Talk:Jyllands-Posten

message: "Jyllands-Posten" is the most commonly used name used to refer to the newspaper. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 19:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Add any additional comments
I originally tried moving the article myself, but since Jyllands-Posten currently has a nontrivial history in addition to being a redirect here, the move was refused. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 21:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Add any additional comments
I originally tried moving the article myself, but since Jyllands-Posten currently has a nontrivial history in addition to being a redirect here, the move was refused. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 21:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Moved. WhiteNight T | @ | C 00:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Result

message: Moved from article page:
Why does the paper seem to have a yellow Star of David as its logo? What is the history behind that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darianb (talk • contribs) .
Stars are a commonly used log for all sorts of companies, I think calling it a Star of David is reading a little too much into it 80.166.182.88 21:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My best guess would be that it represents the morning sun. They have an Aurora award (given for outstanding ads) which includes a sculpture suspiciously similar in shape (Aurora is the Roman goddess of dawn). The fact that "Morgenavisen" ("the morning newspaper") was added to the name specifically to emphasize its early morning delivery probably supports this, especially given that the star is placed in connection with it. It is also interesting to note that "the dot over the i" is a Danish idiom meaning "the finishing touch". — Peter L <talk|contribs> 23:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The number of starts on the frontpage represents the edition of the newspaper. News might change doing the printing process. --CableCat 13:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: User:80.108.250.170 added this to the article:
:Neverthless, what enraged the world's Muslim populatiuon is that in their style, the caricatures resemble the racial stereotyping used by the Nazis against Jews (mean looking eyes and bloodthirst and hyperboled racial features) in form of propagandist editorial cartoons and caricatures before and during the WWII, which is just another point in continuation of the publications documented sympathies for the Nazi cause.
I need to ask: have you actually seen the cartoons? Even the "worst" of them (the one with the turban resembling a bomb) doesn't really have "mean looking eyes". Rasmus (talk) 13:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That paragraph is nonsense, and is a clear attempt to unjustly adopt victim status.  As you say the criticism only applies to one of the cartoons at most. 194.72.92.36 13:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A fact" 

message: I removed this sentence from the article:
: The newspaper has published blatantly anti-Islamic articles in the past.
Any sources for that? Rasmus (talk) 12:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blatantly anti-Islamic 

message: That image is aleady well displayed in the sub-article about the controversy.  I don't see any reason why it should be here as well?  It is an important image, and should be shown on the sub-article, but why show it here as well? Nfitz 03:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoon image 

message: I must say I am having problems with this article in general. I think the grim past of the newspaper is worth mentioning, but it should be mentioned also that the newspaper has dealt with its past properly by critizising its own past. Unfortunately I cant find sources. Help me.
The sentence "Several journalists covering parlamentary and governmental politics were subsequently employed as spin doctors of his government" wrongly paints the paper as having direct ties to the paper. Where is the source? 
The word several is exagerating at the least. Greetings Rasmus (Not User) 6th February 14:40 (CET)
:Agreed. This article is starting to smell like it is trying to paint JP as the "epitome" of Danish racism. While they frequently publish editorials critical of immigration, things like this are too POV to me:
::A 2004 report by the European Network Against Racism, funded by the EU, concluded that the Danish media devoted an excessive proportion of their time to the problems posed by immigrants, and most often Islamic immigrants, while often ignoring the problems that these immigrants face. They hold newspapers such as Jyllands-Posten to blame for the rise of the anti-immigrant right-wing in Danish politics.
:Huh? Many people in Denmark have become sceptical of immigrants/Muslims over the last years, but with all due respect, I don't think JP is to "blame" — it is a much more complicated social issue. The discussion of JP's "attacks" on immigrants does not give any details on any potential factual merit in the editorials in question, nor does it attempt to address the allegations by various anti-racist/left-wing groups. Bringing a country to "the brink of violation of international and European conventions on human rights" is also a serious accusation which strongly needs to be supported by more than some statistics on the proportion of editorials/op-eds negative to immigrants in order to seem relevant. I'm putting the  tag on it. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 23:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To uncritically cite an organisation so political like "Faklen" is like citing the right wing party Dansk Folkeparti. I really think that the part should be removed. --Rasmus81 10:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed. The only part of the "2000s" section I do not consider highly dubious is the sales figures — their supposedly "crucial" role in the 2001 election is probably speculative (for crying out loud, it is a right-wing newspaper). I support dumping the whole section; however, the statistics on the views on immigration might be useful for a new section on the political position of the paper. Just for clarity, Rasmus81, are you the "non-user" Rasmus above? — Peter L <talk|contribs> 11:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I am the abovementioned not-user. The organization Enar mentioned seems not to be funded by EU. That organization is called EUMC. I have just seen some of the reports of ENAR. According to them all European countries will turn into nazi-regimes in very few years. I think they are unbalanced, cherrypicking quotes and so on. --Rasmus81 11:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Eu-funded organization EUMC has made a more balanced report on Danish integration. It can be seen herehere. I am new here. How are the rules for removing things from an article? Not only is it POV. Some of it is blatantly wrong, and the quotes being used are not mentioning Jyllandsposten in the context. I really think the user should start his own article naming it Danish integration, or something like that --Rasmus81 11:40, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You delete it, and write why here.  If someone restore the text, you try to build a concensus here before deleting it once again (to avoid an edit war).--Per Abrahamsen 15:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am responsible for including the ENAC report. I am not trying to push an image of the newspaper as right-wing biggots or racists, but I thought that it was quite interesting what that report concluded. Unless you have some real reason to doubt their credentials, we should include it. Wikipedia tries to represent all opinions in a neutral way. If there are other, less critical reports, by all means include them. Peregrine981 16:39, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I thought I had already made my case. Let me reiterate. Firstly, Enar is not funded by EU as stated in the article. You are confusing Enar with EUMC. EUMC´s report has a BALANCED view on the danish integration. Secondly the quote "The seeds of xenophobia, or cultural and religious intolerance have in fact been sown by a range of political, cultural and media elite for several years which have brought Denmark to the brink of violation of international and European conventions on human rights." [1] is not used on Jyllandsposten specifically as it is being purported, but on Denmark in general.
Thirdly, the reports of this ENAR really are a joke. Try read them. All european countries are nazi-regimes according to them. Totally unbalanced. The daily BT is Extremely Right according to this junk-report. I can also find some neo-conservative sources and cite them uncritically. We can just go on and on with this, it will be a lot of fun, but people will not be properly informed.--Rasmus81 16:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the part saying that ENAR is funded by EU, because its wrong. I also removed the part saying that Jyllandsposten will print the Holocaust-Pictures, because they apparently wont do it anyway. Hope thats ok. I still think the disputed part is POV. --Rasmus81 20:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: On the ENAR report it says: "This report is funded by the European Commission, DG Employment and Social Affairs and the Compagnia di San Paolo. " We can include criticisms of the enac article if you like.; Peregrine981 15:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems with the article in general

message: I cant believe that I am defending the newspaper, which I have always disliked, but this smearing has to stop. Jyllandsposten is not a nazi-paper, it is a right-wing/liberal paper, and I understand that anti-globalist and others may think the worst of it, but I honestly dont see the point in smearing. Stop using these ideologically blinded pages to support your questioinable points. I removed some pretty irrelevant pictures and some of the POV sections. You are welcome to disagree. --Rasmus81 22:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SORRY, but I had to remove a lot 

message: There is a long paragraph basically giving JP credit for the 2001 election result.  While I'm sure the newspaper would be flattered (no question that they prefer the current government over the previous one), I believe it is giving the newspaper way to much influence.  The readers of JP is most likely voting for one of the ruling parties anyway.  The paragraph seem to be based on a American student paper, which again is based on English language articles in the popular press, written right after the election.  At the time, the coverage was somewhat sensationalist.  Basically, the paragraph is a fourth hand account, where each "hand" have had their own angle to the story.  The end result is not something I, as a Danish voter, can recognize.
I'm going to remove the paragraph if nobody protest.--Per Abrahamsen 09:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2001 election 

message: In a case brought to the Council of the Press by Dokumentations- og rådgivningscentret om racediskrimination (DRC) against Jyllands-Posten the council decided the following:
(My translation may be a bit inept, so please correct, or add)
Decision by the Council of the Press, Copenhagen Mach 20th, 2002:
"Regardless the current debate about crimes committed by refugees and immigrants we find that in the concrete case it is irrelevant to mention the nationality of the two [Somali] sisters. In publishing this information the newspaper has violated good press ethics, according to section C. 4 in the guiding rules for good press ethics, and therefore the council finds a basis for stating criticism of the newspaper. Section C 4. states: "Any mention of family relations, occupation, race, nationality, faith or relationship to an organisation ought to be avoided, unless this has a direct relevance to the case."
http://www.retsinfo.dk/_GETDOC_/ACCN/W20020910125-afgrTARGET=
Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen subsequently criticized the council for limiting the freedom of speech and engaging in political correctness.
http://www.cfje.dk/cfje/Lovbasen.nsf/ID/LB02452340
I am not sure how representative this is, since other newspapers have perhaps also been hit on the head by the section C 4, and thus I don't want to be unfair to Jyllands-Posten, but I think the Prime Ministers comment on the verdict is interesting and put things in a clarifying light. 
86.52.36.140 19:41, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documented case of racism by Jyllands-Posten 

message: If the number of subscribers is about 150.000, I'm quite sure, there must be additional papers at the news agents. How can we adjust the two numbers in the article? --Adornix 20:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the second number you refer to (apart from the intro) is in the chapters 40s-90's. I checked the source, and corrected the text. The mentioned number is the circulation, not the number of subscribers Bertilvidet 20:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  number of subscribers <> circulation 

message: does it?? I ask because I dont know. Are you sure the paper not simply represses its past? If you have any knowledge / sources please add it. If not i suggest we delete that phrase. Bertilvidet 20:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They once puplished a special edition, where they critizised and described their past. I am not able to find sources for it. But wether they have openly admitted their past or not, I think it is unfair not to state clearly, that it is no longer a nazi-paper. --Rasmus81 15:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have searched for that special edition on Infomedia (Danish equivalent to Lexis Nexis). In the introduction JP is described as an "independent newspaper that is liberal". So I can not see how the article can give the impression that JP today is a nazi paper! I am not sure if the paper distances it self from the pro-fascist past - the topic is not mentioned on the paper's web site, so I have the impression they rather repress it. I will delte this paragraph, and urge all of you not to insert it before the issue has been clarified. Its better to keep it out as long as we dont know. Bertilvidet 15:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Dear Bertil. Its ok to mention its grim past, but why dont you understand my point.
"I am not sure if the paper distances it self from the pro-fascist past". I dont care if they have explicitly distanced itself from its past or not. The main point is, that it is NOT a paper with sympathies to fascism today. Why cant I write that, when it is common knowledge? I think you are being unfair to Jyllandsposten and you have some weird views on balance. You are misusing the grim past of the paper to further your personal view, that Jyllandsposten is a nazi-paper. Come on!!!--Rasmus81 16:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Rasmus. No one in one's senses will claim that JP today is a fascist or nazi paper! And I would never defend such a ridiculous view! It is stated in the article that the paper today is liberal and independent - so how can you get the impression that the paper is pro-fascist??? The chapter about its sympathy for fascism is clearly limited to a historical chapter, and includes its publication of a critique of the nazi pursuit of jews. As far as I know the paper have not distanced itself actively from its past - so if it is not the case, obviously we cannot state it! If I am wrong, and you can find the documentation, please reenter it. But so far none of us can find the proof / any source confirming it. Obviously its editorial line has changed since 1933, but I believe that is clear from the article. Bertilvidet 16:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: distancing itself from its past in the thirties

message: There's seemingly a lot of complainign about this page villifying JP, which is a fair criticism, but all I can say is stop bitching about it, and DO something in the article. If you don't like the anti-JP sources, find some pro!! If you don't like the emphasis on the 20s, 30s and muhammad affair, then do some research and fill in the gaps. The main problem is that this article totally skips over all of the intervening time, so that the unfortunate parts of the history are highlighted. Somebody in Denmark should go and find a book dealing with the history of the paper, or the media in DK, or something, and fill in the gaps. Sorry, I can't help but I have no access to any libraries of any kind at the moment. Peregrine981 05:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wont bitch so loudly anymore. The article seems fine to me now. I think I was just being desperate, because of the huge amount of lies and misinformation, which is being spread in world medias (especially arabic) in the moment, and I really dont like it, when people on purpose distort information. Greetings --Rasmus81 12:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand. I feel the same way, with many people characterizing the paper as some sort of unltra-nationalist mouthpiece, which is a slight exaggeration. That's why we should try and make this article as complete as possible. Peregrine981 15:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias in the article 

message: Exactly what is the deal with the circulation? I read that both bt and ekstra-bladet have larger circulations. Do they not count because they are in tabloid format? Peregrine981 15:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: JP has now a bigger circulation than both tabloids EkstraBladet and BT. See the figures here Bertilvidet 16:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The free newspapers in the larger cities and towns have hurt the tabloids much worse than they hurt the morning papers.--Per Abrahamsen 08:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Abrahamsen, you are completely right. The free MetroXpressen newspaper is thus the Danish newspaper with the highest circulation. However, JP is rightly stated in the article as being the largest selling newspaper. Bertilvidet 17:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circulation 

message: Is it?  I'd say "apolitical".  It mostly consists of unedited bulletins from the news agencies, with very little journalism of their own.--Per Abrahamsen 08:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I probably should find a source for the claim that it is centrist. The problem is that the left-right axis is rarely used in denoting a newspapers political stance. Instead the most often used device is the socalled gallup compass, but that would become too technical. However, their choice of columnists (anti-war/pro-integration and so on)made me think it was to the left of Urban, published by Berlingske, and JP gratis.
From their stance on Corporate and Social responsibility, they seem to be social-liberal.  http://www.metro.lu/corporate/index.htm
86.52.36.140 16:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Both Urban and MetroXpress make a virtue of being non-political (in contrast to most payed papers - JP labels it self right wing), which is reflected inter alia by not having editorials - and the fact that most of their articles are from agencies. I believe their choice of columnists reflect a broad specter (within the hegemonical discourse). I am sure one can make extensive analysis and find some kind of bias in all newspapers - but for MetroXpress and Urban it is not as obvious as with JP. I will therefore argue that we should not label MetroXpress as anything political in the short reference of this article. Bertilvidet 16:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. It might also look as if the journalists left the paper for political reasons, which there is currently no indication of. 86.52.36.140 16:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't disagree. But someone also has to clean up the main article. For instance the headline 1940-90s is wrong since it also now involves "controversies" in this millinium (2000s). In fact the whole piece needs a rewrite. There are too many instances of mentioning the name of the paper. It is cool that there is this technical stuff, since it shows that Jyllands-Posten is a a "modernist" newspaper, but a streamlining would be apropriate. Maybe a "Cold War history" headline should be there. Jyllands-Posten was after all staunchly anti-Communist.
I btw think it is relevant to include that Jyllands-Posten does not have an online debate forum. They did have it but removed it in 2002-2003. Why did they remove it it?
I would like to have this fact reintroduced.
Also why was the strike in 1954 removed?
86.52.36.140 23:31, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problems for your changes. I don't know about the strike in 1954, but it was written as being a minor evet. Bertilvidet 14:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: They used to have the word "relativist" in their tagline, and they did spring from an cultural relativistic academic tradition (which Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff was popularizing in Denmark).  Everything they did was some kind of "applied cultural relativism".  However, I haven't followed them appart from the first years, they may have a broader basis today, and they do seem to distance themself from their academic past.--Per Abrahamsen 13:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Eh, I'm not sure I had a point to be taken.  Basically, I don't know what happened to the magazine after they broke their ties with Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff, many years ago.--Per Abrahamsen 07:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MetroXPressen centrist? 

message: Will anyone object if I remove the following paragraph from the introduction? It is already mentioned in the article, and I cannot see why this point is so important that it deserves to be in the very beginning:
Since 2003, following a merger with Politikens Hus, the paper has been published by JP/Politikens Hus, although Jyllands-Posten and Politiken continue as separate newspapers.Bertilvidet 22:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree. But someone also has to clean up the main article. For instance the headline 1940-90s is wrong since it also now involves "controversies" in this millinium (2000s). In fact the whole piece needs a rewrite. There are too many instances of mentioning the name of the paper. It is cool that there is this technical stuff, since it shows that Jyllands-Posten is a a "modernist" newspaper, but a streamlining would be apropriate. Maybe a "Cold War history" headline should be there. Jyllands-Posten was after all staunchly anti-Communist.
I btw think it is relevant to include that Jyllands-Posten does not have an online debate forum. They did have it but removed it in 2002-2003. Why did they remove it it?
I would like to have this fact reintroduced.
Also why was the strike in 1954 removed?
86.52.36.140 23:31, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problems for your changes. I don't know about the strike in 1954, but it was written as being a minor evet. Bertilvidet 14:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership in introduction

message: Faklen has in one editorial promoted the idea of cultural relativism. Yet the word "kultur-relativist" is now somewhat derogatory. The now defunct Faklen has always described itself as humanist. I propose that the term cultural-relativist is replaced by the word humanist. This in the spiriet that organistaions are named after how they describe themselves and not how they are described by other people.
:They used to have the word "relativist" in their tagline, and they did spring from an cultural relativistic academic tradition (which Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff was popularizing in Denmark).  Everything they did was some kind of "applied cultural relativism".  However, I haven't followed them appart from the first years, they may have a broader basis today, and they do seem to distance themself from their academic past.--Per Abrahamsen 13:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, I'm not sure I had a point to be taken.  Basically, I don't know what happened to the magazine after they broke their ties with Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff, many years ago.--Per Abrahamsen 07:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Faklen "Cultural Relativist"?

message: Jyllands Posten have previously printed anti-christian cartoons. Here is an example from 2002:
http://www.filtrat.dk/sandbox/images/uploads/Hvem20sagde20hvad.jpg
: That cartoon is not anti-Christian, is is anti-Clinton.  Or rather, makes fun of adultery (which is considered a "lesser sin" in Europe compared to how it is viewed in USA).  What you can say it indicates is that using religous icons in a humourous context is in general acceptable in Danish culture.--Per Abrahamsen 10:13, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It makes fun of Joseph and Mary, remember? It don't see much difference between this and a number (not all) of the Muhammad cartoons. --Valentinian 17:26, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

text: It is not making fun of Joseph and Mary.  It is using Joseph and Mary to make fun of Clinton (and adultery).  Whether or not it is different from the Muhammed cartoons is irrelevant to the (false) claim that the cartoon is anti-Christian.--Per Abrahamsen 18:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am following your logic. The drawing of Muhammed with a bomb in his turban is making fun of suicide-bombers and using the Prophet for this purpose. In both cases no respect is shown for the religion. I think indeed there are similarities. --84.160.126.1 16:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The cartoon where Mohammed tells suicide bombers that Heaven have run out of virgins is making fun of the beliefs of the suicide bombers.  The one with a bomb in the turban I don't believe is intended to be fun at all.  The claim here was that a specific cartoon was anti-Christian.  If you want to argue by analogy that the Mohammed cartoons are not anti-Moslem, you should probably do so in the talkpage about the cartoons. No claim is made on the present article that the cartoons are anti-Moslem.  The only claim made here is that they are satirical, which I hope everyone can agree on.--Per Abrahamsen 18:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti Christian stance 

message: Two days before the national election in 2001 Jyllands-Posten broke a story concerning alleged asylum fraud by resident Palestinians. It turned out that the newspaper was unable to document its claims. This resulted in the sacking of the editor-in-chief. 86.52.36.140 10:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You should add all this stuff to the article, not the discussion page.--Per Abrahamsen 18:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editor sacked because of bogus article 

message: Jyllands-Posten had been a regional newspaper until 1997 when it launched what one commentator described as a "parachute attack" on the Danish capital by issuing a Copenhagen issue of its newspaper. This escalation in hostilities between the tree big ones, Jyllands-Posten, Berlingske Tidende and Politiken was financed through the advertizing boom in the early 90s. Berlingske retaliated by buying up the stock majority of Århus Stiftidende in 2000 - a local competitor to Jyllands-Posten, which JP had previously tried to take over. At the same time the newspapers engaged in a war of attrition, offering newspapers to costumers at increasingly lower prices. In order to gain more readers they also became increasingly similar in content as they sought the widest possible costumer base. The  quality of the newspapers decreased as the hiring of new journalistic talent was put on hold.
Source: Dansk Mediehistore Bind 4 (2003)
86.52.36.140 11:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe Politiken ever considered itself much part of the war, its social-liberal stance and strong link to Copehagen.  Berlingske-Tidende had to respond though, being less Copenhagen-centric than Politiken and more similar in polical leaning to JP.--Per Abrahamsen 12:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the article as it is written it seesm as if Berlingske started the newspaper war. That is not the impression I get from reding Dansk Mediehistorie Bind 4. Jyllands-postens own site is not a reliable source when it comes to answering the kriegsschuldfrage.86.52.36.140 16:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "The Newspaper war"

message: Also why is it not interesting that Anders Fogh Rasmussen after the verdict by the Council of The Press re. the Somalis saw it fitting to criticise the verdict? Is is highly unusual that a prime minister should comment on such an issue by a supposedly politically independent council.
86.52.36.140 22:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Council of The Press 

message: That section is not very good. Jyllands-posten has recieved one obscure second price - plus some of its supportes say it is pro-immigrant. The latter has no source, and is extremely POV.86.52.36.140 16:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The text got mixed up when someone split it into pro- and contra.  I removed the unsupported claim, and moved pro below contra since the pro statistics is from the same organization already introduced in the contra section.--Per Abrahamsen 20:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite funny to hear an official prize from the EU being described as obscure. The ENAR-Report is obscure, but it fits into your premade-minds about Jyllandsposten, alas is that a reliable source.--84.160.126.1 16:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the heading is not consistent with the content of the chapter, which advances arguments for Jyllands-Posten basically being neither better nor worse than the rest of the Danish media landscape. Couldn't come up with a better alternative offhand. Bertilvidet 08:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pro-immigrant? 

message: I think Jyllands-Postens biggest ever editorial success (until the drawings) should be mentioned in the histroy section. http://www.galathea-explorer.dk/default.asp?nid=526
Can someone add this in the article somewhere ?.
:I have no idea what you are refering to.--Per Abrahamsen 14:43, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JP Explorer 

message: Could a Danish speaking Wikipedian please place in the article an English translation of the name "Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten"? I'm guessing that it means something like "The Morning Advice / Jutland Post". --Humehwy 13:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "avis" is "newspaper", otherwise you are right.--Per Abrahamsen 14:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspaper's name in English 

message: I see that someone in their fierce attemp to label JP af fascist newspaper have quoted "research" from a now closed underground magazine called Faklen. According to their "survey" a great majority of all articles in JP are "negative on immigrants". Faklen is not a research institute, it's a political magazine written BY people on the far left TO people on the far left and cannot count as an objective source. In fact I believe that there is no such thing as categorizing articles as "negative/positive" on such large topic as immigration. Whatever standards Faklen has used to do so, only reflects their personal opinions. Medico80 00:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments? Then I delete the Faklen paragraph. Anyway, there still is a similar survey from this ENAR (I thought it was called ECRI?) which also concludes that most article are "negative" on immigrants. As Rasmus81 mentioned, those ECRI reports are known for containing lots of generalizing, undocumented claims. One may say they take a scientific approach in counting the positive vs. negative immigration aritcles, but still, what does it mean? Anyone here who would like to have his opinions on large, complex issues categorized into such crude black/white perception...? Medico80 09:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe you are thinking of ECRI's report on Denmark, which got quite a lot of attention in 2006 for criticizing JP's Muhammad cartoons and is not mentioned in the article. The ENAR report quoted is a bit older (2004), though they both seem rather opinionated. Also, it seems absurd to me to pick out JP for causing "the rise of the anti-immigrant right-wing in Danish politics" if its articles are no more "anti-immigrant than other Danish papers". What's the point, besides a rather pathetic attempt to shoot down JP? (not a criticism of your comments) — Peter L <talk|contribs> 17:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Faklen - a reliable source???

message: I think this article as a whole still has serious problems. Is there a any chance, that a person not familiar with JP and Danish media in general, will read this article and get a positive/neutral perception of this newspaper? The way JP is presented here, it is hard to think it is the bestselling newspaper in a democracy, and that their news are also being read by people not from the political right.
All facts in the article seem to be correct and carefully quoted, ok. The problem is the disproportional emphasis on certain topics, especially its "stance on immigration" and political line in the past. Some editors here have done a great job finding quotes that may give the impression of af pro-nazi/fascist newspaper. I strongly believe, that there is no basis for thinking that JP was more/less approving of the political development in Germany, Italy and Spain in the 30's, than West European media and academia in general.
Why is there a "Stance on immigration" section? There are no sections about JP's stance on labour market, real estate tax and EU agriculture subsidies. One may get the impression that immigration comprises a huge part of JPs daliy news coverage. It doesn't. And then this bold claim that a fraudulent story in JP was responsible for the change of government in 2001... come on, be serious! Besides, the anti-immigrant accusations from certain grassroot movements are given more weight than necessary.
Finally, the "Trivia" section is biased. Trivia should be a list of less important but curious facts that aren't mentioned in other sections. Here trivia mostly looks like criticism of JP. Unless anyone has any actual trivia, I suggest we delete it for now.
In conclusion, I think this article needs a serious revision. Medico80 15:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fix is slightly more complex than I thought, but I tonned down some of the langauge just a tad.  Needs much more.  JeffBurdges 12:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your response. Will noone else participate in this discussion?? I will do something wp:bold soon. Medico80 16:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be happy to chip in; this article has been annoying me for several months, though I haven't got myself pulled together to do much yet. A quick suggestion: adding a section on style, i.e., a basic walkthrough of JP's characteristics (priorities of different kinds of content, format and layout, comparison to other Danish papers etc.) in addition to its political line. I've been telling myself that I'll do it the next day for quite a while now - let's see if it'll be this time :) — Peter L <talk|contribs> 17:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been looking a bit around for high-quality Wikipedia articles on newspapers, and the one on The Guardian looks really well set-out, though a bit heavy on lists. It is also a former FAC; I would highly recommend it as inspiration to anyone interested in improving this article. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 21:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV still compromised

message: How is Jyllands-Posten pronounced in standard or conventional English? I am sure most anglophones (my self included) could not pronounce, --Greasysteve13 03:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's an audio file linked at the top of the article containing a spoken "Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten"; "Jyllands-Posten" is pronounced like that without the "Morgenavisen" (heh). Anyway, an English approximation would be "YEE-lans-puh-styn" (the "yee" is stressed but short, like the "Yi" in "Yiddish"); please check with the audio file if you're in doubt. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 15:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay thanks. Did you mean "stin" when you said "styn"?--Greasysteve13 00:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly, I'm not a native English speaker :) It is in any case closer to "stin" than "steen" or "styne"; in informal Danish, that last vowel is usually mumbled into obscurity anyway, so the name ends up something like this: "YEE-lans-puhs-dn" (for clarity: the a is pronouced like that in "cat", and the u as in "cut"). — Peter L <talk|contribs> 09:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. But y is a confusing letter in english. :)--Greasysteve13 08:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I've removed this claim from the article:
:On March 7, 2006, the newspaper published an article urging the government of Germany to ban the central Islamic text, the Qur'an.
(These sources are given.) However, this claim is simply wrong. Read the article: it is a news story by their correspondent in Germany, not an editorial piece, which describes how some people in Germany have reported the Qur'an to the authorities. Those German people, unsurprisingly, happen to support the publication of the well-known cartoons, but the article is not an endorsement of their cause on JP's part. — Peter L <talk|contribs> 20:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Call for German ban of the Qur'an!? 

message: Unrelated, but the controversy page linked to this has no options on it e.g. editing, but it doesn't say that it's locked or anything. Is there a reason for this? Everytime 18:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy Page

message: Should'nt "Liberal" be changes into "Libertarian" since Liberal means Left-Winger in English, unlike in danish where it means right wing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.239.178.165 (talk) 14:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No Liberal means left-wing in America. In Britain it means almost the same as in danish. So we words are fine. We can't easily compensate for war of words in the US. Carewolf (talk) 12:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberal? 

message: The quote of JP supporting Mussolini's coming into office is given twice in the article, almost identically worded. Since it properly belongs to the "History" section, the "Mussolini" subsection in the "Political line" chapter should be removed, IMO.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 21:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mussolini 

message: The article currently reads as follows:
In April 2003, the same editor on the newspaper rejected a set of unsolicited Jesus cartoons submitted by Christoffer Zieler on the basis that they were offensive.[23] The Muhammed cartoons were explicitly solicited by the editor. Ahmed Akkari, spokesman for the Danish-based European Committee for Prophet Honouring, saw this as a double standard.[23]
Would it not be more informative to delete the last sentence (on opinion expressed by some person) and replace it by a link to the 5 Jesus resurrection cartoons in question which are published here http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2006/02/05/456857.html and here http://cdn.nummer9.dk/wp-content/uploads/1opstandelsesspalte-2004.jpg
The claim that it was the "same" editor is wrong. It was a different editor.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1811:193:EC00:8051:DBFD:F4EA:B89C (talk) 12:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 5 unsollicited Jesus cartoons 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jyllands-Posten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719125557/http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1871-1917/ to http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1871-1917/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719124739/http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1940-45/ to http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1940-45/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060301142122/http://www.editorandpublisher.com:80/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001994449 to http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001994449
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110719125310/http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/121-2/ to http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/121-2/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110106054656/http://www.forbes.com:80/feeds/ap/2010/12/29/general-eu-denmark-terror-arrests_8228070.html to http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/12/29/general-eu-denmark-terror-arrests_8228070.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:21, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Jyllands-Posten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719125235/http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1918-1939/ to http://jyllands-posten.dk/jps-historie/1918-1939/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060209021028/http://www1.jp.dk/info/about_jyllands-posten.htm to http://www1.jp.dk/info/about_jyllands-posten.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141215034358/http://regconf.hse.ru/uploads/eeb884d6b8e24fb82b5185e2742b340ca35faa2c.pdf to http://regconf.hse.ru/uploads/eeb884d6b8e24fb82b5185e2742b340ca35faa2c.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100117044715/http://epn.dk/teknologi2/computer/article1948062.ece to http://epn.dk/teknologi2/computer/article1948062.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060526194037/http://www.ja04.stop-discrimination.info/fileadmin/pdfs/Europ_ische_Inhalte/Journalist_Award/DA_artikel__bers..pdf to http://www.ja04.stop-discrimination.info/fileadmin/pdfs/Europ_ische_Inhalte/Journalist_Award/DA_artikel__bers..pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060220021212/http://www1.jp.dk/info/historie.htm to http://www1.jp.dk/info/historie.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060209021028/http://www1.jp.dk/info/about_jyllands-posten.htm to http://www1.jp.dk/info/about_jyllands-posten.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jyllands-Posten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100920101651/http://politiken.dk/indland/1062297/politiet-jyllands-posten-var-maalet-for-bombemand/ to http://politiken.dk/indland/1062297/politiet-jyllands-posten-var-maalet-for-bombemand/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:48, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified