How politicians are taking control

Experts say it is about control. Politicians increasingly bypass traditional media to speak directly to voters on their own terms.

“Podcasts allow politicians to control both message and format, which is appealing during campaigns,” says Dr. Nils Gustafsson, political scientist at Lund University.

Unlike short TV clips or social media posts, podcasts let leaders speak at length and set the narrative themselves.

Maintaining control

In Sweden, the podcast Ring statsministern has so far drawn modest media attention. Henrik Torehammar at SvD explains that for the Moderates, it strengthens Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson’s communication. 

“He’s skilled, but in traditional media it’s easy to lose the narrative. The podcast lets the party maintain full control,” he says.

Torehammar notes that while the Moderates are increasingly skeptical of traditional outlets, the podcast follows a familiar election format with real voter questions and genuine answers, far from empty propaganda.

Global trend

Globally, similar trends are emerging. In the US, politicians have faced criticism for casual podcasts that avoid tough questioning, but Sweden’s stronger media landscape limits that risk.

Social Democrat Ardalan Shekarabi also hosts a podcast, showing that the approach spans party lines.

Podcasts can also serve strategic purposes in campaigns. “These initiatives generate attention for campaign activity, which is valuable during elections,” Gustafsson says.

Young voters are a key target, though most listeners are likely party members or journalists.

Not a replacement

Experts stress that such platforms should complement, not replace, traditional journalism. 

“If politicians control both questions and distribution, it can reduce scrutiny. But as a supplement to speeches or town halls, it is not inherently problematic,” Gustafsson adds.

The podcast illustrates a global shift in political communication: a move toward longer, direct engagement with voters, while retaining control over message and framing.

While it may help parties reach audiences directly, it also raises questions about accountability and the health of democratic debate.