The 2SIA's International press review

After the recent terrorist attacks such as Charlie Hebdo in 2015 and Samuel Paty’s death on october 2020, a new bill called the Global Security Bill was proposed to the French Parliament. One clause in particular, restricting people from filming police officers in a way that threatens their physical or mental integrity, was highly criticized by many journalists in France and all over the world. Violent incidents implicating French police force such as the clearing of a Parisian migrant camp on November 17th, 2020 or the beating of Michel Zecler on November 21st, 2020, added to this new controversial security law have sparked a major political crisis in France.

How do foreign media look at the debate raging in France ?

As presented by RFI (French international radio)

« Thousands turn out to oppose French security law despite amendment », RFI,November 21st, 2020 (Orla and Sophia)

This article comes from a French public radio station called “Radio France International” that broadcasts in Paris and around the world in over 12 different languages. The article talks about the protests that followed the very controversial amendments that were voted by the French Parliament on November 19th. Indeed, article 24, that consists of banning publication of images of police officers, was voted right after an amendment to protect the right to inform. This document is unbiased and gives a short report on the factual information. In fact, the French law is represented in a neutral way and it seems obvious that the reporters know what they are talking about. In addition, it provides several points of view (the Interior Minister’s opinion as well as a tweet written by protestor Mike Woods), however the protestors’ point of view is very briefly explained. This article contains two main parts. The first one explains the Parliament’s perspective and the reason why they voted 146 to 24 in favour of the article 24. Members of the Parliament were deeply divided over the article, since they were concerned that it would pose a threat to freedom of the press. However, it was approved after a sentence was added guaranteeing “the right to inform”. “The balance is reaffirmed between freedom to inform and protection of police officers”, said Gérald Darmanin, the French Interior Minister, during Friday’s debate. “Will journalists be allowed to film and broadcast without blurring the faces of officers and gendarmes? The answer is yes,” he continued, “Ordinary citizens would also be able to do so”, however he added that “publishing an officer’s face” and “commenting with intent to harm” would be punished by a one year prison sentence and €45,000 fine. Although article 24 was only created to prevent the police from being targets, street protests occurred on Tuesday across France, often joined by groups supporting the Yellow Vest movement.

available at: https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20201121-opposition-to-french-security-law-continues-despite-amendment-police-violence-press-freedom-human-rights-politics

« What provoked France's controversy over publishing images of police? », Mike Woods, RFI, November 26, 2020. (Emma and Eve)

https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20201126-what-has-led-to-frances-controversy-over-filming-the-police-security-press-freedom-social-media-violence

RFI is a French international radio station (16 languages) that broadcasts current social, political and economic affairs. This incredibly factual article is written by an informed foreign correspondent. The author explains throughout his piece the different aspects and opinions, concerning the controversy about the possible law preventing targeted images of the police from being published. Furthermore, this short report on facts informs us of the punishments, the protest, the effect of the law on the press and the growing tensions. However, it also provides various opinions by quoting multiple professionals about their impression on the situation. Moreover, this article states arguments for and against the project as it states that it would either negatively affect the evolution of the policing system or permanently make it more secure. Indeed, the speculation is that policemen could possibly feel safe enough to correctly carry out their obligations or that police brutality would be unaccounted for and create large inequalities.

As presented by US media

“France, Waging a Crackdown, Honors a Teacher and Depicts a Plot in Beheading”, Adam Nossiter,New York Times, October 21, 2020(Gersande)

Adam Nossiter (an American journalist born in 1961 and raised in France) writes about the terrorist attack against the teacher Samuel Paty and its consequences on the country. Mr. Nossiter briefly summarizes the murder, the measures taken to find the terrorist and his accomplices and then talks about how “Dozens of raids all over France, the closure of a prominent mosque, the shutting down of Muslim aid organizations and the mass expulsion of foreigners” followed. He also mentions incidents that happened all over the country that targeted muslims, like the assault of two muslim women in front of the Eiffel tower at night, one of them being seriously injured. This news item is rather neutral and is concise, once again explaining the actions taken by the government and the people's reaction without talking about the author’s point of view.

“Muslim Countries Denounce French Response to Killing of Teacher, Urge Boycott”, Steven Erlanger, New York Times, October 27, 2020 (Gersande)

Steven Erlanger, an American journalist working with the New York Times and the Times newspapers, explains the reaction of muslim countries to what is perceived as French government’s measures against muslims. Mr. Erlander mentions accusations of Islamophobia towards the president and events like the removal of French goods off shop shelves in Pakistan. Macron also got in a conflict with multiple leaders of Arab countries. For example, we learn that Kuwait’s foreign ministry criticized linking Islam to terrorism, saying it “represents a falsification of reality, insults the teachings of Islam and offends the feelings of Muslims around the world.” This news article explains the consequences of the government’s actions with other countries.

« French lawmakers debate bill on police images amid protests »,The Associated Press, ABC news, November 18, 2020.(Jean)

Story selection for this media tends to favor the left through both wording and bias by omission where they under report some news stories that are favorable to the right, but ABC always sources their information to credible sources that are either low biased or high for factual reporting. In their article, true to their reputation, they are factual and offer a more balanced view of the arguments of the French government and the detractors of the law. It acknowledges that the government noted “the doubts, concerns, and criticisms” of the bill in the words of the French government spokesperson Gabriel Attal, who also stated that “There is an absolute right to film and broadcast law enforcement operations by security forces during a protest.” The news piece then explains that “The most controversial provision would make it a new criminal offense to publish “with the intent of causing physical or psychological harm” an image that could identify a police officer.” and present the argument of the bill’s critics who “fear the law would lead to potential violations of media freedoms” and also question the applicability of this provision as “they also worry how courts would determine whether images were posted with intent to harm”.

“France Is About to Become Less Free”.,Mira Kamdar, The Atlantic, November 24, 2020. (Jean)

This news source is known to be slightly politically biased in favor of the left center, or democratic parties and they are also known for being pretty highly factual. In general, they report news with a moderate liberal editorial bias. However in the case of this article it is clear from the headline, that this is a strongly opinionated and subjective piece.

The journalist, Mira Kamdar, chose to report this news in the wider context of an additional two bills, one on universities research budget which is judged “target(ing) students protest and tak(ing) a stab at academic freedom”, the other “dubbed Confirming Republican Principles” designed to prevent separatism and radical islamism and that “would assign all French children a tracking number to enforce compulsory attendance in public or government recognised school, putting and end to homeschooling and unaccredited religious schools, and ensuring that all children are educated in the values of the French Republic”. The piece’s introduction highlights the contradiction or paradox between the declaration of President Macron after the assassination of teacher Samuel Paty and the liberticial character of the three bills that the French goverment is currently pursuing stating “..President Emmanuel Macron to vow that France will never flinch in its defense of freedom of expression. In the name of upholding the core values of the French Republic, however, Macron’s government and members of his party have introduced new legislation that effectively restricts them.” The journalist presents interior minister Gerard Darmanin as “unabashedly right-wing” and mocks his sense of priority when he stated” the cancer of society in the lack of respect for authority” while recalling that “49,000 people died of Covid-19 in France this year and more than 10 million will have been thrown into poverty by the end of December.” The journalists goes on mainly highlighting the risks of two provisions of the bills, mentioning that this has “alarmed the French press as well as brought condemnations from the United Nations, France independent defenders of rights and Amnesty international’. It concludes that “the bill risks turning France into a surveillance state, in direct violation of citizens’ right to privacy, and one in which the police are immune to accountability by citizens or the press.” Mira Kamdar drives the point home, writing “ So much for the liberté part of France’s national motto, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”.

“Macron’s Rightward Tilt, Seen in New Laws, Sows Wider Alarm in France”, Adam Nossiter, New York Times, November 25, 2020https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/world/europe/france-macron-muslims-police-laws.html (Gersande)

This article written by Adam Nossiter (an American journalist born in 1961 and raised in France) is interesting because it is fairly neutral, but exclusively talks about the people who are themselves against this new law. The article explains how the law is divided in two bills, one of them “restricting the public filming of the police” and the other “seeking further restrictions against Islamism”. It also mentions the difficulties the president Emmanuel Macron might face in the approaching elections of 2022 because of the loss of popularity this law project has provoked for him and the anger expressed by other politicians, like Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who says that “An authoritarian regime is installing itself”. This article talks about cases where filming the police made numerous now-famous cases come to light, including the suffocation death of a bicycle delivery driver earlier this year after he had filmed his own arrest. The government’s decision to forbid recording policemen is a direct attack to the press rights in France. This article talks about France’s discontent about the new law in a neutral way, quoting numerous and diverse sources in order to give the reader hindsight on the situation.

“French lawmakers pass controversial bill that restricts the publication of images of police”, Melissa Bell, CNN, November 25, 2020 (Clement, Thibault)

This CNN article gives a critical opinion on the law by using the word “controversial”, likely to give rise to public disagreement. This article explains the goal of the Article 24 on the Global Security Bill and refers to the point of views of those who are against this law such as the protesters and those who agree that this law is beneficial. It says that “the Global Security Bill would expand the ability of security forces to film ordinary citizens without their consent through police body cams and drones, while restricting the publication of photos or videos of police officers' faces” and even though they understand why the government voted this law, they believe that it is a violation of human rights.

« France's new national security bill could jeopardize freedom of expression», Rokhaya Diallo, The Washington post (November 26, 2020). (Marie Sophia Noha-Meïss)

Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/26/frances-new-national-security-bill-could-jeopardize-freedom-expression/ [accessed December 5, 2020]

The law and its context is clearly incriminated by this article. We can identify this by reading the title: “France’s new national security bill could jeopardize freedom of expression.”

“The Washington post” is a very famous newspaper from the City of Washington, known for its commitment to the freedom of expression. Indeed, it is this newspaper and its young journalist of the time Bob Woodward, who led the investigation into the Watergate scandal (1972). This is why the choice of this article seemed interesting and adapted to the current situation in France. “Washington post” is remarkably popular all over the world thanks to its trusted information and captivating point of view, always striving towards the truth of the situation. Here, it offers us a detailed analysis about the danger threatening freedom of expression. The whole article is based on the French journalist’s opinion, Rokhaya Diallo. The argument is about forbidding journalists to film policemen, in France. However, there have been many incidents around the world recently, qualified as police violence. According to this article, this law reflects an erosion of trust towards policemen.

« Macron Says Images of French Police Beating Black Man ‘Shame Us’ », The Associated Press, New York Times November 27th, 2020. (Orla and Sophia)

This article comes from The New York Times, which is an American daily newspaper based in New York City. It is a famous media publication with a worldwide influence and readership. This article doesn’t explain the event in a very detailed manner.

This article can be considered as more of a factual article. It explains how French policemen beat a black man for no apparent reason. This article relates the event to the new French security law, and more particularly to an article that would make it a crime to publish images of officers with intent to cause them harm . Indeed, it relates the event to this law because if this law had been passed before the event M.Zeckler could not have proven what happened to him. This would have meant that this brutality might have gone without any punishment for the officers. The news article gives different views on the subject. It explains how this law can be positive as it protects the officers from any harm that the videos would bring. Nevertheless, it also explains the negative aspects of this law, for instance how “the measure might allow police brutality to go undiscovered and unpunished.”

available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/world/europe/macron-france-police-michel-zecler.html

''Protests take place across France against proposed security law'', Martin Goillandeau, CNN, 28 November 2020 (Robin)

The article from the US media CNN is short and factual. It quickly explains the principle of Article 24 but focuses on the demonstrations and the violence committed by the police. Firstly, Martin Goillandeau, the author of the article, recalls the contents of Article 24: '' to penalize the "malicious" dissemination of the image of police officers''. Then he evokes journalists injured by the police on video during the evacuation of a migrant camp in Paris. M. Goillandeau then mentions the assault by law enforcement officers on music producer Michel Zecler. The article is therefore very critical of the French government and its bill. The author uses a quote from Cécile Coudriou, president of Amnesty International, to show that the situation is worrying. The article also quotes the opinion of G. Darmanin, who initiated the bill, but the author shows in the following sentence his disagreement with the Minister of the Interior. Consequently, this centre-left media is critical of the "global security" bill.

“France Plans to Rewrite Bill Blocking Police Photos”, by Aurelien Breeden, The New York Times, 01/12/2020 (Paloma and Jade)

The first article is from the daily international newspaper The New York Times. It states that French legislators will completely rewrite the law to make it clearer and more effective while also addressing concerns that left-wing parties and journalists express about possible increased police violence. Indeed, we see that according to Pierre Person, it is very much a “reality” that police officers are being targeted, however, the bill, especially Article 24, was “badly written” and “offers a bad response to the problem, divides, and creates suspicion”. Similarly, Christophe Castaner admits there were “doubts” and “misunderstandings” as critics complained about the limits it would set on freedom of information and the right to document cases of police brutality. Even so, President Emmanuel Macron’s aim is to “restore public confidence in the police” by preserving a better image of them, and most LREM officials, although they tend to be right-wing, have no intention of scraping the provision. On the other hand, some left-wing officials as well as critics and journalists still believe this bill is not the solution as it will promote cases of police violence and put limits on individual freedom, and several police beatings are mentioned such as that of Ameer al-Halbi and Michel Zecler, though the French interior minister Gérald Darmanin argues that the law enforcement institution as a whole should not be held guilty for the actions of a few. He did however acknowledge that there could be “structural problems” such as insufficient training of recruits that could contribute to police violence. All in all, this article gives a relatively balanced point of view and paints a nearly complete picture of the situation, so it can be said to be written in a neutral tone.

“Responding to Terrorism in France”, The New York Times, December 4, 2020 (Clément and Thibault)

The article describes France as “a country with a deep commitment to human rights” that “offers many legal avenues of protest”. It talks about the general security bill in a generic way focusing on the causes and events that led to this bill less on the text itself. The article however describes this law as a violation to what France is fighting for and that can be viewed negatively like another law that was passed; “banning Muslim head scarves in school [...] is often criticized as an attempt to [...] forcibly impose French identity on immigrants”. It explains that the law is justified and necessary as to protect France from future terrorist attacks but that it has been incorrectly executed and that the “general security bill [...] was pulled back for a rewrite.”

“Yes, Islam is facing a crisis. No, France isn’t helping solve it.” Mustafa Akyol, argument published in the American magazine Foreign policy, November 20, 2020 (Noémie)

This article discusses the crisis that is happening with Islam and how France could help solving it. It is written as a response to the French president Mr. Macron who said that “Islam is a religion that is in crisis all over the world today”. Mustafa Akyol is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, focusing on Islam and modernity.

The article starts by describing the crisis Islam is going through, Mustafa Akyol explains that nowadays, many muslims think that “in the face of blasphemy against the Prophet” the person responsible should be severely punished or even killed. However, the report then explains that none of these “verdicts had any basis in the Quran” but that jurists purposely misinterpreted it for some targeted killings that “reportedly took place during the Prophet’s battles with the polytheists of his time”. It is then added that although these practices were judged normal and acceptable a few centuries ago, that was when the concept of free speech simply didn’t exist and that indeed Christian contemporaries weren’t any more lenient to blasphemers or heretics. Mr. Akyol then explains that since then the Christian church has changed immensely and is now very tolerant but that this change had yet to be seen in Islam and that it was the core of the crisis that Mr. Macron was talking about.

The second part of the article talks about how the French president is not handling well the issue. Mr. Akyol writes that laïcité is an issue although the president says its target “is not Islam, but only ‘Islamism’”. He then goes on by saying that personal Muslim practices have long been targeted in France such has the ban of headscarves in public buildings or beaches for women. He finished by saying that France requires its Muslims to accept the freedom of speech of blasphemers but also to give up a part of their own freedom of religion. He says that if the president “really wants to help the crisis of Islam, instead of making it worse, what he needs to do is to raise France’s own standards of freedom of speech and religion, so that more Muslims can actually benefit from and appreciate these crucial values, giving them an incentive to make a clean break from the coercive understandings of Islam”. This article, written from a muslim point of view is very detailed and researched and gives different views on the law in France and even considers the fact that the current Islam system might also be flawed.

As presented by British or Irish media

« Macron accused of double standards over attempt to curb press freedom », By Henry Samuel in Paris,The Daily Telegraph, (London, UK) published on November 21st 2020. (Jean, Bruno, Emma and Eve)

This article from the Daily Telegraph, a famous media in England, explains the political situation about Macron and the clause 24 of the new law. This law seemed to be well understood by the Daily Telegraph developing arguments on both sides. The journalist presents the motivation behind the bill according to French interior minister Gerald Darmanin as being “to protect those who are protecting us” . The journalist mentions an attack on a police station as an example of the threats against the police and also cites the co-author of the law, Jean Michel Fauvergue, stating the law was needed because “officers are constantly threatened in their personnel life after being identified” and “ there were calls for female officers to be raped” .

The journalist then offers the arguments of opponents of the bill with Claire Hedon, France’s human rights ombudsman who said “the bill posed significant risk of undermining fundamental rights” and “the publication of images relating to police interventions are legitimate and necessary in a democracy” . The journalist mentions that “French police are often accused of being heavy handed” and recalls that a lot of complaints were filed during the yellow vests movement. The article concludes in a neutral way by simply mentioning that the laws were in the process of being voted.

“France security law incompatible with human rights, say UN experts'', Kim Willsher, The Guardian, 4 December 2020 (Robin)

The second article comes from the English newspaper The Guardian. It is a factual article on the bill and more specifically Article 24. The article begins by mentioning UN experts calling for a review and rewriting of Article 24, as they considered it 'incompatible' with human rights. Then the author also refers to Article 22 of the Global Security Project, which states that the population can be monitored with drones, which is also incompatible with human rights. Article 24 is well explained in the document. The views given are those of the UN. Indeed, in a country that respects fundamental rights, images of the police taken by the public play an essential role in the control of public institutions. There are no opinions in favour of Article 24 in the document. The Guardian therefore opposes the proposed bill. This is expected because The Guardian is a left-leaning newspaper.

“France’s Macron issues ‘republican values’ ultimatum to Muslim leader”, bbc.com, November 19th, 2020 (Carla)

In France, on the 11th of November 2020, Macron gave the French Council of the Muslim Faith 15 days to work with the interior ministry. The ‘charter of republican values’ will state that Islam is a religion and not a political movement, while also prohibiting "foreign interference" in Muslim groups. These remarks and policies have been seen by over 1.5 billion protesting muslims as infuriating. In this article, the law is presented as new measures to tackle the ‘islamist separatism’ in France. The article explaining why Macron asks Muslim Leaders to back ‘Republican Values’ charter is from the BBC in the United Kingdom. It is very detailed and has multiple videos to explain it.

“Macron seeks way out crisis caused by police brutality and security law”, Lara Marlowe, The Irish Times, November 30, 2020 (Clément and Thibault)

This article is from one of the most read Irish newspapers named The Irish Times and it offers a very detailed, precise, and general idea of the situation. The article gives an oversight of the current situation in France concerning Article 24 for the past week with different points of view such as the President, protesters, politicians, and the press. It is very factual by stating situations such as the beating of Mr Zecler, the meeting between Macron and other French political leaders and the protests. The article expresses a relatively neutral point of view focusing more on explaining the motivations for such a law than on the law itself and also on the motivations for protest as seen in this passage: “The passage of the law [...], combined with the violent police break-up of a makeshift migrant camp on the place de la République, and especially the video of Mr Zecler’s beating, prompted hundreds of thousands of people to participate in protest marches across France”.

As presented by Canadian or Australian media

“Proposed law on publishing police images sparks protests across France Social Sharing”, CBC news, November 21, 2020 https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/france-protests-bill-publish-police-images-1.5811607(Milo)

The article from CBC news’ website, presents how thousands of people came to the streets in Paris to protest against the bill.

The project is briefly but quite well explained in the article. They then present several people or groups expressing their opinions. Most of them are against this legislation as they explain how it would infringe human fundamental rights like Edwy Plenel, the co-founder and editor of investigative web-site Mediapart, or the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and France's Human Rights Ombudsman. The article then shows that the French prime minister Jean Castex said that the measure would be amended. However Emmanuel Poupard, the secretary of the National Journalists Union, argues that these amendments “don’t change anything”.

The article doesn’t give that many points of view as they mainly take citations from the opposition to this law. However the main goal of the article is mainly to cover the protests and to give context to the situation, like the death of Cedric Chouviat, a delivery man, that was caused by policemen. This was caught on video which incriminated the policemen. This is why we can consider that this article is neutral, however it might be a little influenced by the left wing.

CBC News is the English language department of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. CBC News is the largest broadcaster in Canada.

“The enemy within”: Is there a place for Muslims in France’s secular republic? », ABC, November 4th, 2020. (Orla and Sophia)

This article comes from an Australian national broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, founded in 1929 in Sydney. The article provides a detailed analysis on secularism and freedom of speech, while focusing on the place of Islam in the French secular system. The subject is introduced with the murder of the teacher Samuel Paty, and even though it is a foreign source of information, the situation is very well understood and explained. The arguments are supported by quotes from several powerful people (such as President Emmanuel Macron, French Prime Minister Jean Castex, French Interior Minister and even the French Council of Ministers) but they mainly all share the same opinion on the topic and believe that radicalised Islam can be a threat to the French Republic. The article could be seen as being biased since it is written from a western point of view, however it does give information about islamophobia and tries to look at the situation from different perspectives while being very factual. First of all, this article shows the desire of the Republic to fight against the terrorist attacks that keep occuring in the last decade. However, it explains that even though Islam is often framed as being the source of terrorism, which the French Interior Minister recently referred to as “the

enemy within”. French Muslims have also been victims of many similar attacks. According to him, France is fighting a “culture war”, and the limits of freedom of speech and secularism are the cause of a deep struggle within France. The article concludes by saying that even though France finds itself in a new period of “terror” where “one form of terrorism threatens the peace and safety of the people” and the other, “a form of political terrorism, threatens the very fabric of society”, only one of them truly represents an existential threat to the nation, meaning that muslims are not the origin of the problem.

available at:https://www.abc.net.au/religion/place-for-muslims-in-france-secular-republic/12848512

As presented by Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar’s media

Lower house of French parl. approves bill banning police identification, Press TV (Paloma, Jade, Milo) https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/11/25/639339/Lower-house-of-French-parliament-approves-bill-banning-police-identification

The article is from a national news broadcaster called Press TV, a state-owned enterprise, owned and funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It gives a factual, detailed overview and analysis of the situation and shows different points of view. However, it gives a mostly negative image of the bill, since it is presented as a major source of conflict within France but also in the EU. The point of view from masked protesters, who believe that this law will limit freedom of expression and press, is often cited. Several other people have also been interrogated, including Cecile Coudriou, president of Amnesty International France: she believes that the bill will make French democracy an exception among others, since it will be open to criticism, debate and interpretation, therefore making it vague, dangerous and susceptible to giving law enforcement officials more power and authority over citizens. Also, “the police refuse to be filmed, which is a right in every democracy in the world.” According to Claire Hedon, France’s human rights ombudsman, the bill also raises concerns as it threatens the right to privacy and freedom of information. Even the EU’s opinion is mentioned, and it stated that the bill would restrict journalists’ ability to work freely and safely. On the other hand, Jean Castex (as well as other members of the French government) argues that "in our legislative arsenal, there already exists the possibility to punish anyone who uses, in an ill-intentioned way, the videos that they publish." In a response to a letter from groups representing journalists who claim that its “vague (...) definition of the crime would have deleterious effects on journalistic and editorial work”, he says that “nothing in the bill stops journalists from doing their job, since prosecution would depend on the need to show an "intent to cause harm."Overall, although this article presents both points of view, it generally argues that the law project is threatening fundamental rights and democracy in France and that many people, including the “yellow vests”, are opposed to it out of fear that it will promote police brutality and racism if too much power and protection is given to the police.

This article is surprisingly quite neutral for a government controlled news network.

‘Massive protests in France against the security bill’, the Saudi Gazette, November 28th, 2020. (Sidharth, Leo)

The article refers to the protests in France on Saturday 28 against the “Global security bill,” which states that one can be punished for filming the police in action. It occured after the beating of the music producer Michel Zecler on November 21st, 2020. Videos of the police assaulting Zecler rather violently have circulated and created a lot of controversy. The article shows the protester’s point of view and states that ‘critics fear its intended to dissuade citizens from holding the police accountable’. However it also mentions that the law is to protect the identity of law enforcement officers who are “exposed to hate campaigns and calls for killing on social networks”.

« Is Emmanuel Macron pandering to the far right? » Aljazeera, November 30, 2020.

(Marie, Sophia, Noha-Meïss) Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/11/30/is-frances-emmanuel-macron-pandering-to-the-far-right [accessed December 5, 2020]

Aljazeera presents France's situation as a 'political crisis' where islamophobia is growing. President Macron is criticized and described as a 'fake president' trying to make decisions based only on strategy for the future elections. The new law is qualified as an 'attack on freedoms' and a potential argument for Macron's future loss in 2022. The subject is well studied and understood by the foreign correspondents, there is a clear explanation based on multiple factors such as Macron's latest changes in political view.

This article has been edited in Qatar, it is from a famous media in the middle east, Aljazeera. It gives a point of view that slightly diverges from the western way of thinking as it represents the muslim world. It gives more arguments against the new law and finds fault with the president's decisions.

As presented by Pakistanese media

« Letter to French president Emmanuel Macron », Daily Times (Pakistan), published on November 18th, 2020. (Emma, Eve)

This article from the Daily Times in Pakistan, a relatively famous media in this country, is a letter written by people speaking for an entire community. Indeed, the authors of this letter are writing for the Muslim community of Newcastle and they disagree with the French President’s statements as they are thought contrary to the Freedom of expression and humans rights. This detailed letter about the different elements of disagreements expresses explicitly the disappointment towards the French President Emmanuel Macron. In addition to that, the Muslim community seems knowledgeable in regards to the subject.

‘Unrepentant Macron’, Pakistan Observer n°31,published on November 24th, 2020. (Carla)

This article from Pakistan is a partially short report that is lacking details. The point of view expressed is that Emmanuel Macron is facing criticism due to asking Muslim leaders in France to agree on a ‘charter of republican values’. On the other side, the politicians and activists enjoyed the new measures proposed by the French government. In addition, Macron argued about the fact that controversial cartoons should be defended on free speech grounds.

Zulfi seeks equal free speech protection for French Muslims, The Express tribune, Pakistan, November 2, 2020. (Carla)

This article is less explicit and the context is not given so it is harder to understand. The point of view that is expressed is the point of view of the muslims and more specifically, the prime minister's assistant in charge of overseas Pakistanis and human resource development, Zulfiqar Bukhari.

He requests that the european leaders “Apply their own laws fairly and give the same protection they give to others, like the Jewish community, from abuses of freedom of speech.” Furthermore Zulfiqar Bukhari defends the Prophet and thinks that there should not be any satires or freedom of speech concerning him because he thinks that the muslims were portrayed as being just as bad as the Prophet caricatured by Charlie Hebdo. This differs from the first articles as they do not talk about the caricature and they have more of a general point of view.

As presented by Chinese media

« Protesters clash with police at Paris protest against police violence. » China daily, November 29, 2020. (Marie Sophia Noha-Meïss)

Available at: http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202011/29/WS5fc353a2a31024ad0ba982ea_1.html [accessed December 5, 2020]

The article “Protesters clash with police at Paris protest against police violence” written by the newspaper “China Daily” presents another point of vue on this law. This journal is one of the most important in the country and is strongly appreciated for being one of the few written in English. It is not only important in China, but also in many foreign capitals even though it is controlled by the state and highly self-censoring. As the title of this Chinese article indicates, the context is presented as violences between police and protesters. While reading it, we quickly realize this article is a short report that only states the outlines of the events. Its content is purely factual and objective. It indicates globally the reasons for the different protestations and what happened in them. Furthermore, the law is presented as creating many conflicts. The lack of detail is surprising for such a popular journal in China but is a great example to demonstrate the struggle of certain foreign countries to fully understand the complexe incidents in France.

“France's Emmanuel Macron retreats over police protection law after clashes'', South China Morning Post (SCMP), 1 December 2020 (Robin)

The article is from the Hong Kong newspaper South China Morning Post. It discusses the issue from a political strategy perspective and its consequences. The article is relatively neutral. They present the law in the same way as The Guardian, by citing the law. As for the analysis of the article, it presents both sides. Indeed, it cites C. Castaner, the president of the parliamentary group En Marche!, saying that the objective is to protect the police from malicious individuals. On the other hand, the author also shows the inconveniences of this law. If there is police violence and it is filmed, this would make it possible to hide certain violence. If we compare it to the other newspapers analysed, we can see that SCMP is the only one that presents arguments from both sides of the debate.