Critics on social media platform X have expressed concerns over what they perceive as double standards in the coverage of Morocco by some French media outlets. The controversy began when French TV channel BFMTV reaired cartoons that were deemed insulting to King Mohammed VI of Morocco. The move sparked widespread reactions on social media, with many accusing these outlets of selectively using the concept of freedom of expression to provoke Morocco.
Several activists and commentators have spoken out against what they see as a biased approach by certain French media outlets. Rafiqa Rihani, a prominent activist, argued that these outlets must recognize that Morocco is not a platform for settling scores and that its institutions and symbols should not be made a subject of provocation under the guise of freedom of expression. She called on these media outlets to demonstrate the same level of courage in addressing their own contradictions.
The issue has also been analyzed from a legal perspective. The social media account Observator pointed out that Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of expression but also ties it to duties and responsibilities. This allows for restrictions to protect the reputation of others and their rights. Observator cited several European judicial precedents to support the argument that Morocco's judicial condemnation of the cartoonist Yasir Monbir was in line with the principle of distinguishing between legitimate criticism and personal insult.
Comparisons have been drawn between the French media's handling of insults against King Mohammed VI and their coverage of French President Emmanuel Macron's private life. Activist Chakib Bendawi questioned the disparity in how French media outlets defended the republication of cartoons insulting to Morocco under the banner of freedom of expression, while engaging in discussions about privacy and defamation when it came to President Macron.
Some critics argue that certain French media outlets apply varying standards of freedom of expression depending on the target. Redouane Taibi contended that BFMTV and similar outlets treat freedom of expression with fluctuating criteria based on the identity of the party being targeted. He linked this to a broader discussion on professional and ethical responsibility in journalism.
The debate has also highlighted the selective application of concepts like privacy and dignity. Lina Aljohari, writing under the title "Antidote to Poison," suggested that some French media outlets employ a selective approach towards Morocco, using freedom of expression as a pretext for provocation against Moroccan institutions and symbols, while invoking privacy, dignity, and professional ethics when discussing the French presidency.
The consensus among many critics is that freedom of expression should not be applied selectively. Several commentators, including the social media account Maroc Pulse and activist Adib Bradah, emphasized that while press freedom is fundamental, it must be coupled with professional responsibility and respect for the dignity of others. They advocate for uniform standards in journalism, irrespective of the individual or institution being covered.
Key points
- Critics accuse French media of double standards in coverage of Morocco.
- Controversy sparked by BFMTV reairing cartoons insulting to King Mohammed VI.
- Debate highlights selective application of freedom of expression and journalistic ethics.
