L’Express’ editor-in-chief Eric Mettout explains on his blog how and why his paper published the scoop on Le Figaro altering the minister’s photo. (French version at the link, excerpt translated by yours truly below. Molière reference impossible to translate.)

“It’s true it’s not North Kivu, this story. But it’s information, not as harmless as it looks, which says a lot about the collusion of media and [political] power — worse, on the conditioning of certain newspapers or journalists who now self-censor even before the Commander intervenes. It threatens us, too. The day when, God forbid, we slip up, to be called back to our senses this way will be painful but salutary.”

—–

Here’s one for the ethics textbooks that motivates me to revive this otherwise forgotten blog. Look at those two photos:

The top one is the Wednesday Nov 19 front page of Le Figaro, one of France’s top daily newspapers. The bottom one is the original photo taken by François Bouchon for Le Figaro. Notice the gorgeous ring on the finger of our justice minister, Rachida Dati? (by Chaumet, white gold and diamonds, price tag: 15,600 euros, or about $19,500 in today’s super high dollar.) Notice how it’s disappeared on the front page?

Worse than the act of altering a news image (huge no-no, if you were wondering), is the totally unapologetic stance of the Figaro photo editor when interviewed by L’Express, a competing newspaper, which revealed the photo was doctored.

“We went to press under a tight deadline. We’re taking responsibility [for this]. We didn’t want that ring to be the object of a polemic, when the real topic is the judges’ petition. Rachida Dati has nothing to do with this.”

[For context, Le Figaro is right-leaning, as is the government, and people could have assumed the minister requested the ring be removed from the photo. Also, Dati isn't very popular with France's law professionals and they recently let it be known. And generally, French people don't like to see a 20k piece of jewelry on their government officials in the middle of the worst crisis since the Great Depression.]

I’m appalled. If you don’t want the ring to be so apparent, choose one of the other gazillion photos on file of this highly mediatic, government official. (Believe me, I too care about the judges’ petition; half my family is in the legal professions.) Being on deadline might be an excuse for not taking the time to tone a photo; I really don’t see how it’s one for going the extra mile and altering a photo. And most of all, nothing —NOTHING— is an excuse for misleading readers.

I really don’t care what circumstances this was done under, because I can’t think of a single one that would make it ok. At this point, were I a Figaro reader, all I’d want is an apology. And I have yet to find one on Le Figaro’s Web site.

PS: Now the photo is all everyone’s talking about, and not the judges’ petition.

Today, check out Tribune poking fun at itself, read Wikipedia’s featured article on “enterprising circus emcee” Ima Hogg, and wish – only wish – that Gmail’s custom time feature were actually real. You’ll never miss a deadline again.

To avoid being made a fool of, re-read Jack Shafer’s 2007 April Fool’s Day Defense Kit. Seen any good ones today? Add them in the comments.

PS: I’m now starting to wonder if the Times is serious about Mugabe resigning. But that would just be too cruel.

Item of note today: someone agrees with me. You might remember that I asked newspapers to stop shooting themselves in the foot by endorsing presidential candidates. (Jay Rosen rightly points out that the Times endorsed McCain while it was investigating his “ethical lapses,” and at the very least the publisher was in touch with both the editorial and the news sides.) Apparently, Time managing editor Rick Stengel is on my side.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is going ahead with his reform of France’s external media, which I could blog about for hours. He just named famed journalist Christine Ockrent to director of the holding France Monde, which will regroup France’s international radio network RFI, trilingual cable news channel France 24 and francophone channel TV5Monde. Journalism unions were quick to point out that Ockrent is the wife of Bernard Kouchner, France’s foreign affairs minister. Ockrent defended her journalism credentials (I won’t deny they’re impressive) and said today on radio that she’s tired of being reduced to her “wife of” label. “Frankly, I find that unfair and humiliating,” Ockrent said. I couldn’t agree more, but she’s missing the point. Her new job puts France’s diplomacy and our international public media in the hands of the same couple. Can you say conflict of interest?

And lastly, think your job is threatened by bloggers, citizen journalists and the evil empire of Rupert Murdoch? Try fending off an insect invasion to save your paycheck.

Our president Nicolas Sarkozy, who must love the media since he’s talking to it twice a day it seems, has proposed a media reform. He wants to create a parent company to bring together three public broadcasts: RFI, the France-based, worldwide, 19-language public radio network; TV5 Monde, a TV station that airs programming from French-language stations all over the world; and France 24, a 24-hour news channel airing in French, English and Arabic that was created in Dec. 2006, the brainchild of Sarkozy’s predecessor Jacques Chirac.

The project’s already got a name, France Monde, and guess what? It’s already got a wiki page.

The idea is far from stupid. It brings together the resources and advertising revenues of 3 major networks for a projected total budget of 400 million euros. The service could become more coherent, more comprehensive and the networks would share their audiences.

Wait, did I say “advertising revenue”? My mistake. That’s the other thing: Mr. Sarkozy wants to drop all advertising from public television to improve its quality, citing the BBC as a model. (Now that I think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever seen advertising on the BBC.)

Here, I should paint you a picture of France’s television landscape. It’s not like in the States where three major private networks battle it out, with cable on their heels, and the public service — though of great quality — gets the crumbs (political activists and public schools). French public television is a major contender; it’s channels 2, 3, 4 and 5 against the private channels 1 (TF1) and 6 (M6), which are partnered. That kind of competition takes major money. It hurts to make the Brits a compliment, but it’s true their public service is much better than ours. But couldn’t improvements be made without dropping advertising? Mr. Sarkozy proposes a tax on TV sets and something else to compensate the loss. Sure. I too thought it was too easy doing business in a country where 45 percent of the national income is redistributed through taxes. Let’s go for another percentage point.

I should also mention that Mr. Sarkozy is best buddy with Martin Bouygues, the owner of TF1, which stands to gain up to 400 millions euros in advertising transfers. Hard to believe in the sincerity of the proposal.

Back to the France Monde plan. Mr. Sarkozy is getting a lot of heat for it from other world leaders; he may have forgotten in his plan that TV5 is a joint venture with Canada, Belgium and Switzerland, and he doesn’t get to make all the decisions. They’re not so keen on funding programming that would come almost entirely from France.

But while I could see good points to all these proposals so far, there is one that just gets my ranting going. A member of the committee that drafted the France Monde project called it, in a Le Monde article back in November, an “alternative to CNN and Al-Jazeera.” It’s about putting France on the map of international news networks. Wonderful. Note that it’s exactly what France 24 was created for.

That’s all great, but how do you plan on doing that when Mr. Sarkozy has declared that France Monde should only air in French?!

“With taxpayers’ money, I am not prepared to broadcast a channel that does not speak French,” Sarkozy told journalists at a press conference earlier this month. (The Guardian)

That’s right. Bu-bye RFI’s 19 languages, France 24’s ambitious 3-language launch. Should we also drop the Quebec accent on TV5? Ridiculous. We’re not back in 1680, and all the elites of the world do not speak French fluently. Even an English-only network would be short-sighted if you ask me. RFI has a great program to teach French in all the countries it covers, with news bulletin in simplified French and lessons on the air. But how do you turn people on to learning French if you don’t first get to them in their own language?

Full disclosure: I just applied for an internship with France 24, and I’d rather not that my advantage of being fully bilingual become moot. I’d also rather not that thousands of multi-lingual correspondents around the world become unemployed. But beyond that, I’d rather not that my own country close up like a shell and multiply the demagogic, defensive actions against the supposed barbaric hordes at its doorstep. It is this very fear that shows our decline.

And Mr. Sarkozy, if really you want to defend the French Word, I’m still waiting on a French as a Second Language program in all public schools.

Guillaume Dasquié, journalist who specializes in intelligence reporting and editor of www.geopolitique.com, was arrested at home by DST agents (French equivalent of the FBI). My apologies for the delay; this happened Dec. 5. The following details are as explained by Mr. Dasquié on ”Revu et corrigé,” a wonderful media watch programme on France 5, a channel of French public television.

DST agents went through the Dasquiés’ home for 5 hours, looking for documents that were leaked to him and that he used in writing his stories. In particular, they were looking for documents related to an article he wrote for Le Monde in April 2007 about what the French intelligence services knew before 9-11 about Al-Qa’ida and Bin Laden. He said he offered up all his documents because his job is about being transparent and he’s got nothing to hide. He was then taken to the DST headquarters for 40 hours for interrogation. 

In France, article 109 of the penal code gives journalists the right to protect their sources, i.e. France has a shield law. It’s actually not strong enough compared to European Union law, and changes are being discussed. When his interrogators asked for his sources, Mr. Dasquié claimed the protection of article 109. He should have then been released, but the assistant DA decided to keep him 24 more hours. “We need a name,” the assistant DA said. Under intense pressure, including threats of keeping him in jail through slow procedures until he got a trial and veiled threats on his children, Mr. Dasquié revealed the name of one intermediary source, he said, but kept his main source protected.

Mr. Dasquié explained that he found out he was targeted because his article, based on documents that did not come from an organized leak, made it look to U.S. intelligence agencies as though the French had given up some of their secrets. So in order to maintain good relations between the two nations, an honest journalist was made to feel that he was no longer able to perform his job. I like 24, but for entertainment only, not as a way to run a democracy.

Mr. Dasquié’s interview on “Revu et corrigé” is fascinating. If you speak French, see it below. If not, here’s just the final sentence translated for you.

I have worked in Algeria, Sudan, Yemen, and every time I left those countries thinking, “My God, the journalists who do my job there, how brave, what a pair of balls!” … I thought, “me, I do it in France because… I’ve got kids, but I live in a democracy. They can mess with me, pressure me, put me through tax audits and other petty things, but they can’t go too far.” That all fell apart. So of course, I gave up a name. And I told myself, I’m done doing this job like this, because proof is, I can’t do it anymore.   

Read more from Reporters without Borders.

  Revu et corrigé du 08 décembre 2007 (3) – France5

Revu et corrigé du 08 décembre 2007 (3) – France5