This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/22/french-press-stifled-regulation-jerome-cahuzac
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| If you think the French press is stifled by regulation, ask Jérôme Cahuzac | If you think the French press is stifled by regulation, ask Jérôme Cahuzac |
| (1 day later) | |
| The same old song has been playing since the beginning of the Leveson inquiry, and now that press regulation has finally materialised and is on the table, it's getting louder. Many of my British colleagues share the views expressed by Daniel Hannan on the Telegraph website: if Britain adopts the new regulatory framework, it will become like France, with her "servile", "supine" and "conformist" press. Oh, and terribly pro-European too. This alone, surely, is a vision of hell for a Telegraph journalist. | The same old song has been playing since the beginning of the Leveson inquiry, and now that press regulation has finally materialised and is on the table, it's getting louder. Many of my British colleagues share the views expressed by Daniel Hannan on the Telegraph website: if Britain adopts the new regulatory framework, it will become like France, with her "servile", "supine" and "conformist" press. Oh, and terribly pro-European too. This alone, surely, is a vision of hell for a Telegraph journalist. |
| According to Hannan, a press that receives public subsidies cannot "deviate from the approved line on questions of tax, immigration, Europe and so on", and be independent. As for French privacy laws, Hannan finds nothing good in them: "What begins with an attempt to protect privacy ends with politicians deciding which opinions are acceptable." | According to Hannan, a press that receives public subsidies cannot "deviate from the approved line on questions of tax, immigration, Europe and so on", and be independent. As for French privacy laws, Hannan finds nothing good in them: "What begins with an attempt to protect privacy ends with politicians deciding which opinions are acceptable." |
| Hannan confuses laws with culture. No press regulation, royal charter or statutory law could ever dent the nature of British journalism which is – culturally – incisive, inquisitive and unyielding. Likewise, an end of public subsidies to the French press and the scrapping of privacy laws wouldn't suddenly make French journalists less deferential and more voyeuristic. | Hannan confuses laws with culture. No press regulation, royal charter or statutory law could ever dent the nature of British journalism which is – culturally – incisive, inquisitive and unyielding. Likewise, an end of public subsidies to the French press and the scrapping of privacy laws wouldn't suddenly make French journalists less deferential and more voyeuristic. |
| French journalists' respect for institutions and the people who represent them, for better and for worse, mirrors that of French society at large. The French are respectful of institutions they have ardently fought for since 1789. Charles I may have lost his head before Louis XVI, as Margaret Thatcher kindly reminded François Mitterrand during the celebrations of the bicentenary of the French revolution in Paris, yet there are still hereditary peers in the House of Lords. British journalists, and British society on the whole, have much less respect for their parliamentary monarchy and their political class. Less respect means more acuity but also more spite – there lies a peculiarly British, and not always entirely rational, pleasure in seeing the powerful fall and be publically shamed. | French journalists' respect for institutions and the people who represent them, for better and for worse, mirrors that of French society at large. The French are respectful of institutions they have ardently fought for since 1789. Charles I may have lost his head before Louis XVI, as Margaret Thatcher kindly reminded François Mitterrand during the celebrations of the bicentenary of the French revolution in Paris, yet there are still hereditary peers in the House of Lords. British journalists, and British society on the whole, have much less respect for their parliamentary monarchy and their political class. Less respect means more acuity but also more spite – there lies a peculiarly British, and not always entirely rational, pleasure in seeing the powerful fall and be publically shamed. |
| Again, on continental newspaper "pro-EU" coverage, Hannan is mistaken. No press regulation could dictate British editors to suddenly write differently about European affairs. It couldn't even prevent tabloids from publishing their notorious fantasy EU stories. British attitudes towards Europe are the product of history, and culture. The French press may appear as ridiculously pro-European to Hannan as the British press, from the Daily Mail to the BBC, can in French eyes look ridiculously reverential towards the Queen. | Again, on continental newspaper "pro-EU" coverage, Hannan is mistaken. No press regulation could dictate British editors to suddenly write differently about European affairs. It couldn't even prevent tabloids from publishing their notorious fantasy EU stories. British attitudes towards Europe are the product of history, and culture. The French press may appear as ridiculously pro-European to Hannan as the British press, from the Daily Mail to the BBC, can in French eyes look ridiculously reverential towards the Queen. |
| There exists a different culture on either side of the Channel – British journalists are perhaps quicker to bark than their French counterparts, butthat doesn't mean they actually bite. While no publication in Britain dared reprint the Danish cartoons in 2006, in fear or reprisals, the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo reprinted them in the name of freedom of expression. Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy was on Thursday evening placed under formal investigation for "abuse of a vulnerable person" in the L'Oréal heir scandal saga, following the investigation of French news website Médiapart, set up by former Le Monde editor Edwy Plenel. | There exists a different culture on either side of the Channel – British journalists are perhaps quicker to bark than their French counterparts, butthat doesn't mean they actually bite. While no publication in Britain dared reprint the Danish cartoons in 2006, in fear or reprisals, the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo reprinted them in the name of freedom of expression. Former French president Nicolas Sarkozy was on Thursday evening placed under formal investigation for "abuse of a vulnerable person" in the L'Oréal heir scandal saga, following the investigation of French news website Médiapart, set up by former Le Monde editor Edwy Plenel. |
| A few days ago, France's budget minister Jérôme Cahuzac resigned from the government following another Médiapart journalistic investigation. Last September, Libération featured France's richest entrepreneur, Bernard Arnault, on its cover with the headline: "Sod off, you rich arsehole!" Arnault was accused of wanting to move to Belgium for tax reasons. France may not have George Orwell but it does have Emile Zola. | A few days ago, France's budget minister Jérôme Cahuzac resigned from the government following another Médiapart journalistic investigation. Last September, Libération featured France's richest entrepreneur, Bernard Arnault, on its cover with the headline: "Sod off, you rich arsehole!" Arnault was accused of wanting to move to Belgium for tax reasons. France may not have George Orwell but it does have Emile Zola. |
| Besides, when France's fourth estate shows weakness, the people take over, in the streets, and finish the job of ousting politicians and scrapping bills. If British newspapers have more teeth, it may only be to compensate for the lack of people's direct political participation. | Besides, when France's fourth estate shows weakness, the people take over, in the streets, and finish the job of ousting politicians and scrapping bills. If British newspapers have more teeth, it may only be to compensate for the lack of people's direct political participation. |
| My British colleagues shouldn't panic about press regulation. With the press tycoons Britain has, you need one. If this restraints the lynching and hacking mentality of some of them, it could even be a good thing. Fear not, no royal charter will ever undermine the indomitable nature of British journalists, which will continue to be universally admired. | My British colleagues shouldn't panic about press regulation. With the press tycoons Britain has, you need one. If this restraints the lynching and hacking mentality of some of them, it could even be a good thing. Fear not, no royal charter will ever undermine the indomitable nature of British journalists, which will continue to be universally admired. |