Finally, Honest Reporting on Immigration and Crime

Finnish media usually mislead Finns when reporting crimes involving people of foreign background by failing to mention that the perpetrators are immigrants. That’s why it was gratifying to see that Uutissuomalainen published this morning a crime report written in a very factual and professional manner. According to the article, “In downtown Jyväskylä, a group of about ten young people of foreign background followed the underage victim in order to rob them.”

By factual, I mean that the reader doesn’t have to guess whether the issue at hand stems from a failure in upbringing or in immigration policy. Instead, it becomes clear that the political responsibility for what happened lies with those parties and politicians who have been steering Finland down the same path as Sweden.

Toward the end of the article, it is also mentioned that the authorities have a good understanding of who belongs to this group of about ten immigrants, who have also committed other similar crimes. Therefore, the problems they cause are likely to be dealt with in the near future. Helping in this effort is the fact that – according to Detective Inspector Eeva-Maria Tahvanainen – “The Police Department of Inner Finland now has an entirely new unit focused on combating street crime, which will take charge of cases related to such offenses.”

I would like to thank the people of Inner Finland for this initiative and, sitting here contentedly behind my keyboard, wish the Central Finland Police the best of luck and success in pursuing violent criminals! I also wish that Finland’s ministers and members of parliament would recognize the facts and use common sense when making immigration policy decisions.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?
Terrorism Landscape in the EU Contradicts the Narrative Presented by EU Politicians and Media
Finland’s Minister of Finance Believes Not All Cultures Are Equally Good

Is Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle Using Taxpayer Money to Mislead?

In Finland, there is a taxpayer-funded media company – Yleisradio often shortened as Yle – whose purpose is to produce truthful reporting. Unfortunately, the company does not always seem to grasp this fact; instead, its programming often clearly reflects the journalists’ own – green-leftist – political views.

At worst, this manifests itself in perspectives favoring the political left and even in what appears to be the deliberate misleading of the audience. A good example of this was provided by Yle’s recent article titled “Report: Finland has succeeded well in integrating immigrants, only Sweden ahead.”

In reality, according to the article itself, the report in question did not actually address immigrant integration, but rather focused mainly on financial and other support directed at them, as well as, for example, opportunities for newcomers to participate in society. In other words, Finland has not necessarily succeeded in integrating immigrants; instead, it has provided the second most services. This assessment did not include any evaluation of the actual outcome – that is, the success of integration.

Therefore – my dear readers – each of you may consider for yourselves whether the generous funding of Yleisradio with Finnish taxpayers’ money is truly justified. Or is it rather a case of misuse of people’s money?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
An Economist’s Fact-Based Response to Polarizing Tax Claims
Acts of Vandalism Against a Political Party
Orwellian Big Brother monitors journalists of Finland's Public Broadcasting Company Yle

An Economist’s Fact-Based Response to Polarizing Tax Claims

A social democratic think tank recently sought to fuel polarization between low- and high-income earners by claiming that the government’s decision to slightly ease tax progression would only benefit the very highest earners. To support this argument, the think tank used euro-denominated comparisons, which naturally make the differences appear large—especially between the very top earners and the rest of the population.

This narrative was swallowed whole by Finland’s two biggest media outlets—namely the publicly owned Yleisradio and the privately owned Helsingin Sanomat. Both repeated the claims without any critical scrutiny, effectively acting as a loudspeaker for a politically aligned left-wing think tank. Their coverage was soon challenged by Sami Pakarinen, Chief Economist of the Confederation of Finnish Industries, who presented a series of facts on social media.

* * *

According to Pakarinen, “Finland will lower its top marginal tax rate at the beginning of next year from 58% to 52%. This has been recommended for years, as Finland’s top rates are among the very highest in the world.”

He elaborated by noting: “In 2017, the IMF recommended that the top marginal rate should be capped at 44%. The OECD average is around 35%. Even after the reform, Finland remains well above this ceiling.”

Pakarinen also reminded readers that “the top 14% of earners pay 49% of all income taxes. When it comes to net public transfers, the top decile shoulders the lion’s share.” In fact, he emphasized that “Finland redistributes income through taxation more than any other OECD country.”

Furthermore, contrary to the social democratic think tank’s claims, he argued that “the self-financing ratio of the tax cut is very likely above 100%. In other words, by lowering taxes, the state will actually collect more revenue. Recent research points in this direction, and there is finally a growing consensus among economists.”

* * *

For international readers, it is worth noting that research shows the majority of journalism students in Finland lean toward the green-left. Perhaps this helps to explain why Finland’s otherwise exceptionally free press—at least in international comparison—can nevertheless appear remarkably one-sided. In practice, it often leans toward planned-economy thinking and value liberalism, as this very case illustrates.

As a result of all this, one is entitled to ask: what exactly are Yleisradio and Helsingin Sanomat aiming at by repeating the left’s polarizing and misleading claims as if they were facts? A society divided along American lines—or even outright revolution?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Jesuit Morality in Crime Reporting on Immigrants
Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges
Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?

Jesuit Morality in Crime Reporting on Immigrants

Attitudes toward the problems of humanitarian immigration in the UK took a strange turn after Keir Starmer came to power. He began arresting people participating in protests and those complaining about abuses, and even started releasing criminals from prisons to make room for these political prisoners.

Since then, Starmer has changed direction and ordered investigations into the most serious crimes. From here in Finland, I can't say how seriously those investigations have been pursued.

* * *

In Finland, too, efforts were made to conceal the problems of immigration for a long time, but gradually this became difficult as the general sense of security—or lack thereof—became increasingly widespread. At some point, Finnish media decided that the names of criminals would be published if their sentences were at least two years long.

However, the fact remains that hardly anyone is interested in the names of those convicted. Rather, what is important—especially in terms of people's views on immigration policy—is that the ethnic background of those who commit crimes should be reported in all, or at least in more than minor, offenses.

* * *

Today’s crime news concerned a man about ten years older who had provided intoxicants and sexually exploited a girl who was originally 12 years old over a two-year period. Nothing is said about the man's ethnic background; instead, it’s stated that “the name of the convicted is withheld to protect the victim.”

This practice has become more common in most media in recent years. As a result, essential information about the perpetrators of sexual crimes—particularly those against teenagers—is increasingly being withheld. This is the case even though people aren’t interested in the offender’s name, as I stated earlier, but in whether the person belongs to the native or immigrant population.

This sharply contradicts the guidelines used by the Finnish press, which remind journalists that—quote—“journalism that strives for truth helps the public form a picture of society and the world.” Instead, it seems to follow the centuries-old Jesuit morality, in which "the end justifies the means."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously
The Increasing Criminality Among Swedish Students Stems from Their Values
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?

Citizen Journalism, Free Speech, and EU Challenges

The text above is my thought that "As long as a society has a true freedom of speech it cannot be completely rotten. However, all totally rotten societies are lacking the true freedom of speech."

The text is placed there because Finns seem to have significant difficulties in accepting freedom of speech. The most recent example of this was provided by the Finnish Green Party, which has decided to leave the social media platform known as X.

According to the party, societal discussion on X is no longer relevant due to the systematic hate speech, conspiracy theories, and disinformation spreading on the platform. They are correct in that all three undeniably occur frequently on X. However, they are wrong in claiming that societal discussion is no longer relevant on that platform, as it has been conducted specifically, explicitly, and practically only there.

Sure, the world is full of social media platforms, but it is precisely on X where open societal discussion has taken place. And it is precisely there where anyone could directly comment on anyone else's posts and provide reasoning. Of course, this often happens in an inappropriate manner, but in my view, both political extremes have been especially guilty of this.

If the Finnish Greens and the broader political left leave X, there is a risk that societal discussion will revert to a time when each ideological group had its own insular forum, making fruitful dialogue—or achieving mutual understanding—practically impossible. And it might not be possible in the future either, not even in the utopian world of the Greens. 

* * *

This relates to the perspective of Finnish Commissioner Henna Virkkunen, who has stated that the EU can impose significant fines and penalties on X if the platform does not meet the Union's requirements. According to her, "In Europe, everyone has freedom of speech and opinion. However, X has a specific obligation, derived from our laws, to assess and mitigate systemic risks related to our electoral systems and public discourse."

Virkkunen's comment arose after X conducted an interview with Alice Weidel, the vice-chair of Germany's second most popular party, the AfD. However, under EU legislation, platforms are required to ensure that certain political views are not favored over others. In other words, the commissioner would like to compel X to also interview representatives of other German parties.

It remains to be seen whether Elon Musk will comply with such demands—or if he will allow others to organize similar interviews on their own, which could then be featured on X. From the perspective of freedom of speech, it would be beneficial if this were possible—after all, Musk himself has emphasized that X is a platform for citizen journalism, where everyone can create their own content.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Criticism from the Left Brought a Small Association’s Independence Day March into the Spotlight
Freedom of Speech in Danger
Finnish MEPs Saramo and Tynkkynen Engage in Social Media Clash Over Ukraine Support

Why Were Violent Protests Acceptable for George Floyd but Not for the UK Child Murders?

The United Kingdom was thrown into chaos when a man of Rwandan descent stabbed several children to death in a northern English city. Since then, there have been protests throughout the country, including in the capital and Northern Ireland.

The protests were immediately condemned as far-right riots, but in my view, their scale indicates that this is a broader phenomenon. This is true even though there are undoubtedly many far-right individuals involved.

The fact remains that no sane person condones the stabbing of children. And it’s not just about the outrage caused by the actions of one second-generation immigrant, but about the long-standing immigration-related issues that have been seen in Britain.

The most well-known of these in Finland are probably the Telford and Rotherham rape rings, which were primarily run by people of Pakistani descent and had over a thousand victims, most of whom were young working-class British girls. During this time, authorities failed to treat sexual violence with the seriousness it required because they feared being labeled as racist.

This same problem apparently still plagues the authorities of the island nation, who have deployed police forces against the protesters. And the journalists, who instead of reporting objectively, have focused on questioning the motives of angry Britons.

This is why it is necessary to ask the people of Britain and the world—especially those who see far-right extremism and racism everywhere—why they consider violent protests acceptable in the case of George Floyd, but not in response to the child murders that have shocked the United Kingdom?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The stabbing of the 12-year-old led to political revelry among the left in Finland
A white family does not represent real Londoners
The arrival of caliphate citizens must be prevented

The stabbing of the 12-year-old led to political revelry among the left in Finland

There were two stabbings in the same town in Finland on the same day. In one of the cases, a person of immigrant background fatally stabbed an adult man.

In the other case, a well-known, notoriously violent Nazi, who despite multiple violent crimes was - according to Finnish legal practice - allowed to walk free, stabbed a 12-year-old immigrant child from behind. As of this writing, the child is alive and the Nazi is in police custody.

In due course, the judiciary will determine how soon he will be free again to continue his dangerous behavior towards his fellow citizens.

* * *

Of the two stabbings I mentioned earlier, it is the latter case that has received significant attention, and the identity of the perpetrator has been unusually reported because 'it is a serious act of societal significance, and the suspect has previously been convicted of far-right activities.' From this, one could infer that the killing/murder I mentioned first was not considered serious or of societal significance by the journalists writing about it, despite the death of the victim.

In contrast, the second case truly is, as Finance Minister Riikka Purra (Finns Party) mistakenly suggested that the perpetrator was of immigrant background - which is not surprising considering the recent increase in violence against children and young people by individuals of immigrant background. Of course, once the real ethnicity of the murderer was revealed, she corrected her view.

This has not stopped the far, extreme, or moderate left from reveling in the fate of the stabbing victim. At least just elected member of the EU-parliament Li Andersson (Left Alliance), long-time EU MEP Ville Niinistö (Green League), party leader and member of the Finnish parliament Sofia Virta (Green League), and member of the Finnish parliament Timo Harakka (Social Democrats) have done so. However, they do not appear to have had anything to say about the dark-skinned person's act of killing an adult man.

* * *

In this situation, it is important to state - and I state it myself - that both acts were heinous and should not be defended in any way. However, this cannot mean that discussions about immigration - its benefits, everyday realities, or drawbacks - should not continue.

Instead, these cases underline the government's - and also the opposition's - right and duty to strive to maximize the benefits of immigration and minimize its associated drawbacks.

The latter concerns both the actions of immigrants themselves and those of the marginal groups among the native population who are motivated by them. This includes groups such as the Nordic Resistance Movement, which served as the reference group for the perpetrator of the recent child stabbing and which the USA has just classified as a terrorist organization.

In Finland, the Supreme Court ordered the Nordic Resistance Movement to be disbanded already in 2020.

Aiempia ajatuksia samasta aihepiiristä:
Monenlaista väkivaltaa ja terrori-iskujen torjuntaa
Huumekaupan motivoimia jengisotia myös Suomeen?
Keskimääräisestä erottuva maahanmuuttaja on otettu kiinni

Marxist far-right and bullies

Belgium is known for various things, such as its bilingual population and good beers. One more recent source of notoriety for the small country situated between Denmark and the Netherlands is the violent (example and another) neo-Belgian population.

Therefore, it was interesting to read a newspaper article with the headline, "Belgium votes in parliamentary elections – far-right separatists expected to succeed, making government formation painful."

According to the article, two parties are expected to succeed in the elections. One of them is the national-conservative Vlaams Belang party, which advocates for the independence of the Flanders region and opposes Belgium's immigration policies. This party is expected to achieve a significant electoral victory and become the largest Flemish party.

The second expected success is the nationwide Marxist PTB-PVDA party. So, extreme communists.

According to the article, these two parties would get almost a third of the parliamentary seats, but other parties would refuse to include them in the government. Thus, making its formation more difficult.

* * *

After reading the article, I was left wondering about two things. The first of these was, by what logic is a Marxist, i.e., a communist or far-left party, considered part of the far-right? I had thought that this term used by political journalists referred to national-conservative parties whose agendas include aspects that strengthen the market economy. To my understanding, Marxist-communist parties do not have such aspects.

The second thing that left me wondering – even more so – was that if some parties refuse to cooperate with others, the blame lies with the latter. Analogously: if a group of bullying kids excludes one child from their games, the fault lies with the latter, not with those who made the decision to exclude.

Therefore, it must be asked whether the author of the article in question, and perhaps all other journalists, should reassess their perception of reality. The article left the impression that those responsible and those not responsible for the difficulties in forming a government were declared based on the author's own – obviously delusional – worldview.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Orwellian Big Brother monitors journalists of Finland's Public Broadcasting Company Yle
Will the multinational force led by Kenyans help?
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry

Orwellian Big Brother monitors journalists of Finland's Public Broadcasting Company Yle

The Finnish tabloid Ilta-Sanomat heard from a long-time journalist of the Finnish Public Broadcasting Company Yle that it is problematic for them that his articles feature "too many heterosexual men". When asked about this, the Ilta-Sanomat journalist discovered that our publicly funded media records not only the gender, age, skin color, and social status of interviewees but also what kinds of thoughts or bodies they have.

Subsequently, Yle's editor-in-chief Jouko Jokinen tries his best in the Ilta-Sanomat article to explain away the image of the company’s operations that the interviewer—and ultimately the reader—might have formed. The article also reveals that Yle systematically collects statistics on the content of journalists' articles.

These are "basic things that can be automatically identified by text analysis and whose tracking is ethical. What topics we cover, how they are geographically distributed, who are the most interviewed individuals, what gender they represent, what the most used titles are, which political parties are most frequently mentioned, and so on."

And finally, the development manager of Yle then—perhaps unwittingly—reveals that "we are trying to diversify our content. Nowadays, we discuss a lot in our editorial offices, for example, whether it is always privileged people who speak for us. There are many underrepresented groups that do not have a voice in society."

In other words, confirming that our tax-funded media operates like an Orwellian big brother, whose duties include collecting data based on which even long-time Yle journalists can be presented with "ratings on the table" if they have interviewed people from so-called underrepresented groups too infrequently.

After reading the article, I was left wondering if such an Orwellian big brother is really the kind of service that Finnish taxpayers want to fund. Or perhaps they would prefer that the money be used for something entirely different—either within Yle or in other sectors of society.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry
Racism or self-preservation instinct?
Nightwish and the Disney Company

Will the multinational force led by Kenyans help?

The only state in the Western Hemisphere led by people of Sub-Saharan African descent - Haiti - has appointed a new prime minister, Garry Conille. He is a former Prime Minister of Haiti, whose term began in 2011 and ended already in 2012.

However, Conille's prospects for lifting gang-ridden Haiti out of chaos and misery do not seem promising, as the country's healthcare system is on the verge of collapse, millions of people are threatened by famine and infectious diseases, and over 362,000 Haitians have been forced to leave their homes due to violence.

The task should, however, be facilitated by the arrival of multinational forces led by Kenya. Their mission is to disarm the gang members. It remains to be seen whether the new prime minister will succeed or if the country's turmoil will continue during and after his tenure.

* * *

The information in the previously written text, with one exception, comes from an article published by the Finnish afternoon newspaper Ilta-Sanomat. I added only the information about the distinct ethnic background of Haitians compared to other inhabitants of the American continent. I did this because this information may be relevant to the years-long plight of Haiti, considering the general level of societal success of Sub-Saharan African states.

I first took notice of Haiti nine years ago. At that time, five years after the earthquake, a wave of looting followed, which required Western soldiers to quell.

Additionally, I drew the attention of my esteemed readers to the fact that in Haiti at that time, even 12-year-old girls were selling themselves to pedophiles to obtain food and goods. Hopefully, this is not the case in the current situation.

At that time, I did not yet take into account the ethnic origin of Haiti's population but only noticed it in my writing seven years ago. However, the editorial team of Finnish media still does not seem to be interested in this issue, not even because the uniqueness of the country's population is rooted in one of the most successful ethnic cleansings in history.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
South Africa: life without a culture of maintenance
Racism or self-preservation instinct?
Should forbidden questions be answered or not?

Finnish journalist called for British Prime Minister´s head to be placed on London bridge to dry

In recent times, there has been an ongoing debate in Finland, where the country's leading newspaper - Helsingin Sanomat - has unearthed old social media messages of ministers that are alleged to be racist. The purpose behind this is to bring down the right-wing government, in which the second smallest party - the Swedish People's Party - is struggling with these issues.

As this has continued for a sufficient period, even those supporting the government have started to search for similar writings from Helsingin Sanomat journalists. The latest revelation includes a few years old social media post by the newspaper's executive editor-in-chief's spouse, Saska Saarikoski. In that post, there was a demand for the then British Prime Minister's head to be placed on London Bridge to dry. Saarikoski has not apologized for his writing.

In a previous case, a nearly ten-year-old article from Helsingin Sanomat was also brought up, in which readers were encouraged to come up with derogatory nicknames for Estonians. The newspaper's editorial staff has not apologized for this message either.

It remains to be seen where this exchange of words will lead. However, it is evident that such confrontation is not beneficial for either the development of Finnish society or its reputation abroad.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
An ignorant mediahouse failed again in historical facts
Why a journalist was unaware on the number of Stalin´s victims?
Climate change raises dishonesty in the Finnish media
 

Elections in Finland enlight journalistic views

Finns will vote for the members of their national parliament in early April. Accoprding to opinion polls, the Conservative party (21.6 % of those, who told their opinions) is the most popular one followed by Social democrats (19.3 %) and True Finns (18.4 %), the latter one being a more conservative but economically slightly less market oriented right wing party compared to Conservatives.

Today also another opinion poll was published. According to that, True Finns were by far the most popular one among those, who will vote for the first time. Their share of told opinions was a remarkable 35,9 %, whereas the secondmost popular Social democrates were favored by only 16,7 %. 

Interestingly though, the main newspaper in the country, Helsingin sanomat, had the latter opinion poll made. And that it published its figures in an unusual way for gallups measuring popularity of political parties - namely, including also those, who did not tell their opinions. 

In this way, the share of opinions to True Finns was lower than it would have been, if expressed in a normal way (as above) - "only" 28 %. As Helsingin sanomat is well known for its disgust for true Finns, this way of presenting the results was probably made by purpose. That is, by an intention to make their popularity among youngsters to look smaller. 

I am not saying that politics in Finland would be exceptionally dirty nor media would be highly corrupted. But definitely journalists are trying to support their favorites as much as they can (another example). And therefore those entitled to vote should be cautious, when following the media stream on politics.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The beautiful PM of Finland has driven herself into a trouble
Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland
An ignorant mediahouse failed again in historical facts

  

The Finnish army is respected by Russians

The opinions of Russian people towards its neighbors are always interesting. Especially if they concern your home country. At the end of April, the popular science and technology publication Ferra published a report about the Finnish army. 

At the end of the report was a survey for readers, where the answer was given by clicking one of four options. The question was: “if Russia for some reason launched a ´special operation´ against Finland, the result would be…”

The most popular option was “worse than in Ukraine”. It received 30 percent of responses.

Option “NATO would have joined the conflict and World War III would have begun” was the second most popular, and received acceptance from 29 percent of Ferra readers.

Option “better than in Ukraine” was clicked by 14% of respondents, with the fourth option receiving the same figure was “roughly the same as in Ukraine".

Thus, it looks like Finnish army enjoys considerable respect among Russians. And NATO is considered as a support for our country already now, although Finland is not yet even a member. These are interesting opinions in a country where propaganda in overwhelming and truth lies somewhere between the written lines.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Russian army not comparable to western military services
Obligatory military service gains support
Why a journalist was unaware on the number of Stalin´s victims?

Misuse of taxpayers´ money in Finland

I analyzed the visibility of Finnish political parties in the politically oriented programs of the Finnish National Broadcasting company Yleisradio (Yle), which is funded by taxpayers. The time line of my study started after the last general discussion of party leaders in January 28, 2021, and ended yesterday (March 3, 2021).

During this time period, the parties had their representatives in Yle´s political programs as follows. 

Social Democrats: 6 times
National Coalition Party: 5 times
Center Party: 3 times
Greens: 2 times
True Finns: 2 times
Left Alliance: 1 time
Other (minor) parties: 0 times

I also compared these numbers to the parties´ share of votes in the last elections of the National Parliament in 2019. And calculated the percentage of votes obtained by each party per the number of times the party obtained visibility in Yle programs. My hypothesis was that - as Yle is funded by taxpayers´ money - the visibility of each party should reflect their share of votes. 

Social Democrats had the highest visibility as their representative was invited to Yle for each of 2.95 percent of votes. The National Coalition Party needed 3.4 percent of votes to get their representative to Yle programs. The corresponding numbers for the Center Party and Greens were 4.6 and 5.75 percent, respectively. The Left Alliance had only one representative for their 8.2 percent share of votes.

Interestingly, the second popular party - and the most popular one in the opposition - had only one representative per 8.75 percent of votes. That suggests that this party is not among the favorites of the Yle staff. 

If we compare the figures given above between different parties it appears that the Social Democrats had a three time over-visibility compared to True Finns in relation to their share of votes, thus falsifying my hypothesis. It should also be noted that the timing of True Finns visibility was already in the early February, thus timely distant from the becoming municipal elections in April, and therefore minimizing the effect of the results of their results.

Based on above, it appears that the editorial staff of Yle has not understood their job as servants of all people living in Finland. Instead, they misuse taxpayers money to support political actors with similar ambitions as their own. This conclusion is supported also by the very similar distribution of visibility of political parties in a highly similar analysis I made in October 2019 (available only in Finnish).

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Minister Maria Ohisalo panicked
Twitter account of an remarkable politician was locked

The original thought in Finnish:
Puolueiden kannatus ei vastaa niiden näkyvyyttä Ylen A-studiossa