French-German Channel Arte's Anti-Bush Spin

Transatlantic Intelligencer reports on the Anti-Bush agenda of Arte, the French-German TV channel.

Those Americans inclined to react to every apparent expression of French rage at America by posing the proverbial and doleful question “Why do they hate us?” might consider Arte and then realize that perhaps “they” don’t know us. The problem with Arte in this connection is not that there is a lack of material on American society and politics in its programming, but rather that there is a wildly excessive offering of such material, almost all of it, however, being selected and spun in such a way as to caste the US in the most negative imaginable light and some of it consisting of outright disinformation. Yesterday’s line-up was typical.

Read it all.

Comments

[Kees Rudolf]

In the Netherlands Arte is available on cable-television. Most households here have got cable television. It plays certainly some role in forming "would-be sophisticated, would-be politically engaged opinion" (as it is aptly called by John Rosenthal), in addition to the role of some other high-brow media. It's really pure poison.
Transatlantic Intelligencer is a very interesting site and the report on Arte's anti-Bush agenda is highly illuminating. I think a lot of "documentaries" on other TV-channels follow exactly the same pattern.To my regret, I can see the impact of it on the brains of some young students, who, in their desire to be well informed and to have well founded opinions, mistake this insidious propaganda for reliable information.

[Downer]

Ich schaue ohnehin kein Arte. Lieber erfreue ich mich über so etwas, denn die Stimme der Vernunft lebt nach wie vor ungehindert fort:

Warum ich für Bush bin

Der amerikanische Präsident George W. Bush hat in den deutschen Medien wenige Freunde. Was man in den letzten Wochen über Bush hierzulande lesen musste, ist geradezu abenteuerlich.

Von Ralf-Dieter Brunowsky

http://www.netzeitung.de/servlets/page?section=784&item=311207

[Gabi]

Matthias Rüb von der FAZ war gerade auf CNN: Kerry und Michael Moore seien Popstars in Deutschland. Es ginge nicht um politische Positionen. Es gäbe 6 Bücher über Kerry nur für Deutschland, es gibt keine englischen Übersetzungen.

Zwei Sender zeigen 9/11-Fahrenheit. Gibt es da irgendeine Erklärung wie zur Bildzeitung, die einen Pro-Bush-Kommentar gebracht hat????

[Gabi]

Fahrenheit 9/11 muß es heißen.

[Downer]

"Matthias Rüb von der FAZ war gerade auf CNN."

Rüb hat in der Schweizer Weltwoche auch ein Plädoyer für John Kerry gehalten - "Erst Denken, dann Schießen." Aber wie dem auch sei.

Gabi, weißt Du zufällig, ob es zu einer Wiederholung kommt, oder weißt Du zumindest, wie die Sendung hieß, in der Rüb auftrat? Besten Dank.

[Downer]

Christopher Hitchens rechnet in der heutigen "Welt" ab:

"'Jeder lieber als Bush' - das ist heute der einzige Klebstoff, der die radikale Linke mit dem rechten Establishment der Demokratischen Partei zusammenbindet - und das bei Leuten, die simple Einseitigkeit heruntermachen! Erstaunlich ist die Buchstäblichkeit, mit der dieses Mantra gesungen wird. Jeder? Inklusive Moqtada al-Sadr, dem schiitischen Fundamentalisten? Die Antwort auf der Linken, die mich erstarren lässt, lautet ziemlich oft: Ja. Das ist Nihilismus. Oder um genau zu sein: Es ist Nihilismus in seinem höchsten Stadium. Wenn es nicht Landesverrat ist - lassen wir diese Frage am besten unberührt - ist es doch gewiss Verrat an den linken Prinzipien. Einer der Redakteure meines früheren Magazins, The Nation, fragte mich neulich, ob ich etwas über meine persönliche politische Entwicklung schreiben wolle. So, wie ich ihn verstand, meinte er damit: Wie gefallen dir denn deine neuen rechten Freunde? Ich kann diese Frage nur zurückgeben. Mir gefallen sie besser als der republikanische Rechtsausleger (und Kriegsgegner) Patrick Buchanan, besser als Wladimir Putin und die zum Kretinismus degenerierte Konservative Partei Großbritanniens oder der niedrige und verlogene Populismus eines Michael Moore, der die psychopathischen Mörder von Irakern mit den Soldaten der amerikanischen Revolution gleichsetzt."

http://www.welt.de/data/2004/10/30/352931.html?s=1

[Gabi]

Downer, es war gerade in der Sendung International Correspondents. Es wird wiederholt. Wie immer auf CNN, bis zum Erbrechen.

Nematt analysierte die arabische Welt und sprach an, daß ein Teil voller Hoffnung auf die USA schauen, weil sie auf Demokratie und Freiheit warten.

[Gabi]

Die WELT habe ich auch lange nicht mehr gelesen. Sie haben sich aufs Niveau der Süddeutschen begeben. Aber diesen Artikel werde ich gleich einmal lesen.

Die Gleichsetzung von Terror und Kampf gegen Terror mit allen seinen Fehlern und Verbrechen und Vergehen, die Menschen eben begehen, die man aber vermeiden will und ahndet, falls sie doch passieren, ist Meinung vieler "Liberaler" in allen Teilen der Welt.

Wer den moralischen Unterschied nicht versteht, auf Hitlers Seite zu kämpfen oder gegen ihn auf Seiten der USA, auf Seiten der Terroristen, die Menschen vor laufender Kamera köpfen und diejenigen, die sie stoppen wollen und dabei auch Grenzen überschreiten und dafür bestraft werden, wer nicht versteht, daß Selbstmordattentate auf anderer Stufe stehen als die schwierigen Versuche, sie zu stoppen, der hat die Geschichte nicht verstanden und die Lehren, die zu ziehen sind.

Die SPD/Grünen haben eine einzigartige Manipulation in den Medien zugelassen und unterstützt, den Terror zu verniedlichen und die Vergehen und Verbrechen in Abu Ghraib bis zur Monströsität aufzublähen, weil das ihre Meinung ist. Sie teilen diese moralische Auffassung.

Moore und Kerry sind Helden, weil sie den Feind Bush attackieren.

Über ihr Feindbild als solches denkt hier doch keiner nach, wenn man sich so schön im mainstream von 90 % verstecken kann. Da muß man doch Recht haben.

Auch im 2. WK wurden auf Seiten der Allierten Verbrechen begangen, und trotzdem wurde der Kampf gegen Hitlerdeutschland und seine Unterstützer nicht unrecht.

[Downer]

NY-TIMES-Korrespondent Richard Bernstein zitiert ausgiebig den Leitartikel Michael Naumanns, der auch wiederum antiamerikanische Reflexe bedient:

http://www.zeit.de/2004/45/01______1_Leiter

Daran sieht man einmal umso mehr, dass es um das deutsche Intellektuellenblatt nicht besonders gut bestellt ist. Vor Jahren noch unverstellbar, aber in diesen Tagen weitgehend der Normalfall im deutschen Blätterwald. Ständig der ermahnende Ton: Wenn Amerika noch weitere vier Jahre mit Bush verbringen muss, ist der Untergang des Abendlandes beschlossene Sache.

Many in Europe See U.S. Vote as a Lose-Lose Affair
By RICHARD BERNSTEIN

BERLIN, Oct. 28 - No matter who wins the presidential election next week, the consequences for American-European relations will be bad, according to a deeply pessimistic view taking hold here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/international/europe/29berlin.html?pagewanted=print&position=

[markus netzer]

gabi,

kennst Du einen Ort, an dem verantwortungsvoll denkende, sich selbst verbindlich einer humanen ethik/religion unterwerfende und gleichzeitig liberal denkende menschen leben?
ich bin allmählich am ende meiner kraft und verliere, abgesehen von meiner zunehmend in innerer emmigration ausgeübten künstlerischen arbeit, die lust am denkenden partizipieren. denn agitieren will ich nicht und ein konstruktiver dialog mit der hier in allen facetten dargestellten selbstgerechtigkeit des gutmenschentotalitarismus ist (zumindest mir nach zwanzig jahren unermüdlichen, mühsamen und menschlich umsichtigen versuchens) kaum mehr möglich. dies nicht zuletzt, weil ich in mir - zu meinem entsetzten und erstmals - so etwas wie vorboten persönlicher militanz entdecke.
where to go, what to do?

a nice guy called
markus

[ralph]

@kees rudolf

Arte ist das passende Programm für irgendwelche Volkshochschüler, die glauben, sie würden irgend etwas von Kunst, Wissenschaft, Geschichte, Gott und der Welt verstehen, bloß weil sie zu solchen Gebieten mal einen Themenabend konsumiert haben.

Die sogenannten Nachrichten haben das Niveau von RTL-Nachtjournal ("Überfall auf den Irak ..."), nur dass man hier das Gefühl hat, als machte die Redaktion immer schön brav Männchen vor dem sicherlich hochgehängten Portrait des sauberen Herrn Chirac.

Am meisten nervt mich allerdings, dass der Blick auf Amerika so pseudo-neugierig, so pseudo-interessiert, so pseudo-unvoreingenommen, so pseudo-nachdenklich ist -Ach hätten doch die bornierten Amis dasselbe Interesse an Frankreich!-und doch die altbekannte Perspektive nie auch nur für eine Sekunde aufgibt. Zwischen Avantgard-Tanz und Avantgard-Film gibt´s dann halt mal solide, deftige Anti-Amerika-Kost, selbst wenn die selbstverständlich als Nouvelle Cuisine daher kommt, um als so etwas wie Hochkultur durchzugehen.
Ein ARTE-Beitrag, an den ich mich erinnere, ging so: Ein Filmteam bereist auf unsere Kosten Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska etc., um zu zeigen, dass der Mythos von der Grenze und dem Westen Resignation und Armut gewichen ist; ganz Oklahoma ist arm ... nein, nicht ganz Oklahoma, es gibt da nämlich ein Dorf, eine Kleinstadt und die ist reich -eine Insel seligen Wohlstandes in einem Meer der Armut. Warum ist das Dorf so reich? ... Na? ... Immer noch nicht? ... -weil das US-Militär dort seine Bomben bauen läßt, was im Moment ja Konjuntur hat.

Hey ARTE, n e u e s Thema eines weiteren Themenabends für Eure neugierigen Zuschauer, natürlich mit Pseudo-Offenheit suggerierendem Fragezeichen versehen:

"Die USA als Militärisch-Industrieller-Komplex?"

[Jack]

I noticed that many of the comments to the above post were in German. This indicates to me that American visitors to this site may not know what all the fuss is about. My fellow Americans. I have lived in Germany for nearly twenty years and have witnessed first hand the rise of witless anti-Americanism here. The post about ARTE is correct (and applies to much of the rest of the German media as well). You would not believe the mindless hateful anti-American garbage that runs here. It might actually better that you don't know, because if you did, you would be very angry.

[Joe]

Jack,

With a bit of luck the heartland will soon find out.

This will become apparent if the candidate all of Europe wants to become President wins this election.

It is interesting how these people feel free to trash the US and at the same time feel it is important and want their nations to have a good relationship with the US.

I can see Robert Z needs to be passing out more of his socialized med's. Europe is going to need them.

[Robert Z.]

Joe, just out of curiosity: did you suffer brain damage sometime?

[Joe]

Robert Z,

Why do you ask?

Does it concern you that Americans might actually find out what the attitude really is in Germany?

[Robert Z.]

No, Joe, that doesn't concern me. Why do you think that it does?

Robert Z,

I guess you do not find it a bit strange that most of the euro landers feel it is ok to trash the US. The wrap this in its really Bush.

At the same time, they or at least that is what the polls say, think it is important their respective nations have a good relationship with the US.

I guess you do not see a great deal of conflict in that statement.

Now what happens should Kerry win? He is going to press the euro landers and their leaders to do more in Iraq. The operative word there is "IN".

Of course, they will not. What then? Does the hate toward Bush now turn toward JFK?

This will cause more American to question just what they should think about the euro landers?

I guess you do not see this as a realistic outcome. Or then maybe you do not want to see this.

There is a flip side to the anti-Americanism in Europe. It is the anti-Europism which is growing in the US. Kerry will speed this along.

Here is a link for you.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,324165,00.html

This is one of the money quotes in it.....
Candidate Kerry has been pledging the opposite. He wants to bring as many allies as possible to Iraq -- including Germany's army, the Bundeswehr. "Kerry is taking a big risk," said Gernot Erler, deputy of the parliamentary group of the Social Democrats, before ruling out the possibility Berlin would accept any troop request -- even from a Democratic president

Now I for one do not really care a great deal about Iran one way or the other. What is going to happen there will happen and it will do so with or without all the posturing by Germany and france.

Of course, like the other sources I have used Spiegel could be lying too. Remember this is the English web page not the one the Germans read.

So you tell me just what you think the future holds if Kerry wins.

How do you think the Germans and the government in Berlin are going to react?

What action will Kerry have to take to make you people love him? To support America?

And to answer the question implied by Gernot Erler, Just whose risk is it? Is it Germany's risk or the US's risk. Who gains and who loses and what do they gain and what do they lose?

Just what do you think Americans should think about your nation and the rest of euro land?

Robert Z, I look forward to your comments.

[Joe]

Robert Z,

Sorry forgot my nick. But the above are my questions to you.

Thanks

[Robert Z.]

> I guess you do not find it a bit strange that most of the euro
> landers feel it is ok to trash the US. The wrap this in its
> really Bush.

That's true. And of coure I find this strange.

> At the same time, they or at least that is what the polls say,
> think it is important their respective nations have a good
> relationship with the US.

That's true.

>I guess you do not see a great deal of conflict in that statement.

Sure I do, that's why I am reading this blog.

> Now what happens should Kerry win? He is going to press the euro
> landers and their leaders to do more in Iraq. The operative word
> there is "IN".
>
> Of course, they will not.

Yes.

> What then? Does the hate toward Bush
> now turn toward JFK?

I guess. As you already pointed out, most of those guys say that they just don't like Bush, but in fact they are not just against Bush but against the USA and the values of the free, democratic world (or at least they are not willing to fight for these values).

> This will cause more American to question just what they should
> think about the euro landers?

Yes, I guess that many Democrats, who today believe that the huge amount of anti-americanism is just anti-Bush and use this in their campain ("Stronger at home, respected in the world") will be forceds to reconsider. This will harm the transatlantic relationship even more, which I do not wish to happen.

> I guess you do not see this as a realistic outcome. Or then maybe
> you do not want to see this.

True, since I hope and believe that Bush will win the elections. ;)

> There is a flip side to the anti-Americanism in Europe. It is the
> anti-Europism which is growing in the US. Kerry will speed this
> along.
>
> Here is a link for you.
>
> http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/
> 0,1518,324165,00.html
>
> This is one of the money quotes in it.....
> Candidate Kerry has been pledging the opposite. He wants to bring
> as many allies as possible to Iraq -- including Germany's army,
> the Bundeswehr. "Kerry is taking a big risk," said Gernot Erler,
> deputy of the parliamentary group of the Social Democrats, before
> ruling out the possibility Berlin would accept any troop request
> -- even from a Democratic president
>
> Now I for one do not really care a great deal about Iran one way
> or the other. What is going to happen there will happen and it
> will do so with or without all the posturing by Germany and
> france.
>
> Of course, like the other sources I have used Spiegel could be
> lying too. Remember this is the English web page not the one the
> Germans read.

I think they are not lying here. I am quite certain that Germany and France will not join the coalition in Iraq, even if Kerry is elected.

> So you tell me just what you think the future holds if Kerry
> wins.
>
> How do you think the Germans and the government in Berlin are
> going to react?
>
> What action will Kerry have to take to make you people love him?
> To support America?
>
> And to answer the question implied by Gernot Erler, Just whose
> risk is it? Is it Germany's risk or the US's risk. Who gains and
> who loses and what do they gain and what do they lose?
>
> Just what do you think Americans should think about your nation
> and the rest of euro land?

Well, they should not fall for Kerry's story that it's all Bush's fault.

But hateful "anti-europeism" from the americans, even though this would be an understandable reaction, is not helpful. Neither for europe nor for the USA.

[Joe]

Robert Z,

Thank you. I thought your answers were very honest and for the most part accurate in their assessment.

I wished you would expand on the risks and what you think might be the results of those risks?

The reaction in Berlin?

What would a President Kerry have to do to obtain the active support of Germany?

I think we might both agree that to this point, the actions by the government in Berlin have not been helpful or at least not helpful to the US.

I can understand why a growing anti-Europism in the US would not be helpful. But does this really matter given what has already taken place and what the probably near term future holds given what we both anticipate the answer to troops from Germany will be.

Finally why should the US continue to be helpful to the Germans. In this case I mean the American people toward the Germany people.

This still seems to me as if this is a one way street where the Germans want the US to do and behave just like they want them to but at the same time have no responsiblity for their own actoins and nothing should be expected of them.

[Robert Z.]

> I wished you would expand on the risks and what you think might
> be the results of those risks?

"And to answer the question implied by Gernot Erler, Just whose risk is it? Is it Germany's risk or the US's risk. Who gains and who loses and what do they gain and what do they lose?"

Well, if Kerry wins the election, and asks Germany and France for troops, he takes the "great risk" of not getting those troops.

This is Kerry's risk, since he could not keep his promise to the american people. The likely result of this rejection would be that the gap between europe and america grows. This would weaken the alliance between the free and democratic states even more and reduce the chance that this situation can improve again. And such improvement would IMHO be helpful for all free and democratic states.

> The reaction in Berlin?
>
> What would a President Kerry have to do to obtain the active
> support of Germany?

I think he can not do anything at all. Chancellor Schröder promised to send no troops to Iraq, and this promise was very important for his reelection in 2002 and is still very important to many Germans today. So breaking this promise he would commit political suicide.

> I think we might both agree that to this point, the actions by
> the government in Berlin have not been helpful or at least not
> helpful to the US.

Sure. Those actions and statements were not helpful in any way. Not for Germany, not for the USA, not for Iraq and so on. They just helped Schröder to get reelected.

> I can understand why a growing anti-Europism in the US would not
> be helpful. But does this really matter given what has already
> taken place and what the probably near term future holds given
> what we both anticipate the answer to troops from Germany will
> be.

Well, I hope that it matters. I hope that this blog and other blogs can help to change the opinion of more and more Germans. Wouldn't this blog be pointless otherwise?

> Finally why should the US continue to be helpful to the Germans.
> In this case I mean the American people toward the Germany
> people.
>
> This still seems to me as if this is a one way street where the
> Germans want the US to do and behave just like they want them to
> but at the same time have no responsiblity for their own actoins
> and nothing should be expected of them.

Well, the problem is that most Germans do not seem to believe that the American people is helpful to the Germans, and so they are not willing to help. They believe that it is the fault of the USA that there is all this terrible terrorism.

If this blog and other blogs can help to change this wrong impression, then Germany and other european states will again be more helpful.

As you see, I am an optimist.

[Gabi]

Robert, I think a big big terror attack in Berlin and Munich and Düsseldorf and so on will change the attitude of the German government. I don't wish one but I think it is unavoidable. A matter of time.

Then they will work together with the USA.

The media will follow and then the people of Germany.

Sad that we need a terror attack to understand terror. To watch 9/11 was only a shock for some days, weeks.

Imagine the chemical bomb would have a sign: FROM IRAQ (built with the help of Germany).

[Downer]

Gabi is right. First, bad things must happen until important decisions are taking.

[@Gabi]

@Gabi
"Imagine the chemical bomb would have a sign: FROM IRAQ (built with the help of Germany)"

Dont forget the help of the USA, France, Russia and some more countries........

[tm]

Does Karl B. still hang out here?

Transatlantic Intelligencer's reports reminded me of his descriptions here, in February and in April, of a couple of programs on Arte which went decidedly against the grain. I hope it wasn't bad manners, but I extracted his comments and put them here.

[amiexpat]

sadly, even an attack in Germany would not wake people up.
the Amis would be blamed as well.
'If it weren'T for the war in Iraq, this would never have happened'
I can hear it now.