Football passion is a fact, and it is normally one of his qualities. But the passion we have moved in recent days, a sort of collective hysteria, grew louder by the hour, and where the sport is relegated to the background, becoming the pretext for all kinds of malicious instrumentalisations .
The facts are simple: the disappointing performance Team France, which is also not yet eliminated, it must be noted at the time of writing. Disclaimer (cons) each performance will have its reading or analysis, and I will not dwell here on my own, which is worth less or more than the coach who sleeps in each of the 60 million French.
But besides sporting considerations, legitimate and logical, it is clear that what the controversy swelled, pushing up in the shadow of the subjects of any importance (the issue of pensions, at random ) is a Apart from reading schemes we are trying to impose, and other journalistic practices are implemented.
Grid reading: it is increasingly clear as people start to speak, it was decided to make this team with the trial of France mixed with a selection of 1998 had been considered the standard . I said I disagree with what Mr. Finkielkraut said on the subject, I think as often, he said aloud and without oratorical precautions that part of France thinks quietly. Critics more or less candid about the behavior of French players, their language, their "home" or their religious affiliation, are often the translation of intolerance against the suburbs and their inhabitants. So far, we still tolerate the success of French - often "from diversity," as we say modestly - in sport, failing to open their way to other careers and successes, but this episode shows that the glass ceiling is still down one floor, and that even in high performance sport these citizens become infréquentables. Just look at how we analyze authority interpersonal conflicts as cultural clashes between "Black", "Arabs", "Muslims" and white "well behaved" without even listening to what other players say these tensions when they do not belie not purely and simply. It's very simple: those who defend a fantasy vision of a "war of civilizations" internal to our country want to make our disappointments sports his example and demonstration. Attitude blaster completely irresponsible.
then journalistic practices. The controversy took a more violent turn with revelations on the internal life of the Blues' locker room, engaged in the pasture with the view of the remarks certainly unacceptable, but that the group would probably tricolor "managed" in it if he had let the occasion. We now familiar ritual of the reasons the press on this type of process, the use of information leaks and "confidential" we swear hand on heart that everything is done in the name transparency and the duty to inform; it would be irresponsible from taking back home with crucial information to understand an event. Unfortunately, in all situations of this type, More prosaically, there is a tendency of the press in voyeurism, a trend that will crescendo as newspapers face increasing difficulties to keep or win readers. The tabloids know, to sell, you have coverage and headlines that are not in lace. Too bad the sports daily benchmark has fallen into this trap. Beyond this new incident, it is the general question of ethics and scope of work of the press as a whole that is, once again, asked.
This afternoon, the Blues 2010 version will have a final opportunity to come out on top of that imbroglio sized psychodrama. There would be no better answer to give to those who use their failures for purposes that have little to do with sport and its values.
Julien Dray
0 comments:
Post a Comment