It would be showing interest. With the era of homepages, that's more to listen to their speech, rather than learning what they stand for. Honestly I got no idea how those speeches looks like. How do the the police differ between audience and protestors that aren't yet active in protesting?
No, I'm not fond of troublemakers pretending to do social justice as an excuse for violence. The same people sometimes end up joining the nazi parties later on to get their violence kick that way. Both sides got people going on eachother hooligan style. Thing is, they're only a few % of the protesters. So what about the rights of the 95+% protesters?
No, I need to interpret what has been said. Politician speech is filled with things that need interpretation. SVP got 6 pages on how they want to improve the goverment and criticism of our current democracy. I can agree with them on some points, but in reality they say nothing on the how, making it empty, nice sounding rethorics.
Add that some sources can be taken at face value, while some can't. It's way preferble to have gotten hints that some messages might have way more bias than normal, since very few will go through the effort of making a very through source checking for everything. See that report that found a link between autism in black boys and vaccination, thanks to beating the data with a hammer throughly enough. That's boderline lies with a specific purpose.
You sure? Political violence are about 50-50 in Sweden. The violent left is probably about the same size, but can hide better in the way larger, non-violent left.
Bookmarks