To Örebro University

Att vara kritisk till våra dagars medier är en självklarhet, medan 1800-talets presspionjärer däremot har fått behålla hjältestatusen. I "Pressen i provinsen" tecknas den moderna pressens genombrott dock som en utdragen och långtifrån entydig process. Från att på 1700-talet ha varit arenor där alla hade rätten att delta i det upplysta samtalet, blev tidningarna under början av 1800-talet gradvis opinionsorgan styrda av tämligen enväldiga utgivare. Allt mer professionella tidningsmakare formade och tog makten över mediet - och språket. Begrepp som opinion, press, publicist och redaktör fick då de betydelser vi idag tar för givna. "Pressen i provinsen" bygger på ett omfattande källmaterial och slår ett slag för regional idéhistoria och för studiet av landsortspressen. Denna värld får färg och konturer genom personer som den energiske nyhetskrämaren Didric Gabriel Björn, den fantasiefulle martyren Jacob Philip Tollstorp och den konservative kapitalisten John Swartz. En mängd sedan länge bortglömda stridskrifter och tidningar kastar nytt - och inte alltid så fördelaktigt - ljus även över våra etablerade hjältar i huvudstaden.

This study treats ideas of how newspapers should be edited, from the middle of the 18th century to the middle of the 19th century. It deals both with notions of communication and how these were carried out. The empirical focus is on the Swedish province Östergötland and its two main cities, the ecclesiastical, military and administrative Linköping and the mercantile and financially important Norrköping. The dissertation, which to a great extent is concerned with the history of concepts, is divided into three parts: "A Civic Press, 18th Century", "Marginalisation and Modern Breakthrough, 1790–1840" and "Modern Press Established, 1840s". The dissertation shows that what could be termed A Civic Press (or A Press of the Citizens) dominated during the 18th century. The publishers of newspapers considered it their duty to publish letters to the paper. The newspaper reading citizens identified a corresponding right. The newspaper should not merely reflect or represent a public debate; it should actually be one, in order to promote a better society. This ideal was to a great extent put into practice – primarily by the traditional and enlightened élite of the Old Regime. The birth of the modern, liberal press is best seen as a marginalisation of the Civic press. The publisher, who saw himself obliged to publish what was sent to him, was gradually replaced by a new and rather absolutist kind of editor (in Swedish called publicist) whose explicit goal was to reach lower social strata. This change can also be seen as a professionalization. An important result is the chronology that the dissertation establishes for this process. The Civic press was long-lived. Eventually many of the conservative opponents of the modern press gave in and adopted the liberal way of editing. The Civic press is nevertheless easy to trace as late as around the middle of the 19th century. Those who criticised the modern press, did so to a large extent with the Civic press as an ideal in mind. These today somewhat neglected editors and debaters – often seen as agents of an Absolutist public sphere or as enemies of the freedom of the press per se – celebrated, in other words, what is the closest historians will ever get to finding Habermas’ ideal type.