations, there is often an individual librarian, who through his or her actions and choices, in the encounter with a user, is often faced with a dilemma and, as a consequence, sometimes acts without support in current legislation. Research shows that increased sick leave can be related to the worries and stresses that librarians experience in relation to these dilemmas. There is therefore a need for increased knowledge of the regulatory framework that libraries can seek support from in situations where they face contradictory norms and values in relation to a user's wishes.

The aim of this master thesis is to examine how library managers have handled situations involving controversial lectures at their libraries. Lately, controversial lectures have upset public opinion and caused critical writing in local newspapers. Questions posed are: How do library managers handle controversial lectures, concerning freedom of speech, library directives and respect for human rights? The theoretical starting-point is Joacim Hansson’s definition of two ideological views on libraries, one educational and one liberal, and also an article about thoughts in post-modernism and modernism by Emily Knox. I have used the theoretical framework to define two ideological standpoints; the perspective of freedom and the perspective of responsibility, to illustrate the views of the informants. Semistructured interviews with library managers were conducted, and the results show that the informants more often expressed views close the perspective of freedom, than views close to the perspective of responsibility. The conclusion is that there is no complete consensus on how to interpret and follow the many directives being applicable to Swedish libraries. Public opinion and the risk of receiving criticism seem to have an important influence on decisions concerning controversial lectures. However, the study shows that both the perspective of freedom and the perspective of responsibility, in dealing with controversial speech, can be motivated by library managers in terms of acting in line with democratic values and library directives.

The purpose of this survey is to analyze how civics teachers relate to freedom of speech in their classrooms. To examine this I want to study following questions a) What arguments for and against freedom of speech in the classroom do the teachers use? b) What strategies do the teachers use in class discussions to not risk result into conflicts or violating expressions? To analyze this, I have used a qualitative method in terms of interviews with six different teachers from both primary schools and secondary high schools. This was made on different locations in Sweden. The main theoretical points for this survey have been from Ulf Petäjäs freedom of speech theories how the western countries of democracy and its populations today doesn´t consider its value, but instead mostly talk about its boundaries. Also, Carsten Ljunggren and Ulrika Unemar Östs strategies amongst teachers when it comes to class discussions, what roles they choose to assume. For example, a moderator who let the students discuss freely, or an educator to maintain control over the classroom. And finally, Tomas Englunds deliberative discourse and Olga Dysthes dialogical dialogue regarding strategies how teachers engage in class discussions. The conclusions that I find are that the freedom of speech, teachers strategies and the teachers view towards the freedom of speech is never static but conditional to the climate of the discourse, depending on which subject they teach and how well they know their students. Which leads to my most definitive conclusion, that the freedom of speech among these teachers in this suvery is situation contingent.

Var går gränserna för vår rätt till yttrandefrihet? En tillsynes enkel fråga som dock inte erbjuder några enkla svar. Gränsdragning är ett resultat av mänskligt samspel. Olika filosofiska perspektiv och principer ger olika svar i fråga om när det är tillåtet med statlig inblandning för att begränsa rätten till yttranden. Syftet med uppsatsen är således att undersöka under vilka villkor yttrandefriheten kan begränsas. Jag belyser frågan genom att diskutera hur man kan ställa sig till Muhammedkarikatyrerna. I uppsatsen behandlas John Stuart Mills klassiska försvar av skadeprincipen, Joel Feinberg och förargelseprincipen, Stanley Fish och avvägningsmetoden, samt Rae Langton och Catharine MacKinnon som mot bakgrund av kvinnors strukturella utsatthet utifrån Ronald Dworkins princip om lika hänsyn och respekt försvarar deras rättigheter mot pornografi. Uppsatsen avslutas med en mer ingående diskussion om ”Muhammedkrisen” genom Elena Namli som även hon argumenterar för begränsningar av rätten till yttrandefrihet utifrån principen om lika hänsyn och respekt.

Online harassment against journalists on various social forums is a debated topic. This study aims to research what threats and hatred can give for consequences for Swedish journalists. Sweden has democratic rights, such as the freedom of expression to be able to report freely in society. The online trolls also have freedom of expression to be allowed to express themselves freely in images and text, but how are journalists affected when the online trolls threaten and hate on the web? To research what this problem looks like, we have proceeded from a qualitative interview study, which is based on eleven interviews with journalists who have been exposed to threats, harassment or hatred online. We have started from the theories of self-censorship, gender and sex, gender role and social role theory. The purpose of these theories is to get an idea of how the gender portrayal and the different social roles diverges between the male and female journalists. Self-censorship refers to whether journalists unconsciously censor themselves out of fear and to protect themselves and their family members. The results of the study show that the respondents perceive that it is men who hatres on the web the most. Female journalists receive more sexist hate comments than male journalists. Women react more strongly to online hatred and take on various support and protection measures, which men do not do in the same way. There are also differences between the sexes in how the view of cyber hatred is perceived. Women take it more seriously and men see it as a minor problem. The harassment on the web leads to self- censorship. Female journalists self-censor more than male journalists. It is easier to silence women than it is to silence men. The journalists' perception of online hatred is that it has gotten worse since the development of digitalisation and when social media came. Respondents see threats and hatred against journalists as a democratic problem for society.