Per French law (Electoral Code, Article L49, i.e. Decree No. 64 1086), from the day before a presidential election at midnight, the media is not to make reports that could influence the public's voting decisions.
The international mainstream media is evidently aware of the rule, because the rule was mentioned in, for example, a USA Today report about Presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron's hacked e-mails:
In the spirit of this understanding, perhaps the mainstream media did not report on a concurrent anti-Macron protest in France, which had become known only through various Twitter posts. The protest drew attention to Macron's terrorist-friendly immigration policy in view of the recent terror attacks:
On the other hand, several French media sources, including Le Parisien, reported on an anti-Marine Le Pen protest:
And, at 11:40 am on the day of the election,The Guardian decided to run a story on French election candidate Marine Le Pen's father, focusing on his opinion of his daughter; what could possibly be more influential in an election than asking the man who raised a candidate what he thought of his child?
Both reports are an obvious breach of the understanding established under French law, but should we be surprised? There has been no lack of media bias in the campaign. For instance, the media had nothing to say about Macron's phone call of support from former U.S. President Barack Obama. By contrast, when U.S. President Donald Trump said Le Pen was a stronger candidate on terrorism than Macron, the media suggested that foreigners were trying to influence the election.
Hmm.
I suppose this is the "democracy" they claim to want to protect - a one-sided media-mafia acting in concert to swing electoral results.
The international mainstream media is evidently aware of the rule, because the rule was mentioned in, for example, a USA Today report about Presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron's hacked e-mails:
 |
| excerpt from "USA Today" |
In the spirit of this understanding, perhaps the mainstream media did not report on a concurrent anti-Macron protest in France, which had become known only through various Twitter posts. The protest drew attention to Macron's terrorist-friendly immigration policy in view of the recent terror attacks:
On the other hand, several French media sources, including Le Parisien, reported on an anti-Marine Le Pen protest:
And, at 11:40 am on the day of the election,The Guardian decided to run a story on French election candidate Marine Le Pen's father, focusing on his opinion of his daughter; what could possibly be more influential in an election than asking the man who raised a candidate what he thought of his child?
Both reports are an obvious breach of the understanding established under French law, but should we be surprised? There has been no lack of media bias in the campaign. For instance, the media had nothing to say about Macron's phone call of support from former U.S. President Barack Obama. By contrast, when U.S. President Donald Trump said Le Pen was a stronger candidate on terrorism than Macron, the media suggested that foreigners were trying to influence the election.
Hmm.
I suppose this is the "democracy" they claim to want to protect - a one-sided media-mafia acting in concert to swing electoral results.
