Words matter. I am not referring here to the most obvious and easily recognisable euphemisms that the Left habitually uses in its attempts to gain political power. Words matter greatly to the Left because language and concepts are often used deliberately to shape and manipulate political agendas, values and identity. It is part of a strategic struggle over how reality is defined.
But what is being promoted is not reality as it is – it is a desired reality. And that desired reality often lies far from the truth. It frequently conceals hidden agendas.
When I say that words matter, I am not referring to election campaigns and the massive distortions and outright lies that can be found across the political spectrum. I am referring instead to everyday power – the so-called fourth estate: the press and the dissemination of news in Denmark.
Here, freedom of expression – including the freedom to receive accurate information – is manipulated and under pressure. The process operates on a subliminal level. It happens through the choice of headlines and through the angle from which a particular issue is presented. Often the wording does not immediately register with the reader, yet it subtly influences how opinions are formed.
Take a single example: the liberation of Iran’s population from its brutal Islamist dictatorship.
A headline might read: “The Iranian people on the road to peace, prosperity and democracy.”
But notice what such a headline does. It openly takes the side of democracy, civil rights, women, life, freedom – and, not least, freedom of expression.
You will not find such a headline in the Danish media.
Instead, headlines looked something like this: “Trump attacks” or “Qatar hit by bombs.” Not a word about the fact that the bombs came from Iran. That information only appeared days later, often buried in short notices or sub-headings. But by then the first headline has already shaped the reader’s perception.
The newspaper Berlingske even gave column space to a former Middle East head of the Danish Defence Intelligence Service to claim that Iran is close to winning the war. Quite a disturbing prediction – and pure speculation. One might well ask who pays him to make such statements. Perhaps there is a reason why he is a former employee. It is a value-laden claim that implicitly invites sympathy for the clerical regime.
It also took a long time before democratic, monarchist Iranians were given a voice on the Danish public broadcaster DR. The first people allowed to comment were, naturally, representatives of the political left. But the large number of pro-monarchy democrats could not be ignored entirely, and DR reluctantly allowed them onto the screen – waving both the Iranian royal flag and the Israeli national flag.
The news coverage appears to push in a particular direction, and the broadcaster almost had to twist itself into knots before airing an interview with Jaleh Tavakoli.
The Danish press – with DR and TV2 leading the way – is clearly biased, and numerous PhD dissertations could be written analysing this phenomenon. My observations here merely highlight one aspect: the choice of words. There are undoubtedly many more examples hidden subliminally within the news coverage.
And this does not even begin to address expressions of disapproval, facial expressions, or the rhetorical questions often posed to guests in television studios.
Danish news coverage is highly manipulative in its language alone.
Words matter.
That is why I would encourage readers to consult foreign media outlets, which may – or may not – be politically controlled to the same degree as Danish mainstream media. In Denmark you receive only the left-leaning version.
So go hunting for reality – for the actual truth, perhaps.
Or read this newspaper, 24Nyt, a so-called small-stream media outlet. Independent, non-state-funded media are a good place to begin.
