To me it seems that you are letting your own self-confessed political views influence your ability to evaluate the quality of the journalism and fall back on ad hominem rather than presenting your counter arguments.
To me it seems that you are letting your own self-confessed political views influence your ability to evaluate the quality of the journalism and fall back on ad hominem rather than presenting your counter arguments.
And while trying to prove your statements you link to a _tv-debate_, like who's the best tv-debater would matter. That video seem to come from a blatant right-populist account which leaves a bad taste as well, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one.
Secondly, in my book, ofcourse being accused of lying, misusing statistics and covering up are journalistic scandals if you strive to be a premier journalistic publication. Maybe we have different expectations of journalism, but perhaps a softer term could have been used to save us both some excitement.
The TV debate was in a well known debate program on state television, and I'm sure you agree that it is very rare for a DN editor to openly receive such strong criticism from another journalist. I have no idea who posted that video on YouTube (I just remembered the debate and googled it) but the original source is state television, so that's an odd comment of you to make.
I haven't seen any sources from you either proving that the mainstream sources I provided as examples have been more criticised than DN.