Mathew’s great post about Mediacafé – Europe: no medium, no message?, picks up on the phrase (Mathew’s emphasis) “The production of qualitative EU coverage should be incorporated in the charters of public broadcasters and it should be supervised as well.” As Mathew sums up: “State-coerced, force-fed media should not be what Europe is about.”
An appeal for this type of intervention is all the more surprising in the context of the Pascal Decroos Foundation for Investigative Journalism. But perhaps, if the EU is involved, a different paradigm is required.
Chatting with a West African diplomat earlier on the relative value to Africa of China and Europe, I learnt that the former is more appreciated because it gets in there and provides what’s needed (obviously in return for access to raw materials), while the latter tends to wrap up its assistance in red tape and sermonising. In short, the EU ends up supporting bureaucracy instead of democracy. The Chinese are apparently prepared to deal with their African interlocutors on an egalitarian basis, making them feel like partners in the process, whereas Europeans seem to treat them as supplicants, in a manner occasionally reminiscent of missionaries bringing the gifts of Christian civilisation to savages.
The striking lack of judgment in releasing this film made many people consider that the 10:10 team were evidently so full of self-importance that their take on climate change could be equally dumb.
This spoof of the caricature of global warmists as ecofascists was no doubt intended to make it obviously ridiculous. Instead it made people seriously consider that the caricature is even more accurate than they originally feared.
Perhaps the phrase “and should be supervised” is also a spoof intended to make us think the “EUSSR” idea is overblown?