Talk:Le Monde

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Defamation

I researched the claim of diffamation of June 2005 and found this source. If we are to mention this event, I think we should write:

On May 26, 2005, a French court of appeal found Le Monde director of publication Jean-Marie Colombani and guest writers Edgar Morin, Samir Naïr and Danièle Sallenave guilty of racial defamation for an opinion piece in which they claimed that "Jews, who were the victims of an unforgiving [power], impose their own unforgiving [order] to Palestinians".

However, I don't think it's appropriate to include this condemnation inside the article:

  • Every major newspaper gets sued every so often.
  • The article mentioned was an opinion piece written by personalities not from the newspaper staff and thus one cannot conclude anything about the editorial line of the newspaper itself.

Finally, to be truly neutral with respect to the case, we'd have to get the record of the judgment, some copy of the article motivating the lawsuit, and explain it all. The reason for the condemnation is a wide interpretation of a statute prohibiting incitation to racial hatred; this crime, or the wide interpretation thereof used by certain French courts, anyway don't exist in most countries and thus some lengthier explanation would probably be necessary for this event to be understood by most readers. David.Monniaux 06:10, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think its important to mention while its true that major newspapers are sued ofthen but court rarely found the sues justifible in this case the court found the editor of the newspaper guilty of "racial defamation" against Israel and the Jewish people.I think its importan to show the slant of this newspaper.
In France, the editor (directeur de la publication) is responsible for any libel, defamation etc. published in the newspaper, even if it was written by guest writers and does not constitute an usual editorial line, so it's really not surprising that he was sued in this case. Furthermore, if Le Monde had a habit of publishing racially insulting texts (as you seem to imply, with the word "slant"), it'd get sued more often and it would not be an event.
Finally, they were not found guilty for defaming Israel, but apparently more for having equated Israel (a state) with Jews in general. It is of course perfectly legal to criticize the actions of a foreign government (or the French government). What was found illegal was to imply that Jews (in general) support Israel's policies, which were described as criminal.
In any case, I think that mentioning a single court case about a single op/ed in order to illustrate the "slant" of a newspaper is misleading, and is not neutral — not to mention the inexact legal qualifications. If you really want to mention this event, please use the right legal qualifications and explain the case properly. David.Monniaux 19:14, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Someone please detail editorial structure.

I did a bit of reorganization and added a few bits, including the section on editorial structure. I hope someone who knows more than I will expand it. glasperlenspiel 05:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] American-style reporting

"Writers of lead reporting articles are not hesitant to venture interpretations and predictions in a manner which might surprise readers accustomed to American-style reporting, with its emphasis on objectivity, "just the facts", and leaving judgements up to the reader." What does the surprise of readers accustomed to American-style reporting have to do with Le Monde? The sentence also implies that American newspapers are impartial. It is both Americo-centric, and bias. Misodoctakleidist 01:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Especially since the news reporting of major US newspapers such as the New York Times is full of sneaky opinion (i.e. opinion presented in the guise of objective reporting). David.Monniaux 06:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


I rightly disagree. American newspapers by and large, whatever bias you might think they covertly express, profess neutrality in their straight reporting. That the French style, or even simply the Le Monde style, doesn't may cause this surprise in and of itself. --24.131.209.132 03:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clearstream Affair?

I would like to see a mention of the Clearstream Affair added, but I don't know enought about it to do so.

[edit] Evening daily?

When in France, even in small and remote villages with a kiosque, I can always buy the edition of that particular day in the early morning.

As the article says:
Le Monde is published around midday, and the date on the masthead is the following day's. That is, the issue which is released at midday on 15th March shows 16th March in the masthead. The rationale is that the paper reaches its subscribers the next day, by which time the date is correct.

It is an afternoon paper in Paris, and an evening or next-morning paper elsewhere.... --Macrakis 13:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)