Talk:Censorship in France

message: This article states that the French gov. doesn't censor, given that it's a liberal democracy.  That's probably the offical government position.  But, for example, Bridgit Bardot was prosecuted for criticising Eid, a Muslim holiday in which animals are slaughtered.  However you look at it, that definitely is censorship.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.44.63 (talk) 00:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official vs. actual gov. position of censorship 

message: Same subjects. Maybe we could rename the article, for the sake of NPOV, Freedom of press and censorship in France. Tazmaniacs 18:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... one is about state control of general speech, whilst the other is about access to government information. Entirely different approaches to the issue, really. I'm not sure if merging is particularly helpful, especially if the FOI section grows at all. Shimgray | talk | 09:19, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Freedom of information in France]] here 

message: I would be interesting to know until when the censored material was forbidden. For instance, "Le petit soldat" is not censored nowadays, I've seen on tv (although it was very late) and I think it's available on dvd. On the other hand, the book "suicide, mode d'emploi", of Claude Guillon and Yves Le Bonniec (could be translated as : "a suicide guide") is still forbidden nowadays.rysg 17:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Until when 

message: I added a section discussing the extensive history of censorship in France extending back to the middle ages.  There still needs to be a discussion of how the censorship practice was affected by the Revolution and what exactly survived.  Ecphora (talk) 06:52, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Early history

message: france just has same amount of freedom as china..france government has less enemies(aka holocaust deniers), whole chinese government as more enemies
but regarding the freedom..france isn't anything better than communist china..  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.212.122.76 (talk) 07:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  censoring less doesn't mean having more freedom... 

message: The two song named in the aticle were not really "censored". They were not play on the national radio, like many others (Brassens for exemple). Those songs were available at records shops. Some rare songs ("mangez moi" by Billy the kick and "l'apologie" by Matmatah, for exemple) were justice cases. Groups were fined, but the records are still available in records shops and groups were singing them live in concert. 89.3.96.96 (talk) 16:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of censored songs 

message: I'm very confused by the section on the law on colonialism and how it caused historians to criticize the existence of such laws. As far as I recall the law was criticised for making the apology of colonialism -- in a country where many people feel colonialism is one among several roots of racial tension in France among ancient colonies' migrants and autochtons, and where colonialists and ex-colonialists are strongly associated with far right movements. People were shocked that children were going to be taught that colonialism had positive aspects -- it is quite obvious indeed that the French colonialists were more technologically advanced than the people they invaded but there has been bitter debate as to whom benefited the "positive aspects" (in short, apartheid was prevalent and so it was colonialists who benefited the advances and not the invaded people).
This is very opposite from other types of memory laws which essentially forbid denying the existence of a shameful behaviour on behalf of our ancestors, such as the Holocaust and the (massive, alas) participation of the French at this time in the discrimination of Holocaust victims. A better example would've been the discussions on the law forbidding denial of the Armenian Genocide. This caused controversy because people thought it was unnecessary to legislate over the whole of History and there wasn't such a strong risk of denial as there had been for the Holocaust.
I would hence suggest getting rid altogether of the reference to the 2005 law. It is a propaganda law, not a censorship law -- and it goes exactly against the spirit of existing memory censorship laws.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.67.73 (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading section on historical memory law 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Censorship in France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806073213/http://www.abanet.org/labor/newsletter/intl/2006/Apr/france3.html to http://www.abanet.org/labor/newsletter/intl/2006/Apr/france3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060620200634/http://www.ifex.org:80/en/content/view/full/197/ to http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/197/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061204181231/http://doc-iep.univ-lyon2.fr/Ressources/Documents/Etudiants/Memoires/MFE2001/trelisl/these.html to http://doc-iep.univ-lyon2.fr/Ressources/Documents/Etudiants/Memoires/MFE2001/trelisl/these.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050615001509/http://www.oflc.gov.au/resource.html?resource=253&filename=253.pdf to http://www.oflc.gov.au/resource.html?resource=253&filename=253.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified