Storm Clouds Over Paris
September 10, 2006 23:15 by BackSpin Editor
A gathering storm comes to a head in Paris this week as a series of lawsuits get underway. Three individuals who criticized France-2 TV’s world-famous footage of Mohammed Dura were sued for defamation by the powerful state-owned TV company. Specifically singled out for criticism were correspondent Charles Enderlin and cameraman Talal Abu Rahma. We encourage readers to see the video at Second Draft.
Associated with the trial are many powerful and uncomfortable issues, including anti-Zionism in the French media, the icon status of Mohammed Dura, Israel’s response to the affair, the disturbingly close relationship between France’s media and political elites, the fairness of French justice, the future role of France 24 (dubbed the “French CNN” due to be launched in December), and—on a broader level—the future of French Jewry.
Pesach Benson of HonestReporting discussed the proceedings with Philippe Karsenty (pictured), the defendant in the first trial, which begins Sept. 14. Karsenty, 40, is the founder and president of Media-Ratings, a professional media analysis company based in Paris. The following is a condensed version. Click here to read the full interview.
HonestReporting: People criticize the media all the time. Why are you in legal proceedings now?
Philippe Karsenty: We have a company, Media Ratings. Our goal is to analyze the media outlets. We’re not a blog. We respect bloggers very much but we are different. We’re an established company. We’re not crazy people writing in their apartments. We treat all sorts of subjects, not just Israel. So the French establishment hates us. They consider me an insider and consider Media-Ratings dangerous.
HR: What’s the significance of this trial?
PK: The significance is that we published an article saying that Arlette Chabot, the head of the information desk at France 2 and Charles Enderlin, who narrarated the Al Dura forgery, should resign because they refused to admit that they made a mistake and to correct the information. They were very upset we published this on our web site…
HR: What led you to conclude that the video was a forgery?
PK: The cameraman (pictured left) offered the images to CNN, and they rejected it because Talal wouldn’t offer guarantees that it was legitimate. On the same day, Talal made another forgery filming fake scenes. Reuters filmed him filming other forged stories. On the first scene of the France 2 report before the child is killed, you see the scenes he filmed are fake.
They broadcast a scene where the guy was supposedly hit in the leg by a bullet but there’s no blood. People are dragging him on the sidewalk and there’s no blood. An ambulance comes, it takes two seconds from the time he’s supposedly wounded and the ambulance comes. Two seconds just doesn’t make sense, it’s too fast….
France 2 claims they have 27 additional minutes of footages. They invited two independent experts to watch the video. According to the two experts, 90 percent of those images were faked scenes.
HR: What was your criticism for which you are on trial? Knowing what you know now, would you have done anything differently?
PK: It’s a good idea to have the case on the table. This forgery was done a long time ago and the Israeli government behaved very cowardly. They refused to take steps to have this forgery corrected.
Apart from damaging the Israeli image in the world, it has given a very hard time for Jews all over the world…
HR: What does France-2 want from you? What’s at stake?
PK: They want us to be condemned for defamation. We could be condemned if the judges think our words were too strong. They could say we wrote too strongly. But it doesn’t change the fact that the video is a forgery. Even if we lose, we’ll keep on saying it’s a forgery….
If they succeed, the day we’re condemned will be a great day for them. They’ll say they were vindicated. They’ll say “We didn’t lie when we said Israeli soldiers killed Mohammed al-Dura.”
HR: What does France-2 stand to lose if you prevail?
PK: So many people supported a certain view of the world, so many people were defending Enderlin (pictured left) and Rahma, it’ll be difficult to apologize without firing hundreds of people. France TV, which owns France-2, is organizing France 24, the French CNN. They’ll do what they can to avoid apologizing.
HR: The Mohammed Dura incident was years ago. Why should anyone still care?
PK: This image is carried in everyone’s brain. Everyone thinks it’s true. Daniel Pearl was killed to avenge Dura. [Pearl’s killers] put the image in the video.
The trial will help to clean up the French media and the international media and expose the lies suffered in Lebanon….
When sportsmen take drugs, they’re kicked out. I want that the people who are giving fake stories to the public be kicked out. If people are fired, it’ll be a good deterrent for any other bad guy who would like to lie or misrepresent the truth.
HR: Do you expect a fair trial?
PK: I hope so. But nothing is sure. It’ll be a very good test to see if there is a future in France for honest, decent people. We’ll see how independent the judicial system is.
HR: What’s the relationship between France 2 and the government?
PK: France TV is owned by the government. France 2 is a subsidiary of France TV, the parent company. The CEO of France TV, Patrick de Carolis is the guy who wrote a book with the wife of Jacques Chirac [Conversation, by Bernadette Chirac]. It was a big success so they made him the head of France TV. It’s completely controlled by the state and the relationships are very strong.
HR: What would you like to tell HonestReporting readers?
PK: France cannot be ignored. It’s a small country but it’s important in terms of diplomacy and media. The French government will launch soon France 24. They call it “the French CNN”. It’ll be the voice of the French officials, dispatching ugly messages. For example, you can be sure that they’ll call the people placing car bombs in Iraq or in Israel “resistance fighters.” France can be a big trouble maker in the world because of its media and diplomatic network.
Edge
7:32 pm
Sep 13, 2006
Walt, I don’t mind crediting France and the French Revolution with inspiring the American Revolution and other democratic movements. So what?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
walt
8:29 pm
Sep 13, 2006
“crediting France and the French Revolution with inspiring the American Revolution and other democratic movements”
thks Edge. this is important as it remembers what many on this weblog like Brad Brezinsky mistakenly forget when claiming “France is probably responsible for the most evil” etc.
wonderful. now let’s finally discuss what to do about global HIV/AIDS
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Lexile
12:33 am
Sep 14, 2006
“[...]france does not go to war for business. the us does go to war for business. hmmmm……… ever heard of ethics?[...]”
Well “Peace for oil” or “War for oil”, I don’t know what’s more ethical: it might depend on who you wage war on, don’t you think?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Truth
2:01 am
Sep 14, 2006
To Philippe Karsenty:
Who are you Philippe Karsenty ?
Look at your website… ( http://www.m-r.fr/ )
Read carefully what you’re writing in this article, or everywhere else on Internet…
Like here for example:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22478
(Note that the title was “Jews-Hate: France’s National Sport” but has been updated later.)
Like if they feared something…
You seem to be not that different than Joseph Goebbels.
Sorry but, what you need is a psychologue.
If not a psychiatre…
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Truth
2:09 am
Sep 14, 2006
Just search “Jew-Hate: France’s National Sport” with google (with the “)
You’ll see more than one responses…
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Amit
12:46 pm
Sep 14, 2006
How could the American revolution be inspired by the French revolution when it preceded it?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Anonymous
8:26 am
Sep 15, 2006
“It is probably not going too far to say that America owes its independence to foreign intervention and aid, especially from France. The French monarchy sent arms, clothing, and ammunition to America; it also sent soldiers and the French Navy. Most importantly, the French kept the United States government solvent by lending it the money to keep the Revolution alive.”
“The magnitude of French support of the American Revolution can be glimpsed at the battle of Yorktown. There, the majority of George Washington’s 15,000 man Continental Army were French soldiers.”
http://revolution.h-net.msu.edu/
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
geoff
7:51 pm
Sep 19, 2006
“without french revolution, democracy would probably not exist”
“Walt, I don’t mind crediting France and the French Revolution with inspiring the American Revolution and other democratic movements. So what?”
Hang on one minute. I’m not an American. Nor am I French. But I do know that the American Revolution happened before the French Revolution. I also know that many historians credit the ideals of the American Revolutionaries with sparking the principles that underpinned the French Revolution. France was hardly a democracy at the time of the American Revolution, a tyranny more like it, and any military assistance it gave the American rebels had much more to do with its conflict with Britain than holding any truths to be self-evident.
Credit where credit is due, please.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
phatbaldvoyager
8:30 pm
Sep 19, 2006
Bravo to Philippe Karsenty for his website http://www.m-r.fr/. I live in France where it’s well known that the French media is a propaganda arm for the authorities. It’s a captive audience, the news comes on at 8:00 pm, half the country is sitting at the dinner table watching and listening to it. The government can and does feed them any line they want. They also feed the population their mushy bile on car radios during rush hour. Karsenty’s website should be read by all the French.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Anonymous
11:36 pm
Sep 19, 2006
Geoff, “any military assistance it [France] gave the American rebels had much more to do with its conflict with Britain than holding any truths to be self-evident”
america owes its independence to foreign intervention and aid, especially from france. whatever the reason behind it, the main credit for american independence therefore goes to france, no?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
mac
7:51 am
Sep 22, 2006
no
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
JL
7:46 pm
Sep 27, 2006
In the spring of 2004 Tali Hatwell was driving her car on a road of the Gaza strip. She was pregnant and had four little girls with her, the youngest 3 years old. A terrorist, or freedom fighter if you prefer, shot and killed her. Then the subhuman being approached the car, saw who was inside and killed in cold blood the four little girls. If there was any human feeling left in the so called “international community” where Israel is concerned, this should have been told on the front page of all the newspapers of the world. But it wasn’t.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Jacques
9:16 pm
Sep 28, 2006
The problem with France is well indicated with the response from Walt that the French Revolution created the possibility of a revolution in America. The American Revolution preceded the French Revolution. The American Revolution created a world leader while the French Revolution created a “shitty little country” that tries to act like a world power.
We saw in the Second World War how much of an empire the French were. If it were not for North Americans (U.S. and Canada) they would still be living under the Nazi yoke.
Really, what has France contributed to the world in the last century? Nothing but trouble!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Matthew
7:46 pm
Sep 06, 2007
Walt said:
“edge, where would a ‘pro-democratic’ army come from, if democracy was never invented”
I assume you mean that the French revolution inspired the American one? That would be interesting, seeing as how the French revolution started in the late 1780s / early 1790s depending on how you look at it (Bastille was stormed July 1789), while the American ran 1776-1778, with the peace treaty concluded in 1783. In fact, many histories note that the inspiration went the other way, the the French were inspired by the Americans. It is true that France helped the early US get loose of Britain, but that was because those countries were at war and France saw the opportunity to provide Britain wih a distraction to draw their forces away from the primary (European) theatre of operations.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0