France 24: CNN à la Française

Recent coverage of Libya

By Nick Steece and Renée Knepper

Background

Launched in 2006 under President Chirac

Funded by the French government

“Designed to help spread what it defines as French political values: paying more attention to the less well covered parts of the world, encouraging debate, and emphasizing cultural as well as economic development” (Seib, p. 37).

Why Create a French Network? Alain de Pouszilhac, chairman and chief

executive of France 24, claimed that opinion leaders have become increasingly “skeptical of the world vision offered by the Anglo-Saxons like the BBC World and CNN International.”

But these leaders “are looking for contradictory opinions – which is what France 24 is proposing by relying on French values” (Burleigh, 2006, quoted in Brown, 2007, p. 339-340).

Why Create a French Network? Elsewhere, de Pouzilhac has said,

“Many people think this is a world with objectivity, but it is a world that doesn’t exist. … We want to cover the world with our eyes, and our eyes are French eyes. And if I have to explain the French vision, I say that it’s a vision that recognizes the diversity of the world” (Carvajal, 2006, quoted in Brown, p. 340).

A feeble attempt at regaining global influence?

Historically France and the French language were at the epicenter of civilization

After being portrayed poorly in international media, France established France 24 to assert its influence

A prime example of a globalized media outlet that has grown alongside domestic media (Hackett & Zhao, 2005)

Established to combat the uniformity of globalization (Seib, 2008) – but there are many challenges to entering attracting international audiences (ex: The United States and Al Hurra)

Even France feels left out of the international media conversation

A feeble attempt at regaining global influence?

“The new channel, in one great aspect a progressive attempt to take advantage of the global nature of new technology, appears to be married to a French historical, moral and cultural arrogance that no longer has international resonance. Is there no other way for France to reclaim its honour?”

“Is it arrogance or honesty for Mr. Chirac to indicate that his “news” channel will be the de facto voice of the French republic? Or is it simply blindness to the idea that world over, what most people want from their news is simply the facts and to be left free to make up their own minds?” (Dilday, 2006, quoted in Brown, p. 340).

Current Statistics

French version distributed to 96 million French speaking homes; English to 105 million homes; Arabic (since 2007) to 67 million homes

Actual viewership is smaller: 20 million households watch the English version, mostly in Europe

Number 1 global French channel in Francophone Africa

In the Maghreb (Northern Africa, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia) viewership is second only to Al Jazeera (according to the French government).

260 full-time staff and has access to 700 additional reporters through agreements with other domestic French news networks (Muhammed, 2011).

France 24 and Libya

One of the first networks to provide in-depth coverage from Libya, even getting an early interview with Gaddafi (CNN had to rely on information from France 24 about the interview)

Provided first images from the frontlines on the battle for Brega, between Libyan rebels and Gaddafi forces (Muhammed)

Possible Biases

Governmental Bias Although funded by the French

government, France 24 has spoken out against French leaders and decisions

Cultural Bias The goal of France 24 is to portray

French opinions and viewpoints, hence their mandatory signing of their mission statement

France 24 Coverage on Libya Analysis of 5 Articles (online English version)

1. Libyan govt denies report of Gaddafi wounding

Lead: “Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is probably wounded and likely not in Tripoli, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has told reporters in Tuscany. The Libyan government immediately denied the report.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20110513-gaddafi-wounded-italy-frattini-libya-denies

(See link for video)

1. Summary

Italian Foreign Minister announces that Gaddafi is injured and has fled Tripoli, the Libyan capital

Catholic Archbishop of Tripoli is the source of information and the article states that he has been in close contact with Gaddafi’s regime

Libyan government officials deny this claim saying that he wouldn’t leave Tripoli because he is in good health and spirits

1. Analysis

The article begins with the statement that Gaddafi is most likely wounded and outside of the Libyan capital of Tripoli. The placement of this statement is evident of the existent belief by the French (and possibly the EU and Western world) that Gaddafi is in fact injured and outside the capital. This statement is further reiterated by the Italian Foreign Minister stating that he gives credibility to the source of this information. One small sentence tells us the government denies the fact and another short contending view is offered. After this, some background information is given about the Catholic Bishop of Tripoli (source of statement) further trying to support his credibility. The article could be seen as top-down but the real facts are spread throughout. Basically this article boils down to presenting an already existent belief and trying to establish concrete evidence about the source who provided information about Gaddafi and his location.

2. Gaddafi taunts NATO 'cowards' in audio message

Lead: “Muammar Gaddafi said Friday that he was out of reach from NATO bombs, dispelling rumours he had been injured in a NATO air strike. The Libyan leader made the announcement in an audio message broadcast on state television.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20110513-gaddafi-announcement-safe-libya-nato-bombing-cowards-frattini

2. Summary

Muammar Gaddafi is displayed on Libyan state television “taunting NATO as a cowardly crusader” and saying that he was untouchable

Made the statement after Catholic Archbishop told authorities he was probably wounded and out of the city. Also after his compound was hit by a NATO airstrike

NATO’s mission there is explained and the

nations participating are labeled as colonial aggressors by Libya

2. Analysis

First, just the title of this article provokes a reaction. At the very least, Gaddafi is seen as the bad guy in this article by apparently “taunting” NATO and calling them “cowards”. It’s important to note that his face is never shown on the audio that was heard on Libyan state television so the sound of his voice is the only indicator that is it in fact Gaddafi. Very briefly, it’s noted that his compound was bombed by a NATO airstrike. The fact that the same NATO airstrikes not only killed his son and three grandchildren but also posed a threat to his life is never mentioned. Furthermore, the concrete facts are only presented at the end of the article when NATO’s mission and participants are explained. The article ends with information about the Libyan government, stating that they call the rebels part of Al Qaeda and NATO participants colonial aggressors. In short, this article is extremely biased towards French opinions and viewpoints.

3. NATO air strike kills Gaddafi's son, Libyan officials say

Lead: “The Libyan government has claimed that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was the target of an assassination attempt after an overnight NATO air strike reportedly killed his youngest son.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20110501-nato-air-strike-kills-gaddafi-son-saif-al-arab-officials-tripoli-libya

3. Summary

Gaddafi’s youngest son, Saif al-Arab, and his three grandchildren were killed by an overnight NATO airstrike

Al-Arab wasn’t involved in politics maintaining a low profile and he has just returned from studying in Germany

The bombed compound was reduced to rubble with toys scattered around and various walls still standing

3. Summary

A Libyan government official has told the public that Gaddafi was in the building when the attack occurred and escaped unharmed

His presence is unlikely and could be a publicity stunt to make Gaddafi seem invincible in the face of an attempted assassination

NATO’s did not intend to target any individual but rather “command centers that threaten civilians”

Rebels celebrated the death of Gaddafi’s son

3. Analysis

This article is more objective than the last two articles. First, it provides a number of different contending viewpoints—NATO, Italy, France, and Libya. It also describes the death of Gaddafi’s son and grandsons in plain terms, even referring to the actual site of the bombing to perhaps invoke sympathy. The fact that al-Arab was not involved in his father’s politics is also highlighted. A small bias may exist towards the Libyan government who is cited as saying that Gaddafi escaped an assassination attempt. The motives of trying to make Gaddafi seem invincible and make NATO seem like the bad guy are brought to light just before NATO’s objective position is presented. The article focuses primarily on the death of al-Arab, a supposedly falsified assassination attempt in order to gain support, and the objective standpoint of NATO. It’s important to note that the standpoint of NATO is at the end after the consequences of their actions have been explained. Overall, the article’s content and facts are spread out.

4. Rebels fail to get full diplomatic recognition from White House

Lead: “Following a meeting with the National Security Advisor Tom Donilon Friday, the US said it will not be giving the National Transitional Council full diplomatic recognition for now even though it views it as the “legitimate” voice of the Libyan people.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20110514-rebels-fail-get-full-diplomatic-recognition-white-house

4. Summary

Last week Mahmud Jibril became the first senior official of the National Transitional Council (NTC) to have talks at the White House. President Obama was not present.

Before the meeting, Jibril wrote in the New York Times: “We ask the United States to join France, Gambia, Italy and Qatar in recognizing the council as the sole legitimate representative of the Libyan people until free elections can be held.” […] “This signal would further isolate the Kadhafi regime in Tripoli, heighten opposition morale and improve access to diplomatic and humanitarian assistance.”

4. Summary

U.S. officials, while not officially recognizing the opposition, have said that they see the NTC as a legitimate voice for Libyans. No financial assistance was promised, though the White House and Congress are looking into possibly using some of the $30 billion in Ghadafi regime assets blocked in the United States. The U.S. position is that Libyans should choose their leaders, not the outside world.

The second half of the article discusses NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s closed-door meeting with President Obama, which took place the same day. Since no reporters were allowed at the meeting, the article uses Rasmussen’s Twitter as a source.

4. Analysis

Presents facts about the meeting

Underlying message appears to show NTC’s lack of recognition by the U.S. government

In contrast, clearly mentions the support of France and a few other countries

This is more apparent when juxtaposed with the next article, about President Sarkozy’s meeting with Jibril.

5. Rebel leader meets with President Sarkozy in Paris

Lead: “A senior member of Libya's rebel National Transitional Council met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris Saturday. France is one of a handful of countries to have formally recognised the Council's legitimacy.”

http://www.france24.com/en/20110514-rebel-leader-meets-president-sarkozy-paris-france-gaddafi-libya

5. Summary

Mahmud Jibril met with President Sarkozy and Prime Minister Fillon to discuss the conflict and steps toward transition. The meeting took place at the Elysée Palace, the official presidential residence. A previous meeting with Jibril took place in March.

“France is one of the few outside powers, along with Italy, Qatar and Gambia, to have formally recognised the Council as the Libyan people's legitimate representative.”

France is participating in NATO airstrikes on Gadhaffi’s strategic sites, and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe has advocated a stepped-up military intervention.

The article ends with a mention of Jibril’s failed “first talks” at the White House.

Sarkozy has called for an international meeting of “friends of Libya” to discuss the future of the country.

5. Analysis

Presents facts about the meeting, though not in detail

Clearly highlights the role of France as a friend of the Libyan opposition (diplomatic recognition)

France as a military power (assistance through NATO)

France as an international leader (organizing “friends of Libya”)

Compares with Jibril’s meeting in the U.S., where the NTC is not officially recognized

Does not mention financial assistance (important to the opposition, according to the previous article) – leaving out a key detail

Overall Observations & Trends Sources of information:

Interviews, on-the-ground reports, wire reports, government spokespeople, government press releases, foreign newspapers, Twitter

New media: Not many comments on these articles (0-2); Not many “Likes” (0-4;

exception: article 3 had 49 likes); no Tweets Significance? Failure to engage with online audience in English; France 24

not the go-to source of information for that particular audience. Also may be a result of the demographics of the readers of articles on Libya

The “French vision” of representing diversity: Not clear in the articles that were chosen for this analysis, aside from

adding the French perspective to the issue.

Objectivity: Fairly objective in some articles, overtly biased in others However, the perspective is clearly French (culture, politics, etc)

Overall Observations and Trends

Governmental bias? French foreign policy goals reflected French actions around the world

highlighted Journalists required to sign a mission

statement that they will “cover international news with a French perspective… and carry the values of France throughout the world” (Muhammed).

Overall Observations and Trends

Not under strict government control and does not come across as propaganda; has been critical of President Sarkozy

“That [government funding] might make you raise your eyes,” acknowledged France 24 editorial director Jean Lesieur at a Columbia University forum on global media last November. But, “we are truly independent,” insisted Lesieur. “We don’t do propaganda for the French government” (Muhammed).

Public Opinion

In late March, 66% of French approved of the intervention in Libya, according to a poll by IFOP (79% of the president’s Gaullist party, and 73% of French Socialists) (NY Times, Reuters)

In early April, a poll by Reuters/Ipsos MORI found that 63% of French approved of the way the intervention was being handled.

This is higher than the support of Britons (50%) and Americans (55%) . In Italy, 60% opposed it.

“This poll shows that international support for removing Gaddafi is accompanied by concern about the cost of military action and uncertainty over whether the objectives of the allied forces are clear” (Helen Cleary, Head of Political Research at Ipsos MORI).

France 24 and Public Opinion

France 24’s English language audience is mostly in Europe, with some in the United States.

Though it is sometimes critical of the French government, the media outlet serves to project French perceptions to foreign publics to explain its point of view and gain support for its foreign policies – in this case, on the intervention in Libya and support for the opposition.

Works Cited (other than direct links)

Brown, J. (2007). Public diplomacy as a global phenomenon, 2006: An internet-based overview of English-language world media reports on public diplomacy – Part III: Europe and the Americas (excluding the United States). Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 3(4), 337-347.

Hackett, R., and Zhao, Y. (2005). Democratizing global media: One world, many struggles. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Muhammad, U. (n.d.). France 24 – Global Media Wars. Global Media Wars. Retrieved May 22, 2011, from http://globalmediawars.com/?page_id=73

Seib, P. (2008). The Al-Jazeera effect: How the new global media are reshaping world politics. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books.