France bids adieu to the words Facebook and Twitter from broadcast journalism

It was 2003. The Culture Ministry in France announced a ban on the use of "e-mail" in all government ministries, documents, publications or websites. Some say it was considered yet another step to stem an incursion of English words into the French lexicon.

Now, in 2011, French officials have banned the use of Twitter and Facebook on public airwaves.

Are the French further protecting the integrity of their language from the influence of Anglo-Saxon culture or simply just trying to remove product placement from public broadcasting. Or is it, as one blogger states, It isn't so much that the words are in English that upsets French sensibilities. It is the fact that the whole thing, the idea of open to everyone, free circulation of information, spreading gossip, mayhem, self-regulating, social cacophony is UN-FRENCH.

You decide—

Here is an article about Frances latest move to ban words that happen to be non-French, from public use:

Twitter and Facebook reminders banned from French airwaves by Kim Willsher in Paris for the guardian.co.uk

How do you say Facebook and Twitter in French? You don't – at least, not if you are on radio or television, where French officials have banned any mention of them unless they are specifically part of the story.

The internet sites have fallen foul of a 1992 decree that outlaws the advertising or promotion of private business on programmes. Journalists will no longer be able to end their reports by saying "Follow us on Twitter" or "Have a look at our Facebook page", because the French government deems this as either blatant or subliminal promotion, and has decided it is unfair to other similar networks.

Christine Kelly, spokeswoman for the Conseil Supérieur de l'Audiovisuel (CSA), the government broadcasting authority, said: "Why give preference to Facebook, which is worth billions of dollars, when there are other social networks that are struggling for recognition. This would be a distortion of competition. If we allow Facebook and Twitter to be cited on air, it's opening a Pandora's box. Other social networks will complain to us, saying 'Why not us?'"

Kelly said the CSA was not seeking to block the networks, only to foster fairer practices. "We encourage the use of social networks ... CSA members spend hours on them. Perhaps one day Facebook will become a generic term, but for the moment it is a commercial enterprise – a leading one, certainly, but not the only one."

No details have been given on how the rule will be enforced or what punishment might await those who continue to say Facebook and Twitter on air.

The ban comes less than two weeks after President Nicolas Sarkozy's internet and digital technology summit, the e-G8, where he was given a Facebook T-shirt by the site's founder, Mark Zuckerberg.

Some commentators have suggested the ban is another effort by France to control the influence of Anglo-Saxon cultural influences, particularly those seen as encouraging the use of English.

The two sites have been particularly cited in relation to the scandal surrounding the arrest of Socialist presidential candidate Dominique Strauss-Kahn on sexual assault charges in New York.

"The CSA hasn't understood that above being trademarks, Twitter and Facebook are public spaces where more than 25% of the French public discuss and exchange information," said journalist Benoît Raphael.
Kelly said broadcasters must not use the website names unless it was "pivotal to the story". Instead, they should say: "Find us on social networks."

I Truly Value Freedom Of Expression. Do I Sometimes Take It For Granted?

At The Miami International Book Fair today, I listened to a panel on censorship and freedom of expression around the globe. What a timely topic since President Obama is in China expressing support for freedom of expression and full access to electronic media, today.

At the session on censorship, I was amazed to learn that book banning is not a thing of the past in the United States. In fact, parents sue and a win cases against school boards every year. I even learned the Diary of Anne Frank is one of the most frequently banned books in US.

What I found most disturbing is that today, thousands of authors worldwide are in prison, missing, kidnapped, facing death threats, awaiting trial etc. for what they have written. The final panelist read a long list of names of those imprisoned in other cultures, many from the Middle East, Asia, Southeast Asia and Africa.

The panel raised my awareness of International PEN, the worldwide association of writers, was founded in London in 1921 to promote friendship and intellectual co-operation among writers everywhere. PEN originally stood for "Poets, Essayists and Novelists", but now includes writers of any form of literature, such as journalists and historians. Other goals included: to emphasize the role of literature in the development of mutual understanding and world culture; to fight for freedom of expression; and to act as a powerful voice on behalf of writers harassed, imprisoned and sometimes killed for their views. It is the world’s oldest human rights organization and the oldest international literary organization.

Some popular books that have been banned in the United States over the years are the Wizard of Oz, Catcher in The Rye, The Great Gatsby, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Color Purple, Charlotte’s Web, Animal Farm, Winnie the Pooh, and of course--- the most famous banned novel (worldwide) in our lifetime: The Satanic Verse by Salmon Rushdie. (BTW, I heard Salmon Rushdie speak at the book fair last year and he was riveting)

The following were the top three reasons cited for challenging materials in the US as reported to the Office of Intellectual Freedom:
1. the material was considered to be "sexually explicit"
2. the material contained "offensive language"
3. the materials was "unsuited to any age group"

In China, today, President Obama speaking on freedom of expression and access said "These freedoms of expression and worship, of access to information and political participation - we believe are universal rights."

China is an authoritarian country in which there are no elections for the country's national leaders. Media outlets and the internet are heavily censored, and those who speak out against the government are often imprisoned.

Mr. Obama added: "They should be available to all people, including ethnic and religious minorities, whether they are in the United States, China or any nation."

After his main speech, he addressed the issue again in a question and answer session with Chinese students - many of whom spoke English.

Mr. Obama said freedom of information - including open access to the internet - was important.

"That makes our democracy stronger because it forces me to hear opinions that I don't want to hear - it forces me to examine what I'm doing," he said.

He said the internet was a powerful tool to mobilize people and had helped him win the presidency last year.

I agree wholeheartedly with the president. It often makes me wonder: Do we take Freedom of Expression for granted?

Here is a video of the panel on censorship and freedom of expression that was live streamed on C-Span on Saturday November 14th 2009:
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/289995-3

Here is C –Span’s description of the panel on censorship and freedom of expression:

Panelists from PEN International spoke about censorship. Panelist included: Mary Gordon, author of Reading Jesus: A Writer’s Encounter With the Gospels (Pantheon); Ana Menendez, author of The Last War: A Novel (HarperCollins); Francine Prose, author of Anne Frank: The Book, the Life, the Afterlife (Harper); Sam Tanenhaus, author of [The Death of Conservatism (Random House); and Michael Thomas, author of Man Gone Down: A Novel (Grove), "Panel on Censorship," a PEN World Voices event of the 26th Miami Book Fair International, took place Saturday, November 14, 2009, 11:00 a.m., in the Chapman Conference Center of Miami Dade College, Wolfson Campus.

updated news report on Obama visit:

November 18, 2009
Chinese newspapers emphasised the US president's positive comments

China has tried to neutralise US President Barack Obama's attempt to speak directly to ordinary Chinese people.

Officials have used their control of the media to make sure citizens receive only a censored version of the US president's comments.

In a question-and-answer session on Monday in Shanghai, Mr Obama praised China and urged it to adopt certain universal rights and freedoms.

But in news reports about the session, Chinese media outlets largely ignored the criticism and played up the positive comments.