“The Enemy Within”: media coverage of Samuel Paty murder fuels hatred against Muslims
The murder of a teacher in the Paris suburbs has sparked a wave of anti-Muslim rhetoric across France, with politicians and media commentators popularising far-right narratives about the ‘Islamisation of Europe’. Instead of instigating a respectful debate about extremism and freedom of expression, much coverage failed to distinguish between the religion of Islam and the tiny minority that carry out acts of terror.
The murder of the French history teacher Samuel Paty, beheaded for having shown caricatures of the prophet Muhammed during a class on freedom of expression, has left France shocked and grieving. Following this act of terrorism, and a further deadly knife attack at a church in Nice, television shows in France have been dominated by discussions on terrorism and freedom of expression, with hundreds of commentators and journalists expressing their points of view. Unfortunately, most of their comments were not directed against Islamic extremists, but against the whole French Muslim population, described by some as an “enemy within”.
This killing was the third terrorist attack prompted by caricatures of the prophet Mohammed in France, and happened just a month after two people were stabbed outside the former offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Tens of thousands of people marched in Paris and other cities across France in solidarity with the teacher.
The French government responded with a hostile rhetoric and forceful actions, going ahead with the strict measures to tackle Islamist “separatism” in France, which had already been announced at the beginning of October. The words used by president Macron, ministers, and politicians hurt Muslims in France and abroad.
When discussing the terrorist attack on BFMTV news, the Minister of the Interior, Gérald Darmanin, said that supermarket “ethnic food” aisles are a threat to the nation. “It’s always shocked me to enter a supermarket and see an aisle of communitarian cuisine on one side. That’s my opinion, this is how communitarianism starts,” the minister said, calling instead for a “patriotic capitalism”. This statement was criticised by many who recognised in his words a virulent correlation between terrorism, “separatism”, and cultural habits, as if eating halal or kosher food would be a threat to the unity of the country.
But the hardening of discriminatory discourses against Muslims, and uncritical endorsement of secularism and “French values”, was not just expressed by political figures. Although the analysis and coverage has not been universally negative, much of the French media have consistently fostered division and hatred. Among them, the broadcaster CNEWS regularly gave voice to commentators with strong anti-Muslim positions, often bordering to incitement to hatred.
Gilles-William Goldnadel, lawyer and regular guest on CNEWS shows, called for revenge, and not just against extremists. “I am still angry at those responsible for the current situation, and we know who they are and they are not just Islamists”, he said. “The most beautiful tribute we can offer to Samuel Paty is to take revenge”.
On the same channel, Elisabeth Levy, Editor-in-Chief of the French conservative magazine Causeur, said that Muslim women should have taken their headscarf off for a week in honour of Samuel Paty. “I am surprised none of them have today [removed their veil] in honour, or tact, of Samuel Paty, because the veil is also the uniform of the enemies of France,” Levy said.
In another episode, CNEWS journalist Julien Paquet complained about the absence of Muslim people at the demonstration in honour of Paty, implicitly suggesting that Muslims do not do enough to counter terrorism. “But how do you recognise Muslim people?” rightly argued a guest in disagreement, also pointing out that there is a paradoxical situation in France, where Muslim people are constantly told not show any religious symbols to demonstrate to “be French" but yet, in case of an Islamist terrorist attack, they have to prove and to show that they are Muslims and disagree with terrorism.
Giving voice to these opinions is dangerous. By explicitly calling Muslims “enemies” wearing a “uniform”, by calling for revenge, by insisting those responsible are not just extremists, and by saying that Muslims are not standing up to terrorism, effectively equates all Muslims as terrorists. When the extremists are a tiny minority of 1.8 billion believers, how can this assertion make sense? How can those who call for unity think that hateful discourse will lead to greater social cohesion? Journalists should realise that this framing encourages suspicion and a hatred that fosters divisions rather than healing them?
Outside of France, the media debate might have been less heated, but nonetheless stigmatised the whole Muslim population, presenting harmful narratives about the so-called “Islamisation” of Europe.
In Germany, Philosophia Perennis and Journalistenwatch, two far-right blogs, argued that in Germany the attack did not receive sufficient media coverage. According to them, this lack of attention was not casual, but rather due to fear of the violent “ideological Islam” and, at the same time, to the determination of “Islam appeasers”.
Belgian weekly outlet Le Vif published an opinion piece by the teacher, writer and secular activist Nadia Geerts, who claimed to know how to address the problem of Islamic radicalism, but failed throughout to differentiate between Muslims as a whole, and Islamic fundamentalists. The article also stated that accusations of Islamophobia are becoming more and more common, dangerously downplaying anti-Muslim hate and delegitimising all those who have experienced it.
In the UK, a very similar narrative was proposed by Conservative Woman, a news blog that defines itself as a “counter-cultural offensive against the forces of Leftism, feminism and modernism”. Writing on the website, journalist Donald Forbes does not make any distinction between Muslims in general, and Islamic terrorists. The piece claims that Islam and its believers do not belong in Europe and that immigrants have “flooded” Europe, refusing to go back where they came from.
On Liberal, Greek novelist and columnist Soti Triantafillou attacked Muslims for “not identifying with us” and for not being loyal to the countries and people that host them. Triantafillou went as far to say that “the major problem of Europe is not terrorism. It is that a big part of the European population is not European.”
The gruesome murder of Samuel Paty was a serious crime and, as such, should be reported by the media, with thorough analysis and data. But the crimes of individuals and extremist groups should not be exploited to stigmatise wider communities.
News media plays a crucial role in fostering division or cohesion. The people they interview, the questions they ask, the discourses and narratives that they draw on, all shape how events are experienced and interpreted by the public.
For the most part, Paty’s murder did not instigate a respectful and informed dialogue about freedom of expression, or the social, cultural, and economic conditions that foster extremism. Rather, it was exploited to strengthen far-right narratives that stigmatise religious and ethnic minorities, and impose a restriction on who has the right to call themselves French, or European.
