In a powerful display of unity and determination, around 11,000 people gathered at Töölönlahti in Helsinki on a Sunday afternoon for the “Me emme vaikene” (We won’t keep silent) anti-racism demonstration. Organized by impassioned activists, this event sent a clear message to the Finnish government: it’s time to take concrete actions against racism.
Photo by Enrique Tessieri
A peaceful march for change:
The demonstration began at Senatintori, in the heart of Helsinki, where thousands of demonstrators came together. They marched peacefully to the Töölönlahti event park. It was a visually striking display of solidarity. Both the Helsinki police and the event organizers commended the peaceful nature of the protest.
Demanding more than words:
One of the most powerful aspects of this demonstration was the demand for action over mere rhetoric. Participants urged the government not only to denounce racism but also to implement anti-racist policies. This call for tangible change underscores the importance of addressing systemic issues at the policy level.
Expressing disappointment with government’s communication:
The organizers of the event were vocal about their disappointment with the government’s communication on anti-racism. They believe that the government’s efforts have so far fallen short. This sentiment reflects a growing frustration with the lack of progress in addressing racism at the highest levels of Finnish governance.
Addressing racist statements:
High-level politicians have come under scrutiny for statements that are seen as normalizing racism as experienced in throughout this summer marked by several Perussuomaliset* statements and a closet full of skeletons. The organizers of the demonstration expressed deep concern about this issue. They believe that such statements contribute to the perpetuation of racist attitudes and behaviors.
Photo by Enrique Tessieri
Pressures on media and research:
The demonstration also drew attention to concerns regarding freedom of the press, journalism, and academic research. Organizers highlighted the alarming fact; that some ministers (mainly from the Perussuomalaiset party) are exerting pressure or manipulation on these important pillars of society. This raises questions about the state of free expression and intellectual inquiry in Finland.
As a Tunisian who has spent the last three years in Finland, I often find myself reflecting on recent events that have influenced my life. The revolution in Tunisia is known for having been “from the people, [but] appropriated by the others.” This phrase resonates with me deeply, as I can relate to the highs and lows, the gap between expectations and reality, and the stark difference between what the media portrays and the actual situation.
One word that carries great power in this context is “the media,” and for good reason. The media has a significant impact on how people perceive their world and how they formulate their beliefs. It plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion and influencing societal attitudes. The media can either promote understanding, empathy, and inclusivity or perpetuate prejudice, discrimination, and exclusion.
When I think about the challenges faced by immigrants trying to integrate into a new community, the metaphor of a “foreign body” comes to mind. Just as an organism can reject an organ or implant, a society can be as hostile towards immigrants who want to fit in and participate as full members. Prejudice, discrimination, language barriers, and other obstacles contribute to social exclusion, segmented neighborhoods, and isolation, hindering the development of a cohesive and inclusive social fabric.
Overcoming these obstacles requires a society that fosters tolerance, empathy, and open-mindedness toward newcomers. Just as the immune system must be modified to accept “the foreign body,” the culture of a society needs to make it possible to embrace diversity and provide equal opportunities for all. Education plays a crucial role in this process by promoting cultural awareness, intercultural discourse, and improving language abilities.
But when the media is predominantly biased, it erects barriers against the “foreign body” and fails to give a voice to immigrants. The media’s portrayal of immigrants can shape public perceptions and influence societal attitudes. Negative or stereotypical portrayals perpetuate societal preconceptions and hatred, while the lack of diverse representation in the media hinders communication and feeds biases.
The Finnish media, in particular, has been a source of cultural shock for me. Much like the media back home, it often presents a negative and disturbing image, which can be subtly regarded as racist. This portrayal in the media reinforces stereotypes and perpetuates discrimination. For Finland to truly embrace diversity and inclusivity, the media must take on a more inclusive and impartial role. Journalists and media experts should make an effort to portray immigrants and their contributions to society in a nuanced and factual way, highlighting inspiring stories and a variety of experiences that accurately depict the realities of cultural diversity.
The Finnish media also has a responsibility to uphold ethical reporting standards and combat prejudice by discouraging hate speech. Fact-checking, diversifying information sources, and encouraging intercultural conversation are crucial steps toward fairer reporting. Failure to do so not only spreads prejudice and stereotypes but also poses a significant risk, as biased and deceptive media can become the perfect platform for opportunistic politicians to rise to power and manipulate public opinion.
In the face of the growth of extremist politicians and parties, it is essential to recognize the potential risks posed by a biased and even deceptive media. Such politicians target the disenchanted, the manipulated, and the frustrated electorate, using the media’s power to formulate public opinion to their advantage. They exploit the portrayal of immigrants as outcasts, even monsters, winning the support of individuals who feel marginalized by the current political climate. Furthermore, they understand the influence they can have on younger generations, who are already shaping society and are particularly susceptible to media influence.
I am often asked about my experience in Finland and whether I encountered any culture shock. In most cases, unless I am talking to people I trust and know well, I tend to give a half-truth response to avoid long and pointless debates where my thoughts might be disregarded due to my background and as a newcomer still learning and struggling with the language. I usually say, “I really enjoy it here, and Finland has my heart.” I mention the country’s robust social and political system, natural beauty, favorable weather, and cultural diversity. This answer helps me navigate discussions without getting caught up in unnecessary arguments.
However, if I were to speak truthfully, the cultural shock I experienced in Finland was primarily due to the Finnish media. As I mentioned earlier, in many ways, it was reminiscent of what I had experienced back home. Most of the time, the media presents a negative and disturbing image that could be subtly regarded as racist—an insidious form of racism. This is where my culture shock originated.
The Finnish media must adopt a more inclusive and impartial role, akin to the adaptive immunological response of the body. Journalists and other media experts can be linked to antibodies, who should make an effort to portray immigrants and their contributions to society in a nuanced and factual way. This entails highlighting inspiring stories, triumphs, and a diverse range of experiences that accurately depict the realities of cultural diversity.
The Finnish media also bears responsibility for spreading prejudice and stereotypes when ethical reporting standards are not upheld. To curb the dissemination of hate speech and advance a more accurate portrayal of immigrants, fact-checking, diversifying information sources, and encouraging intercultural conversation are crucial steps towards fairer reporting.
