My faithful readers know that one of the purposes of this blog is to keep tabs on France-bashing in its subtle and not-so-subtle forms. The last post was a mild critique of a probably well-meaning British journalist who I felt had glossed over some of the nuances of French culture in a story about the mood in France during this year’s Tour de France.
This post is in response to an entirely different beast--a mean-spirited ("bigoted" is also an applicable word) Fox News broadcast that came out as London was chosen over Paris for the 2012 Olympics. John Gibson, a commentator with oddly yellow hair and a swooping comb-over, criticized the committee for not picking Paris. His rationale?
"It would have been a three-week period where we wouldn't have had to worry about terrorism. First, the French think they are so good at dealing with the Arab world that they would have gone out and paid every terrorist off. And things would have been calm. Or another way to look at it is the French are already up to their eyeballs in terrorists. The French hide them in miserable slums, out of sight of the rich people in Paris. So it would have been a treat, actually, to watch the French dealing with the problem of their own homegrown Islamist terrorists living in France already." (Full transcript available on Miquelon.org site.)
Under the brittle surface of this hateful screed, there is emptiness. The man has nothing to say. The diatribe is devoid of facts, humor, focus, or insight. It consists of pure invective. It equates French Muslims with terrorists and French non-Muslims with terrorist appeasers. He justifies his France-bashing by implying that France is a terrorism-sponsoring state. His assertions are shoddily cobbled together. The tirade culminates in the callous statement "They'd blow up Paris, and who cares?"
For anyone who thought that virulent French-bashing in the mass media had subsided, be aware that it is still stepping lively at "Faux" News.
Oh my goodness, I can't believe that there are people out there still like that. And this yahoo probably even thinks he's smart, too. Ick. I think I'm going to make your site required reading for my French students next year. Would you mind terribly if I turn your posts into worksheets? With appropriate credit, of course. . .
Posted by: Michele | July 19, 2005 at 09:37 AM
Michele,
Sure--use it as you wish. Since there is so much mindless France-trashing in the talking points of trolls of a certain political stripe, it is good to show students in any way we can that these are only unsupported opinions. Don't know if you have checked out Tennessee Bob, who provides a wealth of informative resources. (See the link to his "French Language and culture advocacy in the US".) Good luck with helping your students develop their critical thinking skills!
Posted by: Jean | July 19, 2005 at 12:15 PM
Consider the source - Fox News is scum. However, the danger is that a good number of Americans consider Fox News reliable and trustworthy. This type of racist rhetoric does not belong in journalistic discourse. Period.
Posted by: Elisabeth | July 20, 2005 at 08:53 AM
How right you are. But I encounter lots of students and professionals for whom O'Reilly, Hannity and their ilk have taken on a rock star-like aura. Their discursive style is formulaic and based in stereotypes, but perhaps delivered with a swagger that attracts a large viewership. The playwright John Patrick Shanley says that doubt requires more courage than conviction, but the Fox crowd seems to believe otherwise. Maybe these folks are tired of struggling with ambiguity and have decided to abolish it, at least in their little world. If one questions the consequences of such flawed thinking, one is smeared with the "politically correct" label. So anything goes, especially if the person on the receiving end is French, Muslim, or "liberal".
Posted by: jean | July 20, 2005 at 03:24 PM
Under the brittle surface of this hateful screed, there is emptiness
I read the cited links to Gibson's Fox news columns at Miquelon.org and no where did Gibson say: "They'd blow up Paris, and who cares?" as you claim. When did he say that? Did Fox edit their site after the fact or what? Read the links for yourself
Having read his two columns, as far as I could see, he is simply saying in tongue-in-cheek fashion, that he wishes the French would take terrorism more seriously. Personally, I think the French are doing much more to fight terrorism than they are given credit, but I fail to see how Gibson's opinion here in any way qualifies as "hateful screed".
It equates French Muslims with terrorists and French non-Muslims with terrorist appeasers
He did not equate all (or even most) French muslims with terrorists. You seem to be engaging in the same tactics that you accuse others of doing.
Posted by: curvedbrain | August 06, 2005 at 06:25 PM
Curved,
Thanks for weighing in. You can find the quotation in a July 9 article by Julian Borger in the Guardian, also on Miquelon.org. Even if Gibson had not said that, France-bashing would seem to be his stock-in-trade. I hate to rely on using bits and pieces of quotations to illustrate this, but it's hard to ignore that Gibson seems to have a pattern of doing scathing, but not-very-factual pieces about France. He said this on August 4: "The good news is that the French are about to have a few years of troubles and that might occupy their thoughts and attention. And maybe we won't hear so much complaining about us for a while. A break would be nice." I don't understand why he feels personally antagonized or what he thinks he needs a break from. He has the right to his opinion, as we all do. His just does not make sense to me, although at least it is consistent.
Posted by: jean | August 06, 2005 at 11:29 PM
Can I just say what a wonderful blog. The "France is weak on terrorism" slur is a nonsense. It is little known that an Algerian terrorist group tried to mount a 9/11 attack on France by flying a plane into the Eiffel Tower (this was several years before the WTC outrage). The plot was successfully and very firmly dealt with by the French security forces.
Now Jacques Chirac is hardly most people's idea of a decent politician. However his refusal to allow his country to be sucked into the mess that was Iraq (unlike our superpoodle Tony Blair)and his critique of the war put every US politician to shame.
France's tradition of laicisme (secularism) also means a robust approach to militant Islam.
Posted by: Keith Abbott | November 03, 2011 at 02:58 PM