Vilka är bidragsfuskarna? En kvalitativ innehållsanalys av fenomenet bidragsfusk i svenska tidningsmedier under perioden 2019-2021

Sammanfattning: Benefit fraud became a major topic in the Swedish news media during the 1990’s. The description of the benefit cheater in news reports has changed over time, often depending on the political landscape. The aim of this study was therefore to analyze how the phenomenon of benefit fraud is portrayed in news media in present time, between 2019-2021. The method chosen for this study was a qualitative content analysis using Håkan Jönsons problem perspective. The data used in the study consists of different types of articles from three major newspapers in Sweden, two traditional media channels and one alternative media. When analyzing our results, we applied discourse theory as well as the theoretical term governmentality related to neo-liberalism to understand both thoughts and opinions in terms of discourses as well as understand how the current political landscape might influence the thoughts and opinions of the current discourses surrounding benefit fraud. This study found that in large there are three major discourses surrounding benefit fraud between 2019-2021. The first being ‘everyday cheating’ which is characterized as something that can be done by anyone and is unrelated to factors such as an individual's income, ethnicity and gender. The second discourse is ‘organized crime’. This discourse has a focus on categorical affiliation, the problem of benefit cheating is linked to the group affiliation of non-Swedes and criminals. Within this discourse, the act of benefit cheating is usually referred to as an organized crime, that is, a planned and systematic crime. The third discourse found is the ‘system failure discourse’. This discourse lifts the focus away from the individuals and places the spotlight on the flawed system that surrounds the disbursement of benefits. The system in this discourse refers to the structures, laws, rules and regulations that curtail the discretion of the individual administrators who grant the benefits. Responsibility for incorrect payments being made lies within this discourse not on individuals who cheat or individual administrators who make mistakes, but rather on politicians who should review laws and regulations that can make it easier for administrators to reduce the number of incorrect payments.