Reader TTS

The good news is that thanks to the BBC News Channel there was some coverage of the French presidential election on Sunday and that the BBC cared enough about it to fly in one of their most

professional and experienced presenters, Reeta Chakrabarti. That’s the end of the good news. The bad news is that the coverage was so low on analysis or history. The producers did invite a

number of French pollsters, sociologists and politicians, but they couldn’t find a French equivalent to Sir John Curtice who could crack the numbers. Which regions had voted for Macron or Le

Pen? Which demographic groups? This matters in an election where the far-Right candidate won more than 40% of the vote. What lessons can we learn from this election about a bitterly divided

France? Why is it so divided and how might this be addressed by Macron, the first French President since Chirac twenty years ago to be re-elected? Since Macron didn’t say anything concrete

about how he would address these divisions, it would have been helpful to have some thoughtful analysts on television to discuss the issue. Where was Katya Adler, the BBC’s Europe Editor

since 2014? Her title, of course, is deeply misleading because she’s really the BBC’s Brexit editor in Brussels and rarely reports on European politics unless there’s a terrorist atrocity.

And where was Hugh Schofield, the BBC’s experienced Paris Correspondent since 1996? What is the point of having a Paris Correspondent if he’s not there to help with the coverage on the day

of the final round of the French presidential election? These absences matter because Reeta Chakrabarti and Jessica Parker, who was also flown in from London, didn’t seem very knowledgeable

about French politics, French history or the state of French society. Of course, you could say that isn’t their job. Reeta Chakrabarti is an experienced presenter and was there to hold

together a live TV broadcast from Paris and conduct the main interviews. She did all this with consummate professionalism, as ever, but there was never a feeling that she or Parker were

really on top of their subject. Of course, there was an elephant in the room. This was only ever going to be a big news story if Le Pen won or if at least it was a close-run thing. Macron

won by a mile, as always happens when a Le Pen runs against a centrist candidate. For three of the last five presidential elections a Le Pen has made the run-off election and has always

lost, because in the final analysis most French voters, however disaffected, cannot bring themselves to vote for someone from the far-Right. The French have a curious problem with their

recent presidents. Compared to Mitterrand (1981-95) or Chirac (1995-2007), Sarkozy, Hollande and Macron have seemed lightweight and unpopular. Chakrabarti and Parker had a tough job to build

up a news story when there wasn’t one and the lack of excitement was tangible. This was not a historic moment and everyone knew it. All the more reason for some first-rate analysis to make

sense of it all. There is a much bigger story here, however. For decades the BBC has been fascinated by American politics. Since the Sixties, that’s been the big story for them, from Vietnam

and Civil Rights to Black Lives Matter and Trump. Europe, west or east, has never mattered to the BBC in the same way. They have never dedicated the same resources or the same screen hours.

There has never been a European equivalent to “Letter from America”, which lasted for 2,869 broadcasts over nearly 58 years. Or a European equivalent to Beyond 100 Days? One reason, though

the BBC will never admit this, for Brexit is because the British media have never been interested in European politics and so British voters never became interested either. It all felt so

grey and dull. Where were the big European dramas to compare with Watergate and the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy? How many French presidents can you name? Or German chancellors,

apart perhaps for Kohl and Merkel? Or Italian Prime Ministers (apart from Berlusconi, of course)? How many European political parties do you know? It’s not just about high politics. Why

were so many Macron voters waving EU flags? Why were so many people at the Macron rally young, white and evidently middle class? Why did so many French voters abstain: 28.3%? It’s all very

well saying Macron got 58% of the vote, but it was the highest abstention rate in more than fifty years, since 1969. It’s a remarkable statistic and a significant date. 1969 was the year

after France came so close to revolution in May 1968. Could there be something more interesting about the 2022 presidential election than the BBC were telling us? The main lesson for the BBC

here is pay more attention to what’s happening in Europe and devote more resources. Which reporters were predicting what has happened in Ukraine? There were deeply moving human interest

stories brought to us by Fergal Keane, Clive Myrie, Lyse Doucet and their brave cameramen and women, but little historical analysis which might explain the horrors which have ensued and the

fierce determination of Ukrainians to fight to the last. What has motivated Putin? Why has the Russian Orthodox Church behaved so appallingly? Why do Russians not accept the independence of

Ukraine and feel so threatened by the thought of Ukraine joining NATO and/or the EU? Too often, when it comes to Europe, the BBC’s coverage is low on analysis, doesn’t ask the big questions

and sounds too like Neville Chamberlain speaking of “a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing”. This should change. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only

publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout

the pandemic. So please, make a donation._