French riots: the feedback effect on French journalists
In these days, it is difficult to be a French journalist when you have to talk about the Paris suburb riots. Either you are accused of self-censorship and political correctness, or of damaging France's image by excessive coverage!
The first answer is to point out that some of the most well-known French columnists and journalists have reaped as they sowed: during the London attacks and the Katrina hurricane, they gave a lot of lessons, saying that such catastrophies couldn't happen in France.
For instance, it was said that "ghettos" didn't exist in France and that our (costly) French public services would avoid panic and disorganisation when confronted with a natural catastrophy. Nonsense.
It is the reason why I can understand that foreign journalists living in France or aware of the French press' attitude were upset by such self-satisfaction (or ignorance). And consequently, when they had to comment and analyze the French riots, the foreign columnists were more than pleased to retaliate in the same manner: poor France who don't know how to control suburb teenagers! They overplay the French situation and it is, as we say in French "de bonne guerre" (it's only fair).
Beyond this remark, some major points were neglected about the French events:
1) a strong divide behind the coverage done by the American and the British press and the Continental European press. If the tone was dramatic in the anglo-saxon world, analysis and comments were more balanced in Germany, Spain and Italy. With this major question: can it happen in our country?
2) a classical divide between the TV and radio coverage and what was written in national and quality newspapers. Newspaper headlines were less provocative than CNN's "Paris burning" or Fox News' "Muslim riots". A citizen only watching American networks could have the impression that a sort of "revolution" happened in France. The chasm between image and reality is shocking, demonstrating the substantial difference between television and newspaper journalism's ethical guidelines.
3) Have a look on Technorati / Paris riots and you will be surprised by the poor quality of comments in the blogosphere. Theoretically, blogs challenge and balance the so-called mainstream media. In this specific case, polarized weblogs repeated political viewpoints without any originality (nevertheless read this interesting posting from Andres Kupfer). For instance, it is difficult to understand why the French events are mainly called "muslim riots" when a majority of analysts - Emmanuel Todd, André Glucksmann, Olivier Roy... - say that there are no religious motivations in the unrest. Blogs are here the resonance box of rumors and unchecked facts (for instance when they comment the imaginary "French intifada").
4) Last but not least, the sanitized coverage of French broadcast networks - no footage of burning cars decided four days after the riots started - is really unethical. On the short term, you can understand that shocking images can encourage rioters, but in the long term citizens need to trust their media: if not, the result will be that rumors will prevail on balanced coverage and truth. The worst scenario in democracy.
Sources: Technorati, the Tocqueville Connection, the Village Voice and MediaGuardian.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: French riots: the feedback effect on French journalists.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5790
"For instance, it is difficult to understand why the French events are mainly called "muslim riots" when a majority of analysts - Emmanuel Todd, André Glucksmann, Olivier Roy... - say that there are no religious motivations in the unrest"
I understand that while it may not be "religiously motivated" many of the young men involved in this are from families who 2 or 3 generations back emmigrated to France - most of these people happen to be from Muslim areas and kept their religion, passing it on to their children. Coincidence?
I do know though, from firsthand experience, that many French Muslims (and immagrants) feel that they are treated like second class citizens and behave accordingly.
Please don't tell us that it is impossible for religion to have anything to do with this-it's in no way outside the realm of possibilty. A person's religion forms their mentality (whether it's Hinduism or Atheism or Christianity)
People need to think seriously about this and arrive at their own conclusions.
"A person's religion forms their mentality (whether it's Hinduism or Atheism or Christianity)"
Why can't people be who they are, and not what they believe in? I believe Mr Pecquerie meant that the media shouldn't be addressing the issue of these people's religion, islamic or otherwise, but why they're rioting. Issues seem to be totally skewed when the media report the religion and/or race of victims or criminals (I couldn't think of a more general word). Yes I understand the point your trying to make, and it is a valid one on the discrimination of muslims. Their anger is completely waranted, but does this really dominate the reason as why the rioting started? It seemed to me in my (very humble) opinion that it was more of the fact that living conditions bordered on third world status. The fact that some or many are muslims only had the effect (if any) to further isolate them. But i don't think it was a primary factor. But, hey I'm just a student what do I know?
Humble Student
On the point 4 of the post. It's more than intriguing that big media just played down any kind of topic even though it is of an obvious interest for readers / viewers. Yes, media have a social responsability and don't have to encourage unrest. Bur their prime duty is to INFORM the community they are part of. They live by the people, for the people they provide with news. And those people want to know what it is.
Besides, it is terrible that the decisions on coverage have been that unanimous. Competition should do its job, with audiences eventually choosing what they want to see.
On point 3 that is, interrelations between riots and religion, I 'd just like to point out how hot a theme religion is in so many newsrooms. Often times in newsrooms religion seems to transform a into an issue. Isn't it a bias?
"Why can't people be who they are, and not what they believe in?"
Aren't a person's beliefs part of who they are?
Anyways, about the "interrelations between riots and relgion". The problem in France goes deeper than a superficial lack of integration. Many immagrants DON'T want to integrate. They don't like what they see in the country and choose to retain their own habits and customs.They don't see France as their country - they see it as a foreign country which they are living in and getting a very bad deal in. Islam is a very complex religion and if followed faithfully, is not a religion of peace (as we see from history). This is not bias. This is fact. I see a relation here. And what we get is riots.