Journalist lambasts French war coverage

The word envy has french roots, no?

PARIS - Reporter Alain Hertoghe’s book accused the French press of not being objective in its coverage of the U.S.-led war in Iraq (news - web sites). His newspaper fired him.

The book, “La Guerre a Outrances” (The War of Outrages), criticizes the French reporting for continually predicting the war would end badly for the U.S.-led coalition.

“Readers can’t understand why the Americans won the war,” Hertoghe said in a telephone interview. “The French press wasn’t neutral.”

The book, published Oct. 15, charges French reporters were more patriotic than journalistic and what was written amounted to disinformation.

It examines daily coverage by five major French dailies, including Hertoghe’s own La Croix, in the three weeks from the first strikes on Baghdad on March 20 to April 9 when Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s regime fell.

“As soon as there were a couple of wounded, of dead, they were talking about Vietnam, Stalingrad,” Hertoghe said.

In contrast, work by journalists traveling with U.S. troops indicated that “the war was advancing well,” he said.

Hertoghe, a 44-year-old Belgian, said reporters reflected the emotional high in France more than realities on the battlefield, becoming caught up in France’s central role in leading the opposition to the war at the United Nations (news - web sites).

“The French public was so carried away,” he said. The journalists, he wrote in the book, “dreamed of an American defeat.”

Hertoghe, who covered the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites) and the presidential campaign that put President Bush (news - web sites) in the White House, was assistant editor-in-chief of La Croix’s online version during the Iraq war.

Besides war coverage in La Croix, the book examines that of the independent Le Monde, the conservative Le Figaro, the leftist Liberation and the regional daily Ouest-France, which has the largest circulation in France.

Over three weeks, the five papers carried 29 headlines condemning Saddam’s dictatorship and 135 blaming Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites).

Hertoghe was fired on Dec.15 for a “loss of confidence” following publication of the book. La Croix, in a letter, cited four points, including damaging the newspaper’s reputation, Hertoghe said.

La Croix refused to comment.

Efforts for comment from Le Monde — the paper Hertoghe targeted most severely — also were unsuccessful, with the international editor away on vacation. A Paris-based reporter cited in the book did not answer his phone.

Only a free newspaper handed out in the Metro, “20 Minutes,” has so far reviewed Hertoghe’s book.

“The silence is deafening” in France, although there have been rave reviews in Belgium, said Ronald Blunden, editorial director at Hertoghe’s publishing house, Calmann-Levy.

One thing common amongst the people who accuse Americans of being brainwashed is that they are brainwashed themselves in one way or the other....The public opinion in these countries is so unanimous and media so much united in condemnation of America that a voice contrary to their's is hard to find....on the other hand here in America there is more chance of hearing the contrarian arguments and people than any place else on earth.

chanmahi, is listening to the majority of media organisations in the US especially Fox news your idea of an America where you can hear the contrarian arguments ?? It really makes me laugh to think that Americans actually believe all the tripe being broadcast from these stations.

Bottom line is that the vast majority of people believe what they want to believe. The media feeds people what they want and reinforces the things they want to believe so that they will come back for more. If you tell people what they don't want to hear or things that shake their belief structures, they will stop coming to you and will go somewhere else where their beliefs are reinforced and they feel comfortable.

I think what makes the US better than most places is that there are far more sources for news than anywhere else. Each source may be biased, but people who are open-minded can read/listen to many sources expressing opposing biases. This allows them to use their own brain to filter the news and form a better informed opinion.

The story UTD references says there are five (5) significant daily papers in France. Heck, there are what ... 3 ... signficant dailies in NYC alone (5 if you want to count USA Today and the Wall Street Journal). Most major cities in the US have at least 2 major newspapers that usually compete for readers with differing editorial slants. In most cities, you can also get the NY Times, the LA Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. With cable TV, you can access ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, PBS, 4 or 5 local news shows, and probably some others. There is no single party line that these sources adhere to.

All but the biggest anti-America bashers would have to admit that all these publications and TV news media provide a wide-divergence of opinion and news coverage.

Yes people can believe what they want to believe especially in the US where the the majority of the larger media organisations lean strongly to the right of US politics and their number one news source is the Fox news network, which everyone knows as the mouthpiece for the Bush Administration. There needs to be more tabloids/media channels which have independant editorials and print very fair and unbiased articles. But unfortunately Americans are all too happy to believe the propoganda that is shown in Fox news, Washington Times, News Max... etc.

As for France, what you didn't mention is that there are many other sources of news i.e regional journals, radio stations, TV channels etc They dont necessarily have to obtain their news from the 5 main tabloids.

as you said 5 main newspapers.. these are 5 newspapers of international repute ..

there are many many more local newspapers.. each city has them.

plus compare the fact that france if about 58-60 million people..

new york city has estimated population of 17 - 20 million.. rising to 30 million for New York Metropolitan area,,,

so in comparison. france isnt doing too badly in that regards..

plus there is a law in Europe on how much control a single media company can have in a market.. so there are strict controls on cross media and same media ownership..

such is not the case in US and many of the newspapers from different cities are under ownership of single parent company..

in the end. was there any single newspaper on tv station which was critical of the govt and the war? though we doknow a fair number of americans were against it.. where was the 'not adhering to single party line' argument for that?

French = "cheese eating surrender monkeys" - Groundskeeper Willy

Let the French moan all they want, they had financial interests in Iraq just as much as they had accused the US of having. Their media is ofcourse tilted.

This entire US resentment is very deep and too long to explain.
The whole thing sums up in one word: jealousy.

How can a country that was created with our assistance, be the world's only superpower. The French language has dwindled down from it elite status as a language of diplomacy. Their culture is of arrogance and elitism. Let them squabble over the truth.

Sure...The government and media of America is very unbiased...

Where a pastor like Franklin Graham can come up on the world stage and call Islam as an 'evil and wicked religion' and be invited the next day to lead the presidential congregation in prayer...

Where books like 'The Great Deception' can be banned...

And one word of condemnation from any Islamic cleric can be an incitement to terror...

Is it any wonder that French news agencies can be dubbed as 'anti-American'...

Now the term 'anti-American' is on the same par that Jews throw on everyone's face like 'anti-Semite' and 'holocaust' everytime they are cornered about something...

Like Samuel Johnson once said: "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"...And who is more patriotic in his speeches than Dubya...

lajawab

i got only one word for you

huh??

btw.. what kinda weed did you smoke?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by blackzero: *
in the end. was there any single newspaper on tv station which was critical of the govt and the war? though we doknow a fair number of americans were against it.. where was the 'not adhering to single party line' argument for that?
[/QUOTE]

First off, except in the editorial section, news sources are supposed to report the news not offer opinions critical or supportive of the government and war. And yes, in the editorial sections of various newspapers or on opinion shows, criticism of the Bush administration and the war was published/aired. The amount of coverage (on a percentage basis) given to those criticisms was equal to or greater than the percentage basis of those views held by the American people. In some cases, the amount of negativity was quite high. Don't you recall the hours upon hours of former or wanna-be generals wringing their hands about the poor war plan devised and how bogged down our forces were in Iraq about 2-3 days into the invasion?

Now, I ask you...were Americans more accurately informed about the progress of the war or were the Arab and French street? As noted in the article starting off this thread, the French people were uniformly, universally and absolutely mislead about the way things were going and couldn't believe it when we were in Bagdad. So too were all the Arab masses who listened to Arab media sources who uniformly latched on to Bagdad Bob's pronouncements of battlefield conditions until the tanks could be seen over his right shoulder.

At least as to accuracy in reporting the progress of the war, the American media scores far more points than the French or Arab media. Correct?

As to events in Iraq now, if you read the editorial pages of almost any newspaper and watch a representative sampling of TV news channels, you are exposed to far more critiques of the Bush administration's post-war plans than you are support for same.

Finally, I'm not sure I would give much stock to your opinion that Le Monde is a newspaper of international repute. ** Despite its inaccurate and false reporting of the battlefield progress in the war, ** a lot of people will share your opinion because a lot of people want to believe the general anti-American tripe it publishes. When a guy like assistant editor-in-chief of La Croix exposes the false and inaccurate reporting, it's much better to fire him and stay the course rather than accept the criticism and try to improve. The guy who wrote the book and exposed the French media was NOT an American and GWB lover for goodness sake. He was a high level insider of one of the five major French dailies.

Welcome to american ignorance. Myvoice you want French newspapers of international repute?

  1. Le Monde
  2. Le Monde Diplamtique
  3. Le Figaro.

Just because you speak only one language that doesnt mean all international news worth their salt are in english. The indepth analysis of Le Monde Diplomatique is better than most State Department Reports.

Plus honestly most diplomats read Le Monde. Plus what does Yahoo News know about international news papers of repute.

yawn france is so bad etc etc. Right? Well put it this way. Atleast these newspapers report the facts. The US newspapers dont report the facts. They report suited to the views held by their readers. It is news from a perspective. It aint the facts anymore.

If the US can do it with Fox news. Plus the IHT is not objective. Neither is the NYT. Der Spiegel in German is obejective as is Le Monde in French.

want an independent news.. read the independant

www.independant.co.uk

want unbiased tv news.. watch the bbc . or read it on the web

want one of the best analysis of world politics... read Le Monde...

thats not what i say.. that is what the people in media and politics say.

as for french or arab media not being accurate with regards to how far the us army was from baghdad.. would you be surprised to know that they were banned by american administration from the 'accompanying reporters'...

so of course you get the best source of information .. not from the french n arab media..

Blackzero has it on the money. Though i dont agree with the Independent comment as i dont read it so i cant say. But BBC and Le Monde. They are th best out there. Objective and damn good analysis.