• 2018-2022close
• DK close
• Danish close
• Roskilde Universitetscenter's Digitale Arkiv close
• COVID-19 close

The following thesis examines the use of influencer marketing in a political context focusing on the Danish prime minister Mette Frederiksen’s influencer campaigns during the 2019 election as well as during the COVID-19 pandemic – specifically focusing on campaigns involving the Danish influencers Anna Briand, Alexander Husum and Anders Hemmingsen. The foundation of the thesis is therefore a case study focusing on the concept of political influencer marketing based on empirical findings from the campaigns themselves as well as 8 individual interviews and a focus group interview all with recipients of the campaigns. The theoretical foundation of the thesis’ analysis focuses on Mette Frederiksen’s use of personalization strategies in the aforementioned influencer campaigns with special attention to the three dimensions of personalization put forward by Liesbeth Hermans and Maurice Vergeer (2013). This is supplemented by other theoretical contributions from Ana Inés Langer (2010), Duncan Brown and Nick Hayes (2008), Søren Schultz Hansen (2021), Lisbeth Thorlacius (2020) as well as Peter Van Aelst, Tamir Sheafer and James Stanyer (2012) amongst others.The analysis itself is structured through three different sections. The first part of the analysis focuses on Frederiksen’s use of political influencer marketing during the 2019 election campaign. The second part focuses on the influencer campaigns during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the last analytical part summarizes and discusses the two previous parts with the intent of characterizing the use of political influencer marketing going forward. The structure of the analysis allows for a comparative study showcasing a nuanced use of political influencer marketing during various situations. The thesis lastly discusses the theory of personalization itself and suggests that both the professional and private aspects should coexist in the use of political influencer marketing. This ensures that the politician will utilize the personalization that influencer marketing offers whilst still providing the young audience an informed basis on which to form their own political views.

This study investigates whether the so-called Covid-19 critical movement continues itsactivity after the end of the restrictions in Denmark, and if so, what the activity is anexpression of.Methodologically this study takes a phenomenologically inspired, qualitativeapproach. The study is based on digital and physical observations, and four semistructuredinterviews with members from the movement.The theoretical frame of this study is based on New Social Movement Theory byRonald Inglehart, coupled with perspectives from the research conducted by sociologistsAnders Ejrnæs and Silas Harrebye. Moreover, the study uses theories about populism byErnesto Laclau combined with Jan Werner Müllers concepts regarding antielitism andantipluralism.We conclude that the Covid-19 critical movement continues to exist, but in a new form.However, in the current state, the movement shows more system critical tendencies.Therefore the Covid-19 epidemic has functioned as a catalyst for the present broadendcritique. This critique concerns different topics which are not seemingly correlated, but endsup being connected in an equivalent chain that relates all topics to system critique and a ‘fightfor freedom’. Furthermore, the movement is built upon distinct ‘freedom values’ due to theinfluence of strong post materialistic values. The movement is also influenced by populisttendencies such as antagonism, antielitism and antipluralism. Some of the critique which isexpressed by the movement can be seen as a sign of democratic satisfaction. However, someof the critiques also indicate a democratic dissatisfaction.

Since being chosen as the head coach of the Danish national football team, Kasper Hjulmand has become a prominent public figure, and been a central character in several major events. He led the team to their biggest success in many years by reaching the semi-final of the European Championship, dealt with the sudden heart attack of star player Christian Eriksen during a match and gathered the attention of an entire nation during the mentally straining COVID-19 pandemic. All this eventually led to him being chosen as “leader of the year”, as the first recipient who’s not in a traditional business role.This research conducts a discourse analysis of interviews with Hjulmand in conjunction with the use of leadership theories, to identify some traits and themes regarding what kind of leader he is. This understanding leads the analysis to an investigation of the narrative surrounding him as a leader, how it is created, and what role he himself can play in it. Existing studies have been made regarding achieving success in sports and leadership, and others regarding how a narrative is created. The findings of this study take this knowledge further, by determining how a public leader, like Hjulmand, influences the narrative surrounding them and achieves a deeper understanding of how a well-functioning social atmosphere is a precursor for the success of sports teams.

This master thesis is a qualitative analysis, investigating the interrelations in everyday life that contributes to forming pathways of conspiratorial radicalization, while discussing to what extend a conspiratorial epistemic worldview can be considered a part of a process of radicalization. By exploring 4 informants’ experiences of the Covid-19 pandemic response and the war in Ukraine, the thesis takes a phenomenological approach to the issue at hand. The study finds that while international events such as the insurrection at the U.S capitol in 2021 suggest a conspiratorially motivated accept of violent means to an end, such embrace of violence is not inherent in the conspiratorial digital community. However, this does not exclude the constructiveness of applying theories of radicalization to understanding individuals who have adopted a conspiratorial worldview. Instead, the thesis argues, that connections in pathways of conspiratorial radicalization, including social relations, communities of digital echo chambers, shortcuts in information retrieval and a strong group identity contribute to a radicalization where new societal crises become integrated into a monological belief system.

Since covid-19 was first discovered in Wuhan, China, in the fall of 2019, governments all over the world have been restricting their peoples' freedoms in order to stop the spread of the virus. The pandemic thereby sent countries into a new situation in which the press had to navigate its way around a global crisis, where many turned to the media in search of information. The aim of this study is, therefore, to investigate the role of the media in times of crises. The thesis is as follows: How did the tv-journalists at TV 2 experience covering the coronavirus pandemic in the spring of 2020, and what does that say about how the journalistic production is affected by a health crisis? This thesis was chosen from the viewpoint that the media was less critical in the beginning of the pandemic. The study is based on interviews from ten news editors and reporters and includes two interviews with the news directors at TV 2, combined with two journals from another editor and a live reporter. The methodology is also based on observational studies at TV 2, which contribute to the greater understanding of how the media produces the news differently under a crisis and what that means for the work environment. This paper examines the terms of which the journalists covered the coronavirus pandemic. Moreover, what experiences the journalists had with the news production and how they saw their role in the spring of 2020. The analysis supports the theory of journalism leaning towards the political agenda in the beginning of a crisis, which is documented through the journalists’ experiences. Furthermore, it discusses the findings in the analysis to determine what that says about journalism in a health crisis. It concludes that political consensus makes it harder for journalists to live up to the journalistic ideals of objectivity, the role of the watchdog and set the medias own agenda. TV 2’s role as a public service-company also has an impact on these ideals, especially due to the journalists’ own interpretation of the role. The journalists’ felt they didn’t have the same opportunity to act as critical press due to limited questions at press conferences, less access to authorities and bigger work pressure due to both physical and mental challenges. Thus, the media sought out expert sources and comparisons with authorities abroad to try to balance the viewpoints. The corona pandemic also influenced the way news were produced as several journalists worked from home and the rest had to keep a distance to each other and to their sources, which complicated the process. Moreover, this thesis concludes that the journalists’ kept reporting as usual navigating with the same news criteria as before the pandemic. This shows how during the early state of the health crisis journalism was very process oriented, where the news directors had less time to focus on the news because they spent more time on crisis management.

Danmark oplevede i forbindelse med COVID-19-pandemien en høj tilslutning til det danske COVID-19-vaccinationsprogram, men et mindretal på cirka 20 procent ønskede imidlertid ikke at blive vaccineret. Undersøgelser viser, at det i højere grad er personer med begrænsede socioøkonomiske ressourcer, der fravælger vaccinen sammenlignet med andre socioøkonomiske grupper. Regeringen problematiserede i efteråret 2021, at ikke alle havde tilvalgt vaccination, og opfordrede uvaccinerede til at blive det. Regeringens kommunikation var præget af en moraliserende retorik, der kategoriserede de uvaccinerede som egoistiske og usamarbejdsvillige. Denne retorik er af fagpersoner blevet kritiseret for at medvirke til at øge modstanden til vaccinen blandt de uvaccinerede, og regeringen opfordres af en række forskere til at undgå forudantagelser og opnå mere viden om de uvaccineredes behov, hvis det skal lykkes at påvirke flere til at blive vaccineret mod COVID-19. SAGE Vaccine Hesitancy Group, der er underlagt WHO, fremhæver, at vaccineskepsis er et komplekst fænomen, og at det er essentielt at anskue vaccineskepsis i konteksten af vaccinen, tid, sted og population, når man vil forstå årsagerne bag vaccineskepsis, og flere forskere i dansk og international kontekst efterspørger, at der lægges et fokus på at undersøge de narrativer om vaccinen, som de uvaccinerede oplever som sande, den sociale kontekst og de strukturelle forhold, der påvirker denne gruppe til at fravælge en vaccine, hvis det skal lykkes at forstå, hvorfor disse personer ikke vil vaccineres og dermed skabe målrettede indsatser og kommunikationen. Der findes dog ikke meget forskning, der bidrager med den type viden. Den hidtidige forskning differentierer ikke ift. socioøkonomiske determinanter i deres undersøgelser af bagvedliggende årsager, og de årsagsforklaringer som størstedelen af de eksisterende studier præsenterer er kategoriske og generelle. Vi frembringer derfor i dette studie viden om, hvad der kan forklare, at nogle personer med begrænsede socioøkonomiske ressourcer fravælger at blive vaccineret mod COVID-19. Undersøgelsen er baseret på empiri fra interviews med seks uvaccinerede personer, der er udvalgt på baggrund af deres socioøkonomiske karakteristika. Med udgangspunkt i den kritik flere fagfolk har rettet mod regeringens italesættelse og forståelse af vaccineskepsis og vaccineskeptikere, har vi foretaget et empirisk-forankret kvalitativt studie, der har til formål at opnå dyb og specifik viden om, hvad der fordrer et fravalg blandt denne gruppe. Da vi ved at vaccineskepsis er komplekst og ikke kan reduceres til overordnede årsagsforklaringer, har vi haft fokus på at undersøge de narrativer om COVID-19-vaccinen og COVID-19, som informanterne oplever som sande ved at anvende Arlie Hochschilds begreb om deep stories. Vi har yderligere anskuet informanternes forståelser og ageren ift. COVID-19-vaccinen i et perspektiv af Pierre Bourdieus habitusbegreb med det formål at undersøge, om disse personers ageren er særligt relateret til konteksten COVID-19 eller om deres fravalg af vaccinen i højere grad kan ses som et udtryk for indlejrede strukturer for handling, der er særlige for denne gruppe. Med udgangspunkt i Axel Honneths begrebsapparat fra hans teori om anerkendelse undersøger vi, hvilke oplevelser af manglende anerkendelse informanterne har i relation til deres vaccinationsvalg, og teoretiserer med udgangspunkt i empirien over, hvordan disse oplevelser potentielt kan øge informanternes skepsis til vaccinen. Det gør vi, fordi vi ønsker at nuancere forståelsen af vaccineskepsis, fordi vi ser at der under COVID-19 pandemien mellem dem der blevet vaccineret og dem der ikke er blevet vaccineret. Vi ønsker derfor at udlede samfundsrelevant viden der bidrager til den socialvidenskablig forskning og som kan bidrage med en nuancering og en forståelse som Regeringen, myndigheder osv. såvels som sundhedsfaglige personer kan bruge som viden til at udvikle kommunikation og praksis. Dette er derfor også håb om, at dette speciale kommer til at gavne som oplever mistillid til en COVID-19 vaccine uafsagt årsag til dette. By the arrival of the new Corona virus in 2019 we saw a disease that became a widespread pandemic already at the beginning of 2020. This called out for an urgent world-wide health strategy to stop and contain the fast transmission of the disease. This led most countries, including Denmark, to distribute a vaccine against COVID-19. With the introduction of a vaccine against COVID-19 - which was seen as the strongest tool in the ongoing pandemic - a rise in vaccine hesitancy also saw the light of the day. Denmark has one of the highest rates of vaccine willingness, however about 20% of the Danish population are still to accept the offer of the vaccine. International as well as national research on vaccine hesitancy has shown that among different groups in the society, the ones with lower socioeconomic resources are more prone to reject a vaccine compared to groups with more socioeconomic resources. In connection with the roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine, the Government, including the Prime Minister, has called on the population to accept the vaccine. This, though, has been criticized by several experts for being moralizing; so rather than shaming those who have not yet been vaccinated, the Government has been encouraged by experts to gain knowledge about what creates vaccine scepticism in the given context. This led us to being curious about what might explain why people with limited socio-economic resources opt out of the COVID-19 vaccine during this still on-going pandemic in a Danish context. To be able to explain what makes people with limited socio-economic resources opt out of the COVID-19 vaccine, we conducted a qualitative empirical-led case study. In the spring of 2022, we conducted four individual interviews and one group interview. All participants met the requirement of having limited socioeconomic resources and having opted out on the COVID-19 vaccine. In this study, we apply Pierre Bourdieu's concept of habitus to understand the background of the participants' action. We apply Hochschild's concept of 'deep stories' to find the participants' deep truths about the COVID-19 vaccine and with Axel Honneth's concept of recognition we explored what experiences of lack of recognition our participants had experienced in connection with the fact that they opted out of a vaccine, and how these experiences affect their understandings of the COVID-19 vaccine. The overall explanations are consistent with the results of previous research. However, we found that these causes are part of a deeply rooted narrative about the COVID-19 vaccine and COVID-19, which are rooted emotionally rather than rationally. Feelings of fear are pervasive for all participants in their actions related to the COVID-19 vaccine. Most participants have embedded dispositions to act in a way that predisposes to an opt-out of the COVID-19 vaccine. All of the participants have a habitual distrust of either the state, the authorities, the politicians and/or the pharmaceutical industry. Some of them have embedded dispositions to act in a specific way in relation to health that stands in opposition to vaccination strategies. Our findings also show that several of the individuals in this group experience being shamed and do not experience being recognized with the consequence that they seek out online communities with other vaccine sceptics. Our study and findings calls out for further and deeper research on underlying structures that drives and amplifies vaccine hesitancy among people with limited socio-economic resources.

Doing voluntary work in Denmark is considered a widespread phenomenon, with around 40% of the Danish population volunteering one way or another. This culture of volunteering is also the backbone of one of Europe's largest music festivals, Roskilde Festival, where 30.000 volunteers work with a tiny professional team to create a temporary city of 120.000 participants for 8 days, every summer. Through an organizational-psychological approach, this project investigates how a festival of this scale manages to maintain a non-profit multi-divisional organizational structure, where most working roles, from food stands to cable work, to coordination and management are sorted in independent teams. Most of these roles are voluntary, and many volunteers choose to come back year after year, and to work extensive hours to take part in running the festival. We held a focus group interview with four of the volunteers who work +100 hours in the IT department, to understand the culture of their work environment and their volunteer community, as well as what motivates them to do a job that isn't particularly interesting, for a humble reward. We also hosted two expert interviews with one volunteer coordinator and a recruitment officer, both in volunteering positions, about how the volunteers are managed, what is done to engage them and how they have managed to handle a COVID-19 crisis with two canceled festival runs. We use Edgar and Peter Schein’s Organizational Culture and Leadership, to analyze the layers of culture in the IT department, Chris Mowles and Ralph Stacey’s Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics to analyze the supposed complex structure that characterizes the voluntary work environment. Furthermore, we use Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan's Self-Determination Theory to analyze what motivates the volunteers to stay committed to their work and what maintains their connection to it after two canceled festival seasons. We found that the volunteer culture might be partly threatened from the increased dropout rate, since it destabilizes the balance between experienced and inexperienced volunteers. This can make the workload heavier on the remainders and remove some of the motivation, with the loss of a stable community feeling. Regardless, Roskilde Festival has had a fundamental role in many of the volunteers' summers for decades, and two years' absence has not removed its place in either the volunteers' hearts or the festival-goers, and the volunteers are seen as capable of recuperating the communal culture of the organization again.

This master’s thesis wishes to examine how The Danish Health Authority (DHA) has handled inquiries from the Danish media during covid-19, and to which extent the handling of the media’s inquiries has affected the interaction between the DHA and the Danish media. Based on the study, the thesis concludes that the DHA has given priority to responding to the inquiries of the media. We see this, among other findings, when the DHA initially hires more employees to handle the inquiries, and that the DHA has answered or referred 80% of the inquiries received during covid-19. In addition, the thesis concludes that the media has found great interest in the announcement from the DHA. The thesis has collected inquiries from 11 different Danish media and they have accounted for a total of 6.991 inquiries to the DHA during covid-19. In addition we see signs that the media’s interest increases when there are announcements from the DHA. This suggests that the DHA handling of inquiries has meant that the interaction between the DHA and the media has been well-functioning if the media’s agendas have been in line with the agenda of the DHA. The head of press at the DHA Tina Gustavsen has an experience that the interaction between the DHA and the media during covid-19 has been well-functioning. However, the data of this thesis show that the media have been referred to other relevant authorities approximately every fourth time, and that it is more difficult to get an inquiry answered when the DHA is busy. Furthermore Tina Gustavsen experiences that the media has a great understanding of the situation of the DHA, that there is good cooperation, and that the media’s agenda to a large extent is in line with the agenda of the DHA. According to the study’s theoretical perspectives, it is typical during a crisis where the media’s most important role is to save lives, which they, among other things, live up to by passing on information to the public. Especially in the beginning of covid-19, it seems that the DHA and the media are trying to adapt to each other in terms of the interaction and in terms of getting covid-19 on the agenda. When society reaches the last phase of mediatization, it is usually the media that has the upper hand, but this thesis suggests that the DHA and the media takes turns to have a slight advantage during covid-19. The media has the upper hand when it comes to reaching the public, and it semmes that the DHA has a slight upper hand in regards to announcements, which has given them a greater influence on the agenda, because of the media’s interest in covid-19.

This thesis examines what characterized the coverage of the coronavirus pandemic by the five biggest Danish newspapers in the beginning of the lockdown and one year later. The human sources in 1295 different articles from march 2020 and march 2021 by the newspapers Berlingske, B.T., Ekstra Bladet, Jyllands-Posten and Politiken have been examined in a quantitative content analysis in order to uncover if the newspapers had different and/or similar priorities in the coverage of the coronapandemic. Furthermore, this thesis examines whether these newspapers accommodated different political interests during the lockdown, and whether or not the newspapers contributed to a certain framing of the coronavirus. Lastly, this thesis also examines how the political landscape was characterized in the media during the beginning of the pandemic and one year after the lockdown of Danish society.