Actor Robert De Niro’s spectacular confrontation with Donald Trump has resurfaced in both social and editorial media at intervals since it was first written during Trump’s initial term as president.

The most interesting aspect of what he wrote wasn’t his characterisation of the president but his view on what should be done to establish dialogue with Trump’s supporters: “Let’s not talk about ‘democracy.’ ‘Democracy’ may be our Holy Grail, but to others, it’s just a word, a concept. In their embrace of Trump, they’ve already turned their backs on it.

“Let’s instead talk about right and wrong. Let’s talk about humanity. Let’s talk about kindness. About safety in the world. Security for our families. Decency. Let’s welcome them back.”

De Niro’s appeal is just as relevant in Europe as it is in the United States.

We can debate whether his approach is naive, whether it might be perceived as elite condescension toward “the misguided,” or even as meaningless. After all, who gets to define what is “right and wrong,” what creates “safety,” or what counts as “decency?”

Regardless of these possible objections, I believe the reflection is both correct and necessary; I think De Niro hits the mark. I spent much of last year writing an analysis on the relationship between the democratic level in EU countries and the capabilities of editorial media.

Democracy can mean many things

There are several categories of “democracy.” The most relevant are “electoral democracy” and “liberal democracy.”

In the first, free elections are sufficient. In the second, one must also respect fundamental rights for minorities, the rule of law, and mechanisms to prevent abuse of power. In other words, democracy can take many forms, and it is therefore possible to label a society many of us would view as brutal and intolerant as a democracy.

During Trump’s first term, the editorial media in the United States widely spread what they likely saw as a dystopian warning: “Democracy dies in darkness.” That seemingly had little effect — the man was re-elected, and the media were further weakened.

But lacking a strong connection to the concept of “democracy” is not the same as endorsing lies and bullying. When leaders do the opposite of what we were taught as children — and try to teach our own children — the world feels more unsafe, and we long to find what is good and decent again.

Stronger counterforces

The purpose of the analysis I worked on was to better understand how editor-led media influence a country’s democratic level. The conclusion was that this influence has been significantly weakened over the past 10 to 15 years.

This is partly because the media themselves have weakened, and partly because the counterforces have grown stronger — though not so strong that nothing can be done about it.

In the Nordic countries, where press freedom, editorial independence, and public trust remain high, journalism is increasingly being recognised as part of national preparedness. A recent Norwegian government white paper on societal resilience emphasised “trust between people — and between people and institutions — is the very foundation of emergency readiness.”

In that context, fact-based journalism plays a critical role: It counters polarisation, fosters shared understanding, and helps societies remain open, cohesive, and alert to manipulation. Seen this way, journalism is not only a democratic safeguard — it is a pillar of societal security.

Embedding trust in newsroom culture

At Schibsted, we see this role clearly. We’ve launched a cross-editorial trust initiative in Norway and Sweden to better understand what builds and maintains trust. We’re applying those insights through practical measures. For instance, there is more transparency around bylines and sourcing, and clearer communication about editorial methods.

We’re also engaging with the responsible use of AI in journalism. As part of the AI transparency network, we help shape industry standards on when and how to inform readers about automated content and algorithmic influence. These steps are small but essential in preserving public trust — and, through it, democracy itself.

And while these are just examples from one company, they reflect a broader truth: The media’s contribution to democratic resilience lies not in defending democracy as an idea but in practicing its values every day.

The media do not promote democratic values by writing about “democracy” but by providing people with accurate information about what’s happening in society.

“Humanity,” “kindness,” “safety,” and “decency” are not common terms in the news flow, but they remain part of the foundation for most people’s sense of a good life. That’s why they deserve attention — and, preferably, a broad, shared conversation.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .