DEBATE • In the reporting on Reform UK’s major successes in the British local elections on May 7, 2026 – where the party won over 1,400 council seats and took control of several municipalities – SVT chose to call the party the “right-wing populist Reform UK.” By applying the label “populist,” the focus shifts from substantive issues to values, placing political opponents outside the realm of legitimate discourse.

Reform UK is nationally and culturally conservative with an economic policy that lowers taxes, reduces bureaucracy, and protects British workers against imports of cheap labor. Its political profile is close to the experiences and priorities of the working class – namely concerns about mass immigration, cultural division, and a welfare system that no longer feels fair, something many Swedish workers recognize and express by voting for SD.

The epithet right-wing populist is therefore an unfounded description of Reform UK. Formally, this constitutes a breach of law as SVT is legally required to be factual and impartial.

Shifting Focus from Issues to Value Judgments

By applying the label “populist,” the focus shifts from substantive issues to value judgments and places political opponents outside the legitimate conversation. The label functions as a linguistic tool that shapes public opinion and the boundaries of public discourse.

Even though Reform UK is often described as right-wing populist in parts of the media, it is remarkable that public service consistently uses such a derogatory label for right-wing parties, while equivalent labels are almost never applied to the left. The Left Party’s youth wing openly professes communism – yet we never hear “left-wing extremist.” Nor have we heard of “climate populists” when it comes to the Green Party’s policies.

Consistently Conveying a Leftist Perspective

Why should the large proportion of Swedes with right-wing sympathies continue to be both disappointed and surprised that SVT consistently conveys a leftist perspective using value-laden and derogatory epithets?

SVT and SR seem to assume a leftist activist perspective as the norm, regardless of what the statutes, broadcasting license, or public service law (prop. 2024/25:166, §5) state about impartiality and accuracy. SVT must live up to its objective role and realize that it acts biasedly when left-wing extremist organizations are clearly spared comparable derogatory labels.

Not About Rich Versus Poor

The conflict between right and left is not about rich versus poor. It is about independence versus dependence. The right assumes people are capable of making their own decisions. The left assumes that politicians and authorities should exercise more control. When Reform UK (and SD in Sweden) talk about national control and resistance to excessive state dependence, it suddenly gets labeled as “populist.”

According to the law, public service must be impartial and factual. Continued use of asymmetrical epithets is not only arrogant – it is a serious problem of trust. Particularly arrogant, given that right-wing people have significantly lower trust in public service.

Arrogant Responses from the Review Board

Formally, such breaches should be dealt with by the Review Board. In a previous complaint regarding negative labels for right-wing organizations, the case was not processed on the grounds that a similar matter had already been handled.

An arrogant response from a quasi-authority charged with reviewing public service’s accuracy and impartiality. We at Medborgarperspektiv.se see the Review Board as toothless, almost a facade to lull the public into believing public service is impartial and accurate.

At the very least, public service should now strive to explain why they consider Reform UK to be a party that seeks voters’ trust with oversimplified arguments.

Public service’s arrogance has to stop now! Shape up! Especially as we are approaching elections.

Åke Thunström
Association Medborgarperspektiv