Reykjavík Grapevine - 07.04.2006, Síða 6

When the news network NFS was founded
late last year, it had a lot to prove. Replacing
the newsrooms of both Stöð 2 and Bylgjan, it
was to become the central hub for the gather-
ing and dissemination of news in the non-print
media belonging to the 365 corporation. Argu-
ably the biggest impact the channel has had so
far has been through its weekly news magazine
Kompás. While not everyone can see NFS
programming 24/7, to see Kompás or the daily
news you only need a TV and an antenna, and
this has no doubt contributed to its success.
A controversial program, Kompás’s content
tends to be hotly debated over the nation’s
water coolers the morning after it airs. In the
wake of a particularly gripping report, in which
the lack of an intensive care unit in a children’s
hospital was exposed and criticised, the Grape-
vine caught up with Jóhannes Kr. Kristjáns-
son and Marteinn Þórsson to ask them about
Kompás, the nation’s reactions and what it’s
like to be an investigative journalist in a society
with such a limited journalistic tradition.
/// Some of the things you delve into are of
an extremely personal nature. Do people
respond very differently to you when you con-
tact them about issues that are highly charged
with emotion?
Jóhannes: Yes, this story about the hospital,
for instance, is obviously an extremely sensitive
issue for everyone involved. The couple we
talked to, though, did a fantastic job in coming
forward and managing to tell such an emotion-
al story in as much detail as they did – twice, if
you count the initial interview. And thankfully,
they really seemed to get through to people.
This story touched a lot of people around the
country.
/// You mention the reactions. Are you
generally happy with the response you got
following that program? The Baugur family
certainly seemed to step up to the plate after
this became public knowledge. (Following
the airing of the program in question, Jón
Ásgeir Jóhannesson and family pledged to pay
the 60 million krónur a year needed to run an
intensive care unit in the children’s hospital
– for at least the next five years.)
Jóhannes: Well, we’re certainly happy about
how things turned out, aren’t we, Matti?
Marteinn: Yes, of course, but apart from the
money it’s always good to see a much-needed
debate like this one get going. I think the
important thing is for these issues to get fol-
lowed up by other media, so the public gets to
see many angles to the same story. It doesn’t
matter how much you strive to keep your re-
porting neutral and objective, you always have
a particular approach to the story that is in part
subjective.
/// Speaking of objectivity, when you asked
some uncomfortable questions of the director
of the children’s hospital, he stood up, said
some less than complimentary things about
your methods and basically tried to end the
interview. Did you have any indication that
he was upset with you beforehand, or did
something go awry during the interview
process itself?
Jóhannes: He was fully aware of the fact that
we were there to cover an extremely sensitive
issue. When he was pressed on some aspects of
his hospital’s operations, and didn’t give what
we felt were satisfactory answers, we simply
had to keep on asking him. At some point he
just gave up on the whole interview, but we
persisted and got an answer out of him in the
end. Interestingly, Minister for Health and
Social Security Siv Friðleifsdóttir has since
claimed that we violated some kind of rule
or even law by not ceasing the interview and
turning off our equipment as soon as we were
asked to. Nobody here at NFS has any idea
what she’s talking about. It has always been
customary in our profession for the director
and camera operator to decide when and when
not to film.
Marteinn: People in positions of authority
have a duty to provide the people with answers.
If we, the taxpayers, are paying you wages to
manage our affairs, then you have to be ac-
countable to the nation and its people.
/// The Icelandic media are unfortunately
famous for allowing politicians, and others,
to walk all over them and get around the most
basic questions with doublespeak, or simply
by the blacklisting of individual journal-
ists or organisations. Has your hard-hitting
approach burned any bridges for you? Is the
pool of people willing to talk to you shrink-
ing?
Jóhannes: It seems to have done quite the
opposite for us. Practically everyone is willing
to speak to us these days. So far, we haven’t
gotten a single ‘no’ from a politician. When
we’re covering more sensitive issues, then
naturally some of the more private individuals
we approach do not want to expose themselves
to public attention.
/// It hasn’t always been like this, has it? Is
investigative journalism finally in vogue in
Iceland?
Jóhannes: Kompás is really the only program
of its kind currently being shown on Icelandic
television. For 46 minutes a week, we get a
chance to delve much deeper into the issues
than most journalists. It’s hard to work as an
investigative journalist in Iceland, that’s for
sure, but we have a chance to do so and thus
we’re just trying to make the best out of the
situation.
Marteinn: I think these things have changed,
as the society as a whole has changed very
quickly over the past few years. People are
certainly more receptive to our kind of journal-
ism, open to more in-depth coverage. There
has long been this tendency in Icelandic society
to want to sweep uncomfortable issues under
the carpet, even though everyone knew they
were there. For instance, you might have a
weird uncle that you think hangs out with kids
a little bit too much, but no one wants to say
anything.
/// Along with the positive reactions you have
gotten for your work, there must surely have
been quite a bit of negativity as well.
Marteinn: Yeah, the pervert episode comes to
mind…
Jóhannes: Indeed, some people were simply
unhappy with the fact that we decided to
make a program on this topic, and particularly
with the idea of using a fake girl to lure these
guys in. Then again, we also got a number
of complaints about the fact that we blurred
out the faces and identifying features of all
the individuals who showed up for a sexual
encounter with this underage girl. So it went in
both directions, really. On the whole, though,
most people seemed to be very happy with the
program – and so were we.
/// Would you have done anything differ-
ently after the “pervert program” in which you
lured men to meet an extremely underage girl
by posting an ad on the Internet, knowing
how people reacted? (Despite the blurring
of their faces and license plates, some of the
men from the program were in fact identified
by friends, family and co-workers. Follow-
ing the example shown in the program, some
teenagers also took it upon themselves to seek
out and violently attack men who look for sex
with young girls on the Internet.)
Marteinn: No, I think we would do it the
same way.
Jóhannes: We were very happy with the way
we produced that show. We don’t support
people going out and trying this for them-
selves, of course.
Marteinn: Yeah, don’t try this at home.
/// Going back to the criticism, briefly, have
you ever been accused of skewing the facts to
fit your story?
Marteinn: We have been accused of dishon-
est editing. I remember reading a blog that
claimed we had unfairly attacked the hospi-
tal director, the one who wanted to end the
interview, and that it was only our editing that
made him look bad. The truth of the matter is,
and anyone can see this by looking at the tape,
is that it was all one, long shot. What you saw
on your TV screen is exactly what happened.
Jóhannes: We also got that after the pervert
story aired, accusations that we had somehow
twisted everything around in the editing room.
Marteinn: I mean, we had three cameras run-
ning each time, and the footage was all a bunch
of continuous takes!
Jóhannes: Well, that’s the last defence you
have left after the program airs and every-
thing is said and done: “They just edited it to
make him/me seem like a perv.” Like I said,
sometimes Icelanders know very uncomfort-
able things about each other, friends and family
even, but prefer not to rock the boat. They
don’t want to know about it.
/// Since we have been talking about old hab-
its in Icelandic journalism, it seems apt to end
this with the traditional and highly patronis-
ing final question that closes practically every
interview in Iceland: “Any final words or
messages to our readers?”
Marteinn: We’re always looking for tips on
interesting topics.
Jóhannes: Yes, you would be surprised what an
impact one little idea can have once it starts to
snowball. So please, keep them coming.
“There has long been this tendency in Icelandic soci-
ety to want to sweep uncomfortable issues under the
carpet, even though everyone knew they were there.
For instance, you might have a weird uncle that you
think hangs out with kids a little bit too much, but no
one wants to say anything.” Marteinn Þórsson, of Kom-
pás news magazine.
The Unspeakable Brought to the Living Room
Kompás, Iceland’s 60 Minutes, on exposing perverts and even hospital management
by gunnar hrafn jónsson photo by gúndi