France Bans Facebook and Twitter From Radio and TV
An anonymous reader writes "In France, radio and television news anchors are no longer allowed to say the words 'Facebook' and 'Twitter' on air, unless the terms are specifically part of a news story. The ban stems from a decree issued by the French government on March 27, 1992, which forbids the promotion of commercial enterprises on news programs."
"unless the terms are specifically part of a news story"
Well that hardly ever happens.
...that Twitter and Facebook have more influence on global culture than it does.
The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
On the one hand, the freedom of speech lover in me thinks that this goes to far, as I do with many things the French do...
On the other hand, I imagine what CNN would be like if they had to report or analyze a story instead of asking what Twitter thinks of a story...
Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
It's not about news ABOUT Twitter or Facebook. It's about PR related issues. So, the headline "Facebook's Owner, Marc Zuckerberg, killed by frikking bass with lasers he intended to eat" or even "Bill Gate's Twitter account hacked. His password was Chairs4Steve" are still allowed, whereas "Entertainment Industry comes to term with the fact that DRM is contra productive. Read more on our Facebook page" isn't. In the first two, mentioning the sites is relevant. In the last one it's just hidden advertising (Even if might be unwilling).
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
it still isn't. "Amazon.com" (or "amazon.fr" in that case) can't be named in similar circumstances ( "Here is our review of "Harry Potter XIII - Resurrection". You can buy it at amazon.fr" isn't allowed, 'Amazon's worth increasing 10 fold on the stock market after Bezos calls his kid "Kindle"' is actually allowed.)
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
Not that I agree with the French policy (or RTFS), but it's recently bothered me (in a very slight way) that we now have forms of communication that can only be referred to through the brand name. We could chat, text, fax, phone and blog without referring to a company name, but Tweets and Facebook posts seem harder to generalize. Just saying something's been "posted online" seems too vague. The proper generic verb hasn't been invented yet.
Product placement is not allowed in state channels, commercial websites are just that, products.
And in Europe, it's taken for granted that this is a reasonable restriction and that the idea of state channels is reasonable.
Most Americans (and probably a lot of Euros) don't grasp that European leftism != American leftism and European rightism != American rightism. There are strong parallels in abstract, but as you cross the pond you see a fundamental change in the cultural gestalt of the relationship between the state and the individual.
Any objective person can see that saying "Follow us on twitter!" is an endorsement of a commercial service, and it's not legal in France to pepper news programs with adverts like this.
The blogtards and upcoming posters who say "Stupid bans like these don't work" and "Next they will be after McDonalds and Disney" are either missing the point due to a lack of thought, or don't care about the point and just like to criticize France anyway.
Personally, I'm amazed that CSA have finally pulled their finger out and have reminded the broadcasters of their responsibilities.
Sure it has: the proper generic term is GARBAGE. Really, when did ill-considered soundbites from anonymous children ever become news?
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Some examples : -Logos of trademarks that appear in music clip (and the rest) must be blurred. -A video announcer cannot promote his own book (example: this can't happen Glen Beck. Oh, and btw, his analysis of the French riots of 2005 is completely false, ofc. Hello FUD). -Trailers of films cannot be broadcast on TV as ads (only during emission about cinema) Generally speaking this comes from the same law: "No Hidden advertising" You have other reglementations, like 'in average, 6min of ads / hr max', and 'no too noisy ads' (wasn't that a recent proposition from Obama?). More recently, it was decided to stop broadcasting of all advertising on gvt-owned TV channels, which usually account for more than 50% of hearing. Whether you like or not those laws, comparing them to the Freedom Fries stuff is stupid, and shows that the author ignores French culture...