Magda Gad’s call against the media’s “lack of coverage of Gaza” is getting a lot of attention, but is a storm in a teacup. Just like the criticism of REVA, that led to Swedish police stopping checking IDs in their hunt for illegal immigrants, it is about a few activists with loud voices and powerful platforms. The question is whether the Swedish government can withstand it.

A little more than a year before the general election, the collective left is launching a massive attack on the Swedish government. The battlefield is the so-called “Israel-Palestine conflict”, the weapon is claims of “genocide” and the storm troopers are the most loyal and ideologically convinced of them all: Public Service and Sweden’s journalists.

Leading the charge is our very own Magda Gad, the once celebrated female war correspondent who, after a few tours with Islamists and terrorists, began to praise both Islamism and religious dress. Now Gad has succeeded in gathering “500 Swedish journalists, authors and writers” in a petition calling for even more biased reporting, obviously in favour of Palestine (read: Hamas) and even more criticism of Israel (and Jews).

According to the petition, published in Expressen and elsewhere, the media coverage is considered to have failed, and now it is argued that it is the media’s duty to influence Swedish politicians in a pro-Palestinian direction.

Excuse me, but could the reporting on Gaza be more biased?

Reading “news” about Gaza is like arguing with a narcissist: lie after lie is delivered from sources all based in Hamas, but the lies are delivered with such an appealing cocker spaniel look and such a believable tremor in the voice that by the time the lies are refuted, they have become “truths” in the eyes of the outside world. Even if it isn’t true, it could have been true – and then it would have been terrible…

That it has now been 667 days since Hamas launched the largest pogrom since World War II by murdering 1,200 men, women and children and kidnapping 251 people – 21 of whom are believed to still be alive somewhere in Gaza – doesn’t mention the 500 at all. Nor does it mention that the war ends the moment Hamas lays down its arms and releases the hostages, that Hamas obstructs or steals aid shipments, or that Hamas has admitted to supplying inaccurate statistics to the journalists Gad champions. No, Gad & Co. want more Hamas, more bias, more Israel hatred – more anti-Semitism.

Who are the 500…

So what does this “massive call” by Sweden’s journalists consist of? Among the names are obvious left-wing activists such as Jan Guillou, Anna Ardin, Martin Schibbye, Mattias Irving, Ulf Bjereld, Stina Wollter, Bilan Osman and Özz Nujen, but also a number of poets, communicators, cartoonists, some journalism students and a summer intern.

In a text on Det Goda Samhället, Bitte Assarmo notes that 35 of the people who signed the petition have jobs in public service – nine work at SVT and 26 at SR. In addition, there are 23 anonymous signatories who, according to Expressen, “work as reporters, editors and correspondents at major national media”.

Assarmo asks how these individuals’ pro-Palestinian stance harmonises with the credibility of the public service mission, or for that matter with the impartiality for which these journalists so often praise themselves. These are legitimate questions. Another legitimate question concerns Magda Gad’s call-up invitations.

Gad has officially announced that all those who declined her offer are now on the list of names of people who “support genocide” that she claims to have “saved for the future”. What does Magda Gad intend to do with this list of names? Will it be saved to find people with “the wrong values” when Sweden finally raises the white flag against Hamas? How does this saved list of names harmonise with GDPR? And how convinced of The Cause is the person who knows that their name is on “Magda’s blacklist” if they decline? I guess it doesn’t matter, because no one in charge at any editorial office will see any news value in it.

… and how many are actually 500?

Another modest question is how big is this petition really? Five hundred names is certainly a long list to scroll through, but how many of Sweden’s journalists, authors and writers has Magda Gad actually managed to mobilise? We know that 500 said yes, but how many said no? Ten people or a thousand? Even more?

Let’s look at some concrete figures: In 2023, there were 10,600 working journalists, of which 10,219 were members of the Swedish Union of Journalists (SJF). It is difficult to say how many writers there are in Sweden, but the Swedish Writers’ Union has around 3,000 members (to become a member you need to have published two literary works). The rest are lumped together under the term “writers”, which can mean almost anything as long as you produce some kind of text or form. The number of writers therefore very likely exceeds the number of working journalists, but for the sake of simplicity let us equate the groups.

Of a low estimate of 20,000 people (some are probably included in several categories) who are part of the group “journalists, authors and writers”, Magda Gad has thus managed to mobilise 500. This represents 2.5 per cent. That’s right. Gathering 500 names is impressive. But is it the massive mobilisation it is made out to be? No, it’s not. Not at all.

That the petition is getting such attention is therefore remarkable. It’s about a fart in space, a piss in Mississippi. But on the other hand, Magda Gad knew that 500 is more than enough, because the petition is exactly the kind of phenomenon that the Swedish media – that is, the same editors and journalists who have signed it – are happy to highlight and celebrate. It is not the first time. You remember REVA, right?

”The storm of criticism against REVA

REVA was launched in 2009 and was a project between the Swedish Migration Agency, the Police and the Prison and Probation Service aimed at increasing efficiency and legal certainty in the enforcement of deportations. In short, the government wanted to ensure that people who should not be in Sweden were allowed to leave Sweden. A natural part of this work was increased identity checks – something that, by migration activists, was directly labelled as racist. Although REVA was a great success – between 2009 and 2013, for example, the border police in Skåne deported 23 per cent more people than before – the project was scrapped in 2014. The reason was the massive protests in the media and the public debate. But even then, the media and public debate consisted of a number of activists with Twitter accounts and editorial offices.

In February 2013, Aftonbladet published a petition against REVA signed by “162 writers, academics, journalists and cultural workers”, and Twitter was filled with posts critical of REVA, something that was then called a “storm of criticism”. But even then, the storm took place in a glass of water: the critics were few in number, but loud. The Swedes who welcomed REVA were more numerous, but they did not have access to newspaper editorial offices, public service or Twitter accounts with followers in the government chancellery.

A higher gear for a change of government

Supposedly, both the REVA and Gaza petitions are primarily based on the political affiliation of the signatories (70 per cent of journalists at SVT vote red, of which 56 per cent vote V or MP) and the Gaza petition is worrying: the loyal megaphones of the red-green opposition in public service and other media have stepped up a gear to bring about a change of government next year.

That’s why the Gaza call should be seen for what it is: an open, pro-Palestinian and Hamas apologetic provocation and a test of strength for the incumbent government.

Much suggests that the activists will succeed this time too. The Reinfeldt government caved in to the left’s drive, and presumably the Kristersson government will do the same. Most indications are that neither the prime minister nor the other party leaders in the Tidö coalition have the cojones to resist. This week, for example, it was announced that the government had joined forces with the Social Democrats to “toughen the tone against Israel”.

Not surprisingly, social media is now flooded with criticism from outraged moderates who believe that Ulf Kristersson is betraying both Israel and the party.

The criticism is justified. The decision shows that the government is weak, very weak. And that does not bode well for the hostages, the Gazans or the Swedes. Or for the journalism the petition claims to defend.