Fascinating entry in the daily email Political Journal (subscription only from the Wall Street Journal, no linkee):
How come the French all think alike?
Well, OK, the French don’t really all think alike: In May, 56% of them wisely voted “no” in the referendum on the European Constitution, which enjoyed the support not only of every major political party but also all of the major media outlets, from the leftist Le Monde to the right-wing Catholic paper La Croix. But if most French voters opposed the Constitution, why was their view reflected nowhere in the media? Surely there must have been a market for anti-Constitution sentiment, which any canny publisher or broadcaster could have exploited to boost circulation or ratings. But there was zippo.
This puzzle was recently solved for us by a well-placed French source. Part of the answer, he reminds us, is that much of the French broadcast media is state-owned, as is the venerable news agency Agence France-Presse.
But that’s not all: Even the “private” French press is massively subsidized. It enjoys lower tariffs for freight transport, a postal discount, a reduced value-added tax rate and a complete exemption from local taxes on investment. Government also subsidizes secondary printing facilities and helps pay for the distribution of French papers abroad. If you’re a journalist — or just a “journalist” — you also pay income taxes at a lower rate. And the best part: If a newspaper faces revenue losses because of declining advertising or circulation, the government will help make up the difference. The only catch is that, to benefit from this munificence, publications must officially register with a state agency (the French call it an organisme) run by a committee of editors and government functionaries.
The ostensible rationale for all this madness is that the government wants to avoid capitalistic media concentration and foster a plurality of viewpoints. The effect, of course, is the exact opposite: Unlike in the U.S. or Britain, in which various publications tend to represent some segment or other of market opinion or taste, French journalists are utterly indifferent to the views of their readers. Instead, they tend to write articles with a view to impressing their colleagues, a classic media echo-chamber that’s as conformist as it is insular. No wonder the French public tunes out: Le Monde, the biggest and most influential daily in a country of 60 million, has a circulation of only 400,000.
Who knew?
The mighty Le Monde has a circulation of 400,000? Just around 50,000 more than The Grauniad? What an absolute hoot!
But then the Daily Telegraph is the biggest selling broadsheet newspaper in Europe with a circulation of about 900,000. This isn’t a great figure either if you consider the 60 million population of the UK.
Maybe there are more newspapers on the continent, resulting in lower sales per newspaper? Or maybe it is that newspapers just aren’t as popular on the continent. As a knock on result of the aforementioned subsidising.
I knew. I’m french. Here, it doesn’t shock citizens to know that fact. People are so well conditionned by media “unique-thinking” propaganda, that nobody can even imagine that the free-thought of media has gone for a long time. There is very fiew small publication private owned which dare to try displaying information to people, out of this marxist thinking. France is a soft USSr, where you can’t express yourself freely.
Excuse my english.
Nice website.
The British do get through more newspapers and have more variety in them than any Western nation. We are a compact country that hasn’t had significant political controls on the press for a long time nor a state media. (The BBC maybe statist but it is emphatically not controlled by the Government.)
What we really lack compared with the French are specialized sport newspapers such as L’Equipe, which means most of our papers are full of large quantities of the stuff to the exclusion of actual news.
I found this item to be very interesting. I was amazed that The circulation for Le Monde is lower that the top 16 newspapers in the US and just slightly higher that the Minneapolis Star Tribune at # 17. I had always envisioned Le Monde as some sort of giant — who knew.
And the incestuous relationship between the media and the government certainly explains a lot of things.
French journalists are utterly indifferent to the views of their readers. Instead, they tend to write articles with a view to impressing their colleagues, a classic media echo-chamber that’s as conformist as it is insular.
Actually, this is the case among the large “mainstream media” outlets in the U.S., especially The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the large broadcast TV networks, ABC, CBS and NBC — as well as the much smaller broadcast networks, CNN and MSNBC.
True, there’s variety, but the circulations of The Wall Street Journal and Washington Times, and the viewership of Murdoch’s FoxNews are truly dwarfed by the others.
Commentary here(Link)
Very simple explanation – we aspire to reading the Daily Telegraph but what we really want is Page 3 of The Sun (estimated 10m readership).
I don’t know if you can really say Page 3 has a “reader”-ship.
A following, certainly. Probably even a few stalkers. But reading doesn’t seem to be a requirement for enjoying Page 3.
I knew, except for the low circulation part (maybe your queston referred to that). That was a real nockout.
Rick, the big difference is that in the US people watch and read the crap out of free choice.
Spot on, although the opening statement is wrong, and unfortunately typical of many US/UK outlets’ far too idealistic and optimistic view of the French vote:
Well, actually, no. As I recently had a chance to mention briefly at one of Brian’s Fridays, with the notable exception of a handful of French free marketers (such as Pascal Salin. And myself. Yeah, he’s the famous one), the French who voted “No” did it exactly in the same perspective as those who voted “Yes”, and for the same reasons.
They voted “No” because they thought the Constitution wouldn’t bring enough State control over society as a whole, and the economy in particular. And of course, over those pesky individuals who dare to rise above the Gallic mass by their own merits (a threat to l’Egalité! Quelle arrogance!), whereas those who voted “Yes” believe it would bring just enough State control over the odious abuses of ultraliberalism (whatever that means. Ask the next neo-Marxist you stumble against). At least for the moment.
Bottom line: even when they give antipodal answers to the same question, the French do think alike.
Small wonder this country can’t be reformed without a bloodbath every now and then.
Amazing people aren’t we?
The Wall Street Journal has a circulation of around 2 million copies, as opposed to the Washington Post’s 750,000, the New York Times’ 1.1 million, the LA times 1 million, the WSJ being America’s 2nd most popular paper after USA Today. Your use of the Washington Times, with a circulation of around 100,000 is accurate, but it’s difficult to agree with the circulation of the WSJ being dwarfed by newspapers which taken on their own half as many people buy and together only around 50% more people buy.
It can be more difficult to find reliable data with regards to TV viewing figures but do you have any facts to support your comments about the unpopularity of Fox News? The Nielsen ratings appear to indicate that Fox News is more popular than any other cable news network (although one can make the case for CNN being as popular depending on which statistics you use). It is only slightly behind the 3 major broadcasting networks in terms of ratings and whilst Fox News isn’t quite up there with the likes of Brian Williams’ show on NBC to say dwarfed is again unfair when one considers the ratings I’ve seen.
Gee Dissident,
Aren’t you being just a bit too harsh?
I grumble about France, now and then (who doesn’t?) …
but even I’m not *that* pessimistic about her future.
Lighten up….France has done a lot of good and (hopefully) will continue doing so, even if we have our
occasional disagreements. 😉
(By the way, my highest and most sincere compliments
on your wonderfully creative graphics! I truly envy your talent.)
Whaddya know, everyone who is French or lived in France knew! Myself included, frankly – I love reading French papers both for my french (imagine the Telegraph on a grumpy day written by a milton addict, and you would have Le Figaro) and for their beautiful predictability. The fact of which means that you actually get a fair idea of what is really going on.
But on the topic of cosiness with government and insularity this book claims much more!
Whaddya know, everyone who is French or lived in France knew! Myself included, frankly – I love reading French papers both for my french (imagine the Telegraph on a grumpy day written by a milton addict, and you would have Le Figaro) and for their beautiful predictability. The fact of which means that you actually get a fair idea of what is really going on.
On the topic of cosiness with government and insularity this book claims much more!
Well, Patrick, I didn’t know. I thought Le Monde actually must have a legitimate readership to back up its influence. But given what I have just learned, it has no influence, because it is influenced. Like French TV with all its dreadful political discussions where they nitpick but agree overall.
The Americans who are comparing these figures with the US forget that the US has 350m people, so their comparisons are meaningless. The British are the most voracious consumers of newspapers in the world – although, yes, Alisa, they also soak up everything that’s free on the net. But over breakfast, commuting, over lunch, they like turning the pages of actual newspapers. But the British are the most intensely involved in commentary people in the world. (In my experience.)
Arnaud,
Do not let your lack of comfort with English discourage you from commenting. Altho the structure required some effort on our part, the choice of words clearly required some thought on your part.
Arnaud – English is a very forgiving language. You’re doing fine.
I also thought some of thos “private” papers have other business ties to the gov’t, like defense? 1 of the families is a big defense company, oui?
I had to chuckle a bit when I saw the title to this post–quite possibly the single most ambitious post title in the history of blogging.
The Americans who are comparing these figures with the US forget that the US has 350m people,
Er? When did the US absorb Canada?
Current US population is ~295 million or so. That’s about 5x the population of France (~60M), which means that if you take it on a per capita basis, Le Monde’s 400k readers is a roughly comparable proportion of France’s population to the WSJ’s circulation of ~2M. That might help explain why Le Monde seems to have a greater impact than it’s circulation would suggest.
Everything above is true and…
Sorry, it’s in French, but here is what you find if you search for “Agence France Presse” ” mensonges” (lies), among 9,240 answers. A few internauts are dedicated to reinforming the French, word by by word about each news item :
“L’AFP lies : why French democracy doesn’t exist” :
http://www.chretiens-et-juifs.org/article.php?voir%5B%5D=209&voir%5B%5D=1348
I’ll try to tipe more later other helps to French press (propaganda) and about journalists in their artificial ecosystem (there are few places where they can live happily).
Cher Arnaud, the scores of French teenagers in English have lowered between 1997 and 2003, and it’s part of the propaganda to make English courses inefficient. So, you’re right to fight back on this blog. On the contrary, English level in business school, over the same period, has increased and the number of pupils in expensive bilingual schools increases too. Why ?
I know it is not entirely on topic, but I could not resist adding this quote from Le Liberation (01/06/05)
‘nul ne contestera l’internationalisme de la gauche avec son souci d’aider de façon désintéressée l’humanité entière ansi que son engagement proéuropéen’
No-one would deny the internationalisme of the left with its care to selflessly help all of humanity, not to mention its european engagement.’ (very loosely translated, no link because it is now paying)
That is actually in an article that my not at all biased teachers thought fit to make us read – needless to say I proved the statement wrong.
“I don’t know if you can really say Page 3 has a “reader”-ship.”
How can you say this – especialy with the succint and informative ‘news in briefs’ on the page …
@ Sandy P, the “small private newspapers I am talkin’ about, are very small publication, not tied to big defence companies or something like that. I am talking about some “freedom of speech preachers” who publish weekly papers criticizing government’s action. But these papers unfortunately, do not advertize and due to the fact that they are not subsidized, they have a very small audience, essentially of people are really interested in those publications. The biggest problem for these papers is that they do not support printing unions, which are controlled by communist party-serving unionists. Though they are able to perform they own censorship whithout asking anybody. That’s why publications I was talkin about at the beginning cannot really grow and get larger audience.
I had to chuckle a bit when I saw the title to this post–quite possibly the single most ambitious post title in the history of blogging.
I took it straight from the WSJ Political Journal.
All these statements about french press are accurate. Direct and indirect subsidies to press account for more than 10% of their revenues, according to a french senate’s report.
But you might find other reasons that explain “french mindset”
exposed here
Quite right Alice, Journalism is it’s own little ecosystem. Though nowhere near as bad as France, you all must have noticed how self referential our major newspaper columnists are.
Polly toynbee writes something and some guy in the Telegraph rebuts it. She has a go back, and Matthew Parris in the Times trashes them both ( well there’s class and real class!) And around and round it goes.
The best thing about British journalism is it’s diversity of point of view , and the fact that almost all Brit journalists have ever been near a College of Journalism in their lives.
RAB writes:
“The best thing about British journalism is it’s diversity of point of view , and the fact that almost all Brit journalists have ever been near a College of Journalism in their lives.”
Few truer words have been published here. One can almost trace the steady decline in the quality of American journalism to the slowly tightening hegemony of those ‘trained’ in the subject by US colleges.
A straw in the wind here is that the contemptible Roy Greenslade lectures on the subject in the UK, thus confirming once and for all time, the old ‘Those who can…’ principle.
Just another interesting slightly off-topic point, on the 21st (or 22nd) April the Cour d’Appel at Paris ruled that it was illegal to copy-protect dvds, since the legitimate purchaser should have the right to make a copy (in this case, to copy to VHS to watch it at his mother’s). Le Monde did not even report this decision!
(It will be appealed, of course, to the Cour de Cassation I believe)