DID FLORENCE AUBENAS DESERVED ALL THAT NOISE?

Behind this provocative question holds probably one of the most scandalous politically incorrect idea of the moment. France was right to wake up strongly for Florence and Hussein, but what i want to say here is that this particular hostage media coverage was excessive and somehow detrimental... I would like to share it with you why. Maybe after you read me you will agree…

Let me remind first that Florence Aubenas, a french journalist for the newspaper Liberation, has been taken hostage in Irak with her guide Hussein Hanoun, for about 160 days . A terrible episode, that unfortunately becomes more and more common in Irak, without even always understanding the true motivations and expectations of the kidnappers…Anyway a tough moment in Life. .

Since she was kept hostage an amazing and unusual wave of solidarity and media coverage were dedicated by so many people in France. Probably like never before in the whole history of terrorism and kidnapping. Two days ago Laurence and Hussein were set free: which is a great news and any French feels happy about that, Jacques Chirac being first.

Now, i would like to stop a minute a explain to none french readers what happened in France: Florence and Hussein became the central point of focus of any information, media, demonstration and social discussion for the past 3 months. Nothing was more spoken about: not one website, not one tv show, not a tv news without at least a mention of the poor hostages. Blogs, radio programms, tv shows, outdoor demonstrations, permanent stickers, street posters, even parties and concerts, tons of GRPs that even an average guy could not escape…to “support” Florence and Hussein. So much noise that i am asking today: why? why so much? why not before for other hostages? why for her and not others, other causes?

  

• Mass support is the privilege of journalists. Like Florence Aubenas: the whole media took posession of the subject to cover it and make noise and pressure on the government about it. They were right. But if she was not journalist what would have happened? probably nothing and not a lot. Liberation was the initiator and conductor of the wave. Florence case was the consequence of a professional status and not of a desinterested action. NPO (non profit organization) hostages don t benefit from that noise, if Hussein was alone he would have never got that either.
• The media coverage was undecent for many: Its daily, permanent intensity that became overdosed was undecent to other hostages who did not benefited from it like Ingrid Betancourt kept hostage for 2 years in south america and that we hardly hear/ talk about in France. Undecent to future hostage (i am sure they will be more) that for sure will not be “supported” like that. Undecent to families of many who had someone of their family kept hostage and killed. Undecent to other important problems that are not so covered (see later)
• The coverage was so noisy it became invisible: any marketing director will tell you that too much advertising kills advertising. But Florence and Hussein are human beings, not product, therefore it is natural to overcome marketing rules. However i could not help of feeling (even from abroad…) that the message because of overdose had no more effect on me (and probably not only me) and that it even disturbed me in its permanentness. As an anedoct a friend of mine asked me one day after watching a TV report showing posters : “Who is Florence Hussein you are talking so much about in the news?” “Florence Hussein” ??? you will understand the rational behind that anecdote: the message was so common that it lost its true meaning and POWER.
• Negotiations matter not noise: everybody knows that only good negotiations can free hostages. This is what also happened with Florence and Hussein although we will never know what exactly government was ready to give to kidnappers…The mobilisation was good to put pressure on the government to free Florence Aubenas. The government could not afford to disappoint after that social wave of generosity and humanity. But was so much necessary to put pressure? Probably not. The proof 2 months before Chesnot and Malbrunot, 2 other french journalists were set free without all that noise.
• What about the rest. Nothing else matters? Why this subject became number one country priority? Because it was an easy way to forget other important issues/ news. Because some media told us it was more important than the rest and therefore we followed (me included) forgetting the rest. Because the government had an amazing way out to cover up other nation important issues. I must add I was personnally disturbed that this was so permanently omnipresent when other important issues should create at least the same level of solidarity and action: unemployment, European constitution, Ingrid Bettancourt, Kids that disappeared and never were found back (like estelle), …I think found in Florence and Hussein a way to express solidarity beyond this case, because solidarity is a feeling particularly absent in France: there all these events and messages told something else about French society. France needs solidarity and most of all action: this was an opportunity to remind it.
• This level of support is even dangerous: terrorists and kidnappers are excited by media coverage, they seek for it. Noise encourage them to keep their hostage and even to kidnap more. Let me say that the kidnappers of Florence and hussein must have been flattered totally (actually Florence precised it) and probably were encouraged in keeping her a little more, who knows even to kill her to be a little bit more famous. Terrorists are not rational people… Can this give ideas to other terrorists: probably. Why not after all? Kidnapping a French journalist is the best way to become famous instantly now…
• The overdose of NO-INFORMATION is finally embarassing: what did we learn during  that campaign? nothing much. Florence and Hussein were kept hostage and a lot of solidarity around France. What else? nothing…nothing at all. This don t-know-more message everyday, every hour, in every city…We were brain-fed without noticing and even understanding why. Disturbing even insulting with regards to our capacity to judge and evaluate information. Indeed media are not the only players in that game: they initiate, we followed them because we decided to play a part of it. Based on what? Because we decided this as an important cause. And it was one. But what about the rest of problems? My answer: overdose made the difference and not only the cause in itself. Because when you look carefully there are thousands of good/better reasons to get involved in long nation wide action/reaction (poorness, kids education, drug…) So why that one in particular? Would you have done something without that excess of information? If poorness was broadcast so much in the media would you do something?…i am sure we would be surprised by the answers to these questions.
• The overdose of NO-INFORMATION will be problematic: what do we all feel now? a terrible need for information to understand that will put Florence Aubenas and the government in delicate situation. They will be requested permanently for information, details on the period of detention, the conditions for freedom, the identity of terrorists,….Of course everybody wants to understand now why? what happened? why were we so much told about that? Why did i got involved?  You can already feel that when you read the news. Everybody wants answers. And they will never come because information will be confidential. And poor Florence who probably wishes quiet and silence. She will be swallowed by the same media tornado that helped raise the awareness of her case.

On the other side saying/doing nothing would be completely stupid and therefore i claim that our media and government should have been more cautious in the way they managed their campaign. Because now they will pay the price of overdose. But not only them, us too: starting with the price of the probable book to come by Florence …and Florence too unfortunately: free from terrorists she becomes now hostage of media and political interests….

Conclusion: Less and Better

Have we done too much? Was it worth? So should have we done less? More would have been better? Surely not (awareness came to its climax already) maybe even dangerous. Like for iceberg the invisible side is the big part. In our case negotiations, intelligence and diplomatic efforts. So maybe we should have done less maybe on the visible side (because after a while it does not help) but better and more powerful for sure on the invisible side. It was a long time ago that the nation was aware of Florence and Hussein case: so after overdose was reached, time comes to wonder what is the next step to do better: and maybe there is nothing else to do. But maybe yes Florence and Hussein were hold more than 5 months it could have been shorter: national lobbying, international lobbying, fund raising to family support, were other tools that we did not hear so much about ….….Can we learn from that? I hope so…

Solidarity is good/ blind overdose from media no. Mass support is good/ Brain-washed generosity no. Hostage conditions are terrible / Mass coverage is dangerous. Information is good / Media overdose is insulting.

In a word Florence and Hussein of course deserved to be free, to be supported at a high level but without blind overdose because it prevents better action for them and other opportunities.

Comments

[F. de C.]

Couldn't use the trackback. So:
I linked this article -with the note on Google!-
http://www.u-blog.net/kelepokepique/note/157

[zapa]

Interesting even if sometimes quite confusing as per the real idea conveyed. I fundamentally disagree on numerous aspects and felt compelled to comment:
Mass suport is the privilege of journalist: You claim that only journalist get cover. There has been so many hostages in Irak that actually I do not have a "distribution" of their profession but there has been, for example, a massive coverage for the British-Irish-Iraki woman, who was in charge of an aid agency and unfortunatly got executed . You also question what would be the coverage if Florence Aubenas was not a journaliste, and claim that Liberation was the initiator of the wave. Well, well, well. Firstly, let's face it, who except military forces and some very minute profession are going in force in coutries torn by wars and occupation? Who? Yes indeed, journalist. And furthermore, I can not see any problem with the actual employer of FA to organise the "wave" to rally support for her employee. Makes total sense to me.

Media coverage was undecent to many: Well, well, well. I do not think this is a news. It can not be denied that Irak is today doing the front pages, so Irak related story are more likely to come on the front of the newspaper than Colombia related. I am however still facing decent "media exposure" to the fate of Ingrid Betancourt.

The coverage was so noisy... : not sure the anecdote of a friend watching TV bears a lot of weight to be honest?

Negocition matter, not noise. Sorry to contradict you but the coverage around Chesnot and Malbrunot was simply HUGE if not much much bigger than the one that FA benefited from.

What about the rest. Nothing ...? Interesting diatribe which finished with a little attack against France. I would like to remind that the way to cover mediatic event has nothing to do with the shortcoming of specific countries. An example: the world got taken over by the press after the Tsunami event that killed 200,000 people. Does the world have an idea of the massacres going on in Africa, massacres that have generated casualties in the same range as those of the WWII (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War) ? Why so much attention for a "little Tsunami" and so little for civil war of this amplitude? May be the entire world found a way to express solidarity??? Or may be it was simply more prone to get media attention. Full stop.

This level of support is dangerous: people… "Can this give ideas to other terrorists: probably." Come on Ouriel. Taking hostage has been common practice for thousands of years... As if media coverage was what is actually causing people to be taken hostage. Shall we talk instead about the cause rather than the consequence, about the crisis in Irak rather than the hostages in Irak. Or may be we do not want to be able to talk about it? I take it this is not what your reasoning intended to go to but it is indeed where it would be ending. Be careful Ouriel, this "let's kidnap a journalist and let's get famous" example is EXACTLY in the same vein of a right wing american blog which concludes by "let's buy a Mercedes" http://fuckfrance.com/read.html?postid=1294005&replies=148&page=3.

The overdose of NO-INFORMATION ...: Question: what would be your expectation of information when it comes to the authorities negociating with hostage takers? The place where the hostages are? An interview of the hostage takers? Unfortunately, there is not much that can be obtained but the worst thing would be for people to be forgotten and let to rot in their hole. Hence the coverage reminding people not to forget.
"Would you have done something without that excess of information?" Has actually anyone done something about it??

Anyway, I will close here by stating the bleeding obvious. "Florence too unfortunately: free from terrorists she becomes now hostage of media and political interests…." Don't you think that she is delighted, rightly, to have to face this. And when it comes to the book, a- let's see, loads of other hostages did not necessarily write one, and if she does, well you do not have to buy it ... unless you really want to do away with what you called NO-INFORMATION and know EXACTLY her ordeal?

[ouriel]

thanks for that quality comment. Let s get back to your points 1 by 1 and let s make sure i was clear enough (i do recognize that what i say is complex, problematic and not easy to agree with)

> mass support is the privilege of journalist: what i mean is that journalist get more (incredibly more) cover than others in similar situations (doctors, NGOs, ...). it is a fact. The problem is not that FA employer organize a wave (don t get me wrong this is even great). The problem is the selectiveness according to the status. If you are journalists you will get more/ much more (http://www.a7fr.com/article.php?id=3662 apparently other think like me). By the way out of military and journalists: NGO, politics and diplomatics are also massively present in Irak. My comment is not only refering to hostage in Irak but to all kinds of situations where a life is at stake.
> My comment do not apply only to media: but to all other form of support. as you know the support got to all level of society (associations, politics, schools,...) and therefore my conclusion is on the excess of this particular action symptomic of French society unable to wake up to solve its important issues.
> Media coverage is undecent to many: you obviously did not think of other families who lost their kids in France and still looking for them for example . Why don t they get that support? Because they are not in Irak? My point here again is that, because of strong irak media coverage, FA got special coverage.
> The anecdote is not the point regarding "the noise". It is just showing a consequence of excess mediatic coverage. The point is that all the message was so present at all level of my life (Computer, TV, street, ...) that it had no more effect on me because i was not noticing it anymore. And i am sure not to be alone in that case.
> Coverage was probably bigger (and i believe even better) for Chesnot and Malbruno and it supports my point: but i did not feel like it because it was on a shorter period of detention. The point is that level of support to get government into action was reached much before the last days of FA s detention. And therefore all incremental actions (which was more popular than mediatic) was not what made a difference. Again it participates in my conclusion: the french people needed an opportunity for solidarity because this is missing in France (Exactly like European constitution pol was an opportunity to express a need for a change of government and not a "no" to Europe)
> What about the rest? first i don t see any problem in criticizing France. Second please do not compare FA case and Tsunami. I don t think it is relevant and even decent. My point again is that France is not apt to wake up, gather solidarity, creativity and energy like they did for FA to solve their own problem (an not the world s catastrophes as you mention)
> Level of support is dangerous: maybe for thousands years they were hostages but not media. And i believe you should read more about terrorists psychology: they seek/ need media coverage, starting in Palestine for many years now. Media is their best partners because it is the best way to spread and intensify terror message but also to gain better compensation when negotiations come. Media is not the cause for taking hostages of course but it is a pretty good reason to keep them longer and even kill them. The reasoning is not " let s get an hostage to get famous" but " let s get an hostage, and get media involved to get coverage and then better firepower to negotiate". In FA case terrorists had a wonderful case. By the way i don t join to the analysis of the mercedes case you indicate: causes for taking hostage are clear. But causes to use media are different. Don t get me wrong....
> The overdose of NO-INFORMATION: the problem is not the NO INFORMATION, but the overdose. more info cannot be obtained. right. Overdose: is not sain because it lead to lost of control and blindness on other key issues. To answer your question. "Would you have done something without that excess?" the answer is OF COURSE. For a proof just have a look on Modjaba case in my blog.
> your conclusion: i don t know if Florence was delighted to face that media coverage. For now maybe yes. she s a journalist so she s used to media. But let s talk about it in a month. Chesnot and Malbruno themself said they were over sollicited and said on the TV, media should respect her. If she writes a book this will be great, because FINALLY it will put an end to this NO-INFORMATION. Her book will have probably a lot of success and it will be just the consequence of the situation: Overdose of NO-INFORMATION creates a need for TRUE-INFORMATION (that we will get only partly because a lot is confidential)
> My conclusion: it is always difficult not to be critical when it comes about such a situation where OF COURSE support is needed. My reflexion is just about excess and the illness of french society it talks about through the above. Illness that can be analyzed through above symptoms. But to see that it requires a little honesty.

[Dominic]

.