“The primary change is that we now live under protection on secure premises and at a secret address. And this clearly raises the question of the challenge which faces our democracies nowadays: during the 21st century in Europe, in a time of peace, a satirical newspaper, an opinion-based paper, has to be placed under protection in order to continue to work.
To say that they were right, those who attacked Charlie Hebdo, the Hyper Cacher store, the Bataclan, the terraces of Paris, the promenade des Anglais in Nice, the Christmas market in Strasbourg, those who created thousands of victims in Europe and across the world and continue to kill in the name of a totalitarian religious ideology. This would give the message to fanatics that their strategy works and that violence and terror are a good method of operating. This is nothing short of racketeering. But we know very well that if we accept submitting to racketeering, it never stops and the price we pay continues to increase.
In western Europe, freedom of expression and the freedom of the press have never been as protected by the law and by the courts. However, these freedoms are being directly threatened by individuals or groups of individuals, often in the name of some very noble causes such as antiracism, feminism, LGBT rights etc. The majority of the time it is well-organized militants who exert pressure on social networks at the heart of universities and in the media. They create a puritan way of thinking – Good against Bad – and this is not necessarily dominant, but it is considered such by many editorial teams who prefer to give in to it rather than face attacks from trolls, calls for a boycott or tackling controversy. And this in turn leads to self-censorship.
Taken to the point of absurdity, this desire not to shock anyone, to humor various highly active pressure groups on social networks or to foolishly conform to what is deemed to be the “correct” way of thinking at any cost is really the worst form of censorship. Every newspaper and media outlet is, of course, free to follow its own editorial stance. But when this editorial stance is dictated by external pressures – and not by compliance with the law – the freedom of the press is thrown into question. The role of the press cannot be the same as that of the militants. Otherwise, this becomes the propaganda press.
I work in premises which resemble a bunker and I am under police protection. My freedom of movement has clearly been affected and I can no longer do certain everyday things like go out for a walk when I see a ray of sunshine at the window, for example. Before doing something like that, I have to alert my security.”
Gérard Biard (62) is de hoofdredacteur van Charlie Hebdo. Op 7 januari 2015 werden 12 redacteuren van Charlie Hebdo op brute wijze afgeslacht met een AK47, uit naam van Allah, door moslims, aanhangers van de ideologie van vrede en tolerantie gewelddadige en barbaarse ideologie islam, in het seculiere Frankrijk, in vredestijd, in het hartje van de Nobelprijs voor de vrede winnende EU, omdat Charlie Hebdo het had gewaagd de spot te drijven met een islamitische profeet, iets wat kan en mag en moet in een vrije democratie maar helaas lukte het die vrije democratie niet om haar burgers te beschermen tegen de barbaren. Integendeel, de barbaren werden in paarden van Troje binnengehaald.
Op 15 februari 2021, meer dan zes jaar later, moet de huidige hoofdredacteur van Charlie Hebdo nog gewoon voor zijn leven vrezen, kan hij alleen werken in een zwaar beveiligde bunker, niet leven zonder beveiliging en is zijn vrijheid beperkt.
En dat allemaal omdat hij gelooft in democratische waarden als vrijheid, vrijheid van expressie en vrijheid van meningsuiting.
Hij wél.
