Iceland review - 2016, Qupperneq 44

42 ICELAND REVIEW
7. Do you think it’s easier or more dif-
ficult to work as a journalist in Iceland
than in a larger society? Does everyone
knowing one another make it easier or
more difficult to access information?
In some ways I think it’s more difficult
and in some ways easier. It can be good
to know many people and to know ways
of acquiring information. But it can also
be more difficult, because sometimes it’s
possible to pinpoint the person who is in
possession of the information and who
revealed it to the journalist.
8. You’ve said that it was very valuable
for you to work with foreign journalists
on this story because they are like a
mirror on Icelandic society. Could you
explain?
In those ten months that I worked with
foreign journalists on the Panama Papers,
we extensively discussed news relating to
politicians in Iceland. The foreign jour-
nalists said from day one that this is not
about legal details—but ethical ones.
That was their mirror on Iceland.
9. So, you mean that you were orig-
inally inclined to approach this from a
legal point of view? How do you gauge
the reaction here: do Icelanders consid-
er this more of a legal than an ethical
issue?
In the coverage, both technical legal and
ethical issues are covered. The mirror
which the foreign journalists brought
was good, because here in Iceland the
discussion had largely centered on the
legal aspect—especially among the poli-
ticians themselves.
10. What was the most important
thing you learnt during the ten months
you researched the Panama Papers?
To not give up, and what a difference
it makes to work with good people.
The Kastljós team worked on the pro-
gram with me and my business partner
Aðalsteinn Kjartansson, and I don’t see
how it could have been done without
them.
11. Have Icelandic links to the Panama
Papers, and events in Iceland since April
3, harmed Iceland’s image?
Based on what I hear from foreign jour-
nalists, I think so, yes.
12. How so?
I’ve met many foreign journalists in
Reykjavík since April 3. It was best illus-
trated when I sat down with four jour-
nalists from the largest media outlets in
Europe who wanted to know what the
situation in Iceland was after the cov-
erage of the politicians’ offshore com-
panies. When I had explained what was
happening, a journalist from Le Monde
asked: ‘Is Iceland definitely in Europe?’
And they all laughed.
13. Reykjavik Media has raised close
to EUR 100,000 on crowdfunding site
Karolina Fund, far exceeding your tar-
get of EUR 40,000. What are your plans
for the company?
We’re speechless over the support we’ve
received. We’ll use the funds to build up
the company further and to support our
strategy to provide extensive, high quali-
ty news coverage.
14. You’ve been working as a jour-
nalist for 15 years. How has technology
changed the way you do your work, par-
ticularly investigative reporting?
You don’t need to make as many phone
calls today—the internet gets you a long
way in your research.
15. What about the role of data jour-
nalism, which has become a bit of a buz-
zword. Could you explain to our readers
exactly what it is and how it has helped
in your work?
All sorts of data and information can
be acquired on the internet, but it can
be difficult to interpret unless you set
up databases and work that way with
the information. Aðalsteinn is a good
example of a good investigative journalist
who has embraced data journalism. The
trend in journalism in recent years has
been towards journalists realizing this,
and with each passing year data journal-
ists are now playing a larger role on the
editorial teams of all the major media
outlets. *
MEDIA
Reykjavík Media founders
Aðalsteinn Kjartansson (left) and
Jóhannes Kr. Kristjánsson.