See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282608008 French Sociologists and the Public Space of the Press: Thoughts based on a Case Study (Le Monde, 1995-2002) Chapter · January 2009 CITATIONS READS 0 41 1 author: Sebastien Mosbah-Natanson Université du Québec à Montréal 26 PUBLICATIONS 85 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Sebastien Mosbah-Natanson on 10 January 2016. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Intellectuals and their Publics Chapter 10 Perspectives from the Social Sciences French Sociologists and the Public Space of the Press: Thoughts Based on a Case Study (Le Monde, 19951002) Laurent Jeanpierre and Sébastien Mosbah-Natanson Intrsduction Recent studies in comparative history tend to support the hypothesis of a Edited by speciûcally French national mode of engagement of the intellectual professions cHRIsTIAN n'rpck and oftheir place in the social sbucture (see Charle, 1996). lt is in France, as is University of Graz, Austria well known, that, at the time of the Dreyfus Affair at ths end of the nineteenth century, the neologism 'intellectual' was coined and that a heterogeneous social ANDREAS HESS gloup, made up of thinkers and writers, used it to oppose the traditional elites, in University College Dublin, IrelaJtd particular those in possession of economic power (see Charle, 1990, 163-82). For a long time, being an intellectual in France was based on the fact of E. STINA LYON speaking out in public in the name of universal values, using a legitimacy acquired in a specific London South Bank University, UK professional field of the intellectual world, as in the case of Zolaupon his famous publication of 'J'accuse' (1898). Other forms of intervention by professional intellectuals have undoubtedly been developed over the last century. But this initial model ofengagementhas been maintained in contemporary national public life. In this chapter we ask how it is socially structured and organized today. This chapter deals more particularly with the public engagement of sociologists in France. It considers one aspect of this issue: stances taken in newspaper op-ed columns. We focus on the op-ed columns ofonly one large daily newspaper,Ie Monde, between 1995 and 2002.t In the French political and public context, the year 1995 witnessed the intense engagement ofcertain intellecfuals with social movements ofthe time, a mobilization that has already been the subject of sociological analysis (see Duval et al., i998; Legavre, 1999). Therefore, it appeared that this year and the studies formerly canied out could serve as a ûrst point of oomparison *hich would be of relevance for our own results, seeking to treat a longer time span. On the basis of this case study, we shall firstly situate the commentary of sociologists in relation to that of the other intellectual professions. Then, the main factors determining the behaviour of French sociologists in Le Monde over recent years will be analysed. Finally, we aim to identiS the traits - in ASHGATE I For a comparison between the French and the ltalian case, see Lettieri (2002). t4 Intellectuals and their Publics French Sociologists and the Public Space ofthe Press 175 particular - the themes - that may characte rize the modes of intervention of French The first selection was made on the basis of 'selÈpresentations', in the Goffinanian sociologists in the national daily press. sense, chosenbythe authorsthemselves(seeGoffman, 1959 [ 956]).Itis noJunusual to observe intellectuals changing self-presentation on the basis of circumstance or the 'cause'being defended.s In all ofthe professional fields selected, professors Methodology and the holders of various teaching positions at secondary or tertiary levels, as well as students, were added from the outset wherever their disciplinary affiliation In order to evaluate the position and role of sociologists in the contemporary was indicated. In order to limit the omission of professionals in the social and French public sphere, we decided to carry out an analysis of the interventions in human sciences, we also specifically added people with an affiliation tothe Centre debates in the daily newspaperze Monde. using the newspaper's cD-RoMs, we national de la recherche scienlifique (CNRS) or the École des hautes ëtudes en .Horizons-Débats' constructed a database containing the opinions published in the sciences sociales (EHESS) and explicitly coming from disciplines in the social pages between 1995 and 2002. For the most part, these pages publish columns, sciences which appear in the public organigrams of these institutions or of their similar to the 'op-ed'pages ofAnglo-American newspapers.2 Thàre is no freedom research centres.e This means that while self-presentation remained the criterion of access to the column, which is in fact managed by one editorial journalist for the professional categorization ofposition that prevailed, it was also crossed, who selects columns on the basis of proposals received. she or he is actually the during the primary phase of the study, with another criterion: affiliation to teaching gatekeeper or even the producer ofthe op-ed section. personalities gain the right and research in social science institutions. to write in it, and through this, attain the status of public intellectual. The words In order to avoid any suspicion of professional ethnocentrism or bias, we published in the opinion pages must, furthermore, be individually or collectively applied this last criterion most rigorously to sociologists themselves. The number signed, or taken responsibility for in the name of a group. In the newspaper studied, of interventions they made was therefore slightly underestimated. During the individual bylines must also be followed by a title or post. This signàture takes on study's second phase, we excluded from the final breakdown those who presented the role of a veritable 'discourse on discourse', and allows for the representation themselves as sociologists or as holding a title or an equivalent position but having made by the intellectuals of their position in the social space, and on this occasion never appeared in a scientific journal ofthe discipline in recent decades.r0 Taking the public sphere, to be situated.3 into account the proximity in France between sociology and political science, the The articles which appeared in the opinion pages of Le Monde can be broken same restrictive criterion had also to be applied to political scientists. In several down and analysed in terms of the following intellectual professions: economists,a cases, it was difficult to determine if people belonged to one discipline or the writers, historians,5 philosophers, political scientists, psychologists,6 sociologists.T other, as instances of cross- and dual affiliations were rather frequent. In the same way, columnists who declared themselves teachers of 'political sociology' were classified in both disciplines, and consequently counted twice. 2 These commentaries, solicited or selected by the newspaper, were also supplemented In addition to the margins of error regarding the breakdown of intellectual by some less frequent pages of interviews under the same general op-ed formai and called professions contributing to op-ed sections, a further limitation of our study, related Horizons-Entretiens ('intewiews'). They also reflect the representation that the newspaper constructs of people with the most legitimacy to have their words published. 3 On the social role ofthe signature, see Fraenkel (1992). 8 Therefore, in the relatively numerous cases of dual self-deflnitions ('philosopher 4 We have excluded signatories of texts with the title 'lecturer in economic sciences' and writer', 'sociologist and historian'), we decided to classiff the author under all the and probably underestimated the number of economists who do not work in higher education fields she or he claimed to represent. We therefore from the outset prevented ourselves from or scientiûc institutions, but rather for banks or insurance companies. We have also excluded judging the legitimacy of the self-deûnitions given. As a result, multiple self-definitions do business; management or flnance professionals. Intellectuals with multiple affiliations (a not ûgure more heavily in any field in particular. Professor of Economics and Business, for instance) were included with the economists. 9 Other institutions were added in the case of political scientists - the Fondation 5 Historians of art and of science were éxcluded from the study. In the French nationale des sciences politiques (FNSP), the Ceri tre d'études etderecherches internalionales university system, their training and recruitment follow different patterns from those of (CERI) and the Centre d'étude de la vie politique française (CEVIPOF). To be sure, our historians. breakdowns tend to underestimate specialists ofcultural regions. It appeared to us that their 6 In addition to psychologists and teachers ofpsychology, we included psychoanalysts disciplinary skills, as sociologists, political scientists, geographers, historians, economists and psychotherapists. We did not take psychiatrists into account, as their primary training in or anthropologists, were secondary to their knowledge of a specific territorial domain. medicine is further away from the human and social sciences that are the focus oiour study. 10 The appearance of signatories in disciplinary journals was evaluated onthe basis