The NY Times' Dangerous Obsession With Marine Le Pen
Some thoughts about the skewed and lopsided coverage on the eve of the second round of voting.
The @nytimes has a dangerous obsession with Le Pen. A quick review of headlines from the past month:
Marine Le Pen Is as Dangerous as Ever
nytimes.com/2022/04/20/opi…
Macron May Keep the Presidency, but Le Pen Has Already Won
Le Pen Closer Than Ever to the French Presidency (and to Putin)
nytimes.com/2022/04/22/wor…
A Reinvented Marine Le Pen Threatens to Upend French Elections
nytimes.com/2022/04/07/wor…
Macron to Face Le Pen for President as French Gravitate Toward Extremes
French Election Opens Up as Marine Le Pen Surges
nytimes.com/2022/04/04/wor…
In Le Pen Territory, as France Votes, Anger at a Distant President
nytimes.com/2022/04/23/wor…
A Problem for Macron in France’s Election: ‘The Hatred He Arouses’
Even if the tone toward her is negative, she has absolutely dominated the way the Times covers and thinks about this election. In much the same way Trump used to drive media narratives. Lessons not learned, I guess.
The coverage is veering into New York Times Pitchbot (@DougJBalloon) territory. It reeks of the Trump-obsessive coverage in the US. The determination to understand the monster's appeal and working doubly hard to avoid the appearance of liberal bias and thus overcompensating.
I have my own critiques of Macron. And it's fair to say that there's unusual disdain for him relative to the actual state of the country. Whatever his successes, he is a clumsy politician. Still, where are the stories seeking to understand the Macron voter?
The default seems to be: Anyone voting for Macron is just choosing the person they hate less. But that's not true. Polls show his approval rating is above 40%, among the highest for anyone seeking re-election in the last 20 years. He was the first choice of 28% in round 1.
The now lionized Chirac was around 48% but at the end of a 2nd term in 2007, and had been in the mid-20s a year earlier.
Sarkozy lost re-election in 2012 and because his approval was under 30% most of his term, he was considered one of the most popular presidents of the 5th Republic.
correction: considered one of the most unpopular…
And Hollande...FFS, the man had an approval rating of 4% at one point. So inept he didn't even run for re-election. This is what unpopularity looks like.
The point is: To paint Macron as somehow unusually unpopular is just not the case. He is one of the 3 or 4 most popular politicians in the country at this point, not bad in a country where hating the president is practically the national pastime.
To be fair: @paulkrugman did give Macron and France props for the economic performance during the pandemic back in January.
But if you're going to slobber all over Le Pen's reinvention and the drift to the right over and over, it would seem that it be reasonable to explore some of Macron's achievements, and why many other voters are big fans.
Take France's booming tech sector. That would seem to be a good thing, no? Well, no. Because according to the Times, it has not solved all of France's economic issues (an impossibly high bar).
‘La French Tech’ Arrives Under Macron, but Proves No Panacea
However, we learn that Macron seems to be lost in a vanity project trying to address the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
President Macron’s Unending Russia Diplomacy
And they did find free time to get to the bottom of ConsultantGate!
Macron Goes on Defensive Over Use of McKinsey and Other Consultants
In case you're not up to speed on every single thing Macron has done wrong, you can read this tidy summary.
Emmanuel Macron Is Playing a Dangerous Game
Readers might be interested to know about a €30bn reindustrialization plan announced last year to catalyze production across numerous sectors, especially green ones. (Wait, isn't Macron purely neoliberal?) France is attracting record foreign investment.
Dullsville! Instead, let's get 1,500 words on a plant Macron failed to save.
For Macron, France’s Troubled Industries Hit Home
