Should We BeCharlie? A Deliberative Take on Religion and Secularism in Mediated Public Spheres

Abstract

The terror attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in January 2015 serves to explore the role of religion and secularism in mediated public spheres. We argue that deliberative theory, including its recent criticisms and extensions, helps navigate normative dilemmas presented by the attacks. From a deliberative perspective, journalists should reprint Charlie cartoons that are perceived by Muslims as insulting and incendiary only if this fulfills a real need for public reflection and enlightenment. Media and the wider public should engage in differentiated solidarity with Charlie Hebdo, help transfer the hidden argumentative potential of its cartoons into the realm of truly argumentative discourse, and engage in metadeliberation that explicitly reflects the contexts and rules for public debate.

Free speech versus marginalized groups: Public and newspaper responses to the Charlie Hebdo attack

“…News media outlets particularly highlight the importance of guarding freedom of expression, not curtailing it, which not only pinpoint the news media's role in upholding freedom of speech, but also raise the problem of prioritizing certain values and claims over the other. Our findings complement previous research on the Charlie Hebdo attack (Jenkins & Tandoc, 2017;Sreberny, 2016;Wessler et al, 2016), and illustrate that the free speech frame and the protection of marginalized Muslims frame are more prominent in British newspapers than American ones. Framing the Charlie Hebdo attack with a focus on freedom of expression, the editorial decision-making process (whether or not to republish images of Muhammad), and the plight of Muslims, provides a nuanced insight into the differences between U.K. and U.S. newspapers.…”

“…Although press freedom within a liberal tradition is considered as autonomy from any political interventions (Lovett, 2014), the editorial judgment of whether or not to reprint the cartoons reflects a question about whether freedom of the press can be reconciled with other important values such as respect for religion. A deliberative perspective contends news organizations should reprint the Charlie Hebdo provocative cartoons perceived as offensive by Muslims only if this achieves purpose of public reflection and enlightenment (Wessler et al, 2016).…”

“…These categories were generated based on the topics and frames in previous research on the Charlie Hebdo attack (e.g., Andre & Esposite, 2016; Titley, 2017; Wessler et al, 2016; Wolska-Zogata, 2015). Each of these categories was coded as “not present” (0) or “present” (1).…”

“…A dense field of meaning explorations and scholarly work take shape around the Charlie Hebdo event, and examine news media coverage (Bertelsen & Zagato, 2015; Freedman, 2017; Sreberny, 2016), framing mechanisms in relation to attacks (Castelli Gattinara, 2017; Mayer & Tiberj, 2016; Połońska-Kimunguyi & Gillespie, 2016; Walter, Demetriades, Kelly, & Gillig, 2016), the tension between freedom of expression and respect for religion (Grantham & Miller, 2017; Juss, 2015; Kim, 2016; Rudi, 2015; Simon, 2017), diverse French factions allying against Islamophobia (Mondon & Winter, 2017), public discourse over attacks (Felicetti & Castelli Gatiinara, 2018; Wessler, Rinke, & Löb, 2016; Zagato, 2015), hybrid media dynamics of the response (Sumiala et al, 2018), Twitter hashtags #JeSuisCharlie (Salovaara, 2015) and #JeNeSuisPasCharlie (Dawes, 2015, 2017), and antiracist thought and activism in response to attacks (Lentin, 2017).…”

Mediated Deliberation in Deep Conflicts: How Might Deliberative Media Content Contribute to Social Integration Across Deep Divides?

“…Habermas, 1996;Young, 1996) themselves. For a more detailed discussion of this development see Wessler et al (2016). 3 Peters (1993, p. 208) names this process "political integration", which refers to the creation of an overarching form of collective identity and the emergence of society-wide solidarity that bridges particular group identities and interests.…”