ON
← Back to feed
NOCulture2 days ago

She wants less publicity.

The article discusses concerns with the current system of public transparency regarding job applications in the public sector. While the intention behind making these lists publicly available is to allow taxpayers to ensure the correct people are hired and to prevent favoritism, the article argues that this does not work in practice. Applicants can request their names be removed under certain criteria, leading to lists that are often heavily edited and do not provide real insight into who is applying.

Riktig med et hakk mindre formell offentlighet

Dagens lederartikkel

Publisert: 19.06.2026 07:38

Lederen gir uttrykk for Aftenpostens syn. Sjefredaktør og politisk redaktør har ansvar for innholdet.

Intensjonen med dagens ordning er god. Ved at søkerlisten til jobber i det offentlige legges frem, kan skattebetalerne – de som betaler lønnen – kontrollere at riktig person ansettes. Åpenhet skal også forebygge kameraderi og styrke tilliten til offentlig forvaltning.

I praksis fungerer det ikke slik. Søkere kan kreve sitt navn fjernet etter bestemte kriterier. Noen får det innvilget, andre ikke. Listen som til slutt leses av en journalist eller en annen interessert, er gjerne så frisert at den ikke gir reelt innsyn. Den eller de mest aktuelle kandidatene står der ikke.

Les hele saken med abonnement

Read the full article at Aftenposten

1 reports

AftenpostenParty-aligned🔒Center2 days ago
She wants less publicity.

The article discusses concerns with the current system of public transparency regarding job applications in the public sector. While the intention behind making these lists publicly available is to allow taxpayers to ensure the correct people are hired and to prevent favoritism, the article argues that this does not work in practice. Applicants can request their names be removed under certain criteria, leading to lists that are often heavily edited and do not provide real insight into who is applying.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced critique of the current transparency measures without taking a clear ideological stance. It highlights both the intended benefits of the policy and practical challenges without favoring one side over another.