Press Releases
For a long time, the leader of SPD, Tomio Okamura, criticized the media for being untruthful and biased, but considered them tools for engaging with the public and for supporting his statements. Okamura’s stance towards the media has changed after leaving the Dawn for the SPD, and was further influenced by social crises. His attitude towards alternative media was largely positive. This is evident from a study by Alena Kluknavská and Vlastimil Havlík from the National Institute SYRI, further contributed to by the political scientist Jozef Kunc.
The scientists analyzed 1207 randomly selected Facebook posts from 2013 to 2020 in which Okamura mentioned the media. The study shows that he alluded to them in three ways. “Most of the time, Okamura labeled the media as untruthful, biased, and manipulative. At the same time, he utilized them as information sources and as a communication arena, which can be used for spreading his own messages,” described Alena Kluknavská from the National Institute SYRI and Masaryk University.
Okamura’s attitudes concerning the media have changed over the years – for example, he viewed them differently as the leader of the Dawn party and as the leader of the SPD. “At the time when he led the Dawn, he more often used the media as information sources. After founding and consolidating the SPD, his communication moved towards stronger allegations of untruthfulness, which corresponded with the change of the party profile and with a more distinct voter mobilization strategy,” remarked Kluknavská.
Okamura’s approach towards the media also changed regarding critical political topics, including the 2015 and 2016 refugee crisis and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. “In the refugee crisis period, his attacks on the media intensified, as he portrayed them as actors failing in their service to the public. At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the intensity of the attacks lowered. This happened because the media fulfilled an important information function,” explained Kluknavská, and added that the topic of the pandemic was harder to present as a conflict of “people versus elites”.
The researchers also examined whether Okamura’s stance was the same towards different types of media. “He was the most critical when mentioning mainstream media, especially the public service media, as he often depicted them as biased and influenced by the political elites. On the other hand, he viewed alternative media more positively and used their content more often, thereby increasing their legitimacy,” said Kluknavská. However, promoting alternative media can have a negative impact on society.
“If a political leader systematically and uncritically shares the content of alternative news media, they can boost their credibility in the eyes of their supporters. That can deepen information bubbles and weaken the facts we share in society and on which we base our public debates,” concluded Kluknavská.
Read more: https://tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09668136.2025.2593332
Alena Kluknavská works as an assistant professor at the Department of Media Studies and Journalism of Masaryk University. Her expertise lies in the areas of political communication with a special research focus on populist, radical-right and post-factual political discourses and on the interplay between politics and the media. Within the framework of SYRI, she deals with the issue of political communication, especially populist and anti-populist communication on social networks, in the context of crises with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic.