American newspapers aren’t the only ones in trouble. Their French cousins, including the once unassailable Le Monde, now are apparently going through a period of “extreme turbulence.” Of course, we must consider the source, The Independent, only yesterday dismissed on this site for its nonsensical reportage on the movie business. Nevertheless, Le Monde’s controversial editor Edwy Plenel is evidently quitting to go back to the “the simple pleasures of journalism and writing”.
Meanwhile, the oh-so-very-1968 Libération may be the target of a partial takeover bid by Edouard de Rothschild, of all people. What does this all mean (other than a better class of wine at staff meetings)? I’m not sure. We do know their papers are not selling. Some of our French readers will have more to say about this, I hope. (I’m not sure this has much to do with it, but I have observed that the French press is far more uniform than ours about foreign policy, as if democracy ended at their border.)(hat tip: AB)
UPDATE: Howard emails this explanation: Lagardère (formerly Matra) – controlled by the Lagardère family – has a major stake in the European aerospace and weapons sectors, along with control of the Hachette group. Hachette encompasses Paris Match, Elle, the only national Sunday newspaper and most newspapers in the Marseilles-Nice region. It is the biggest book publisher, the largest book distributor and the biggest newsagent in France. Dassault – controlled by the Dassault family – has substantial aeospace interests (eg produces the Mirage fighter) and in 2004 took control of Socpresse, the group that owns conservative daily newspaper Le Figaro, weekly news magazine L’Express, two of the largest regional newspapers (in Lille and Lyons) and over 60 other publications. Socpresse was formerly controlled by Robert Hersant.
That is why there is unanimity of opinion. The press is only interested is serving their weapons industry.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
3 Comments
1. Dirty Dingus:Detailed comment at my blog – http://www.di2.nu/blog.htm?20041130b
Nov 30, 2004 - 11:30 am 2. richard mcenroe:Can you imagine the outcry if McDonnell-Douglas-Boeing owned The New York Times?
Nov 30, 2004 - 5:36 pm 3. Ari Tai:In France, the press serves the state and the state serves the press. Last decade’s reporting of the tainted w/ AIDS blood scandal is but one other horrific example.
Francis Fukuyama in “Trust” highlights the difference in various societies expectations of their government. He points out how France is largely incapable of creating independent-of-the-state civil society solutions. IMO, their press is but one example.
In France, there is near-incestuous entanglement of state-and-corporate management and finances. The French see no difference between espionage undertaken to ensure their own national security and espionage in pursuit of their own business’ success (in (most of) their minds, as Fukuyama explains, there is no distance between the two). It is amusing to consider that the great capitalist hyperpower is incapable of this behavior (irrespective of conventional wisdom). This is why the French seldom have minor corporate scandals, only those-too-monumentally-embarrassing to be ignored.
My sense is the Europeans and especially the French are just governmentally and culturally delayed (relative to the U.S.). They’ve yet to experience the 1960s in U.S. terms (e.g. eventually their underclass in the northern Paris ghettos will riot and demand equality). They haven’t had the 70s (vietnam-ish) experience with their old colonies, or the shame of their head-of-government stepping down. And they certainly haven’t seen the corporate re-engineering of the 80s and 90s where time-in-job (i.e. relevance of existing skills, prior to new learning or retraining) moves from decades to years. And the discipline and responsibility-for-self this drives throughout a society
/Ari
Nov 30, 2004 - 8:14 pm