Desmume Roms Soul Silver

The reaction philo Ivan Segre - the beginning of a real debate?

Two books were published in May 2009 editions Lines, signed manually by one author: Ivan Segre.

Both works The reaction philo or treason of the clerks and What do you think of Auschwitz are at complete odds with the positions we thought well established in the French intellectual field on the Zionism, antisemitism, the role of the State of Israel or the Holocaust's place in the history of the West.

Let the moment ; on What do you think of Auschwitz , book I, however, preferred and is of significance may be speculative more essential to our society's reaction philo .

But it is like a stir a debate that has crystallized as the second intifada since September 11. Recall the forces.

Since these two events, anti-Semitic acts were committed on French territory and a form of radical Islam has taken over the hackneyed themes of anti-Semitic propaganda of the last century.

The response of some intellectuals, mostly Jews, had was massive and disseminated through many channels, "community" and national print and broadcast form of discussions and articles. Some, such as Tariq Ramadan , people tried to find a doctrinal unity, essentially marked by the Jewishness of most of these authors. Bizarrely, some members of the Jewish community also had this reflex amalgam: "experienced all those who stand up for Israel and the Jews: Do not be too fussy about the goods, the main thing to find allies in this difficult time! "

Where Ivan Segre innovates, is that he wants to look in detail exactly what those supports. Is this really a defense of Israel? Or more subtly a defense of Western lifestyle (or Christian) through the defense of Israel?

Since they are called "community" can we really hold these intellectuals advocated in their arguments to the values of Jewish tradition? Or they are they ultimately have no say?

Is there no substantive difference between a Raphael Draï and Shmuel Trigano ? Or between a Finkielkraut and Bernard-Henri Levy ?

This debate is important because it should be wanting to irrigate any reflection on the strong Jewish community and its leaders: the LIRA does it take into account the ideological acquaintances with a French right of certain ultra-conservative supporters of Israel ;? Is there not a long-term risk for Jews and Israel want to assimilate tradition of Judaism and Western values ?

can discuss and point out a particular weakness of the book of Ivan Segre. But equate it to a new "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" ? Yet the boldness with which smoking has delivered Jewish News from the pen of Franklin Rausky . Comparison that is answered by Ivan Segre, found below in this blog, hoping that it may this time launch a real debate on this fascinating and crucial.

Response to an "intellectual" French
In the issue of Jewish News dated September 3 was released on account of a book which I am the author The reaction philo or treason of the clerks (Lines, 2009).

Here's what you could read under the title "A disturbing manifest anti-intellectual" "This disturbing argument designed to prove that nowadays, reactionary thinking, cons-revolutionary, anti- Progressive has changed its face: after having been the spearhead of the "anti-Semitic reaction", it becomes the last few years the term a "philo-reaction" involving the defense of the West, capitalism, and, last but not least of Zionism. Among the intellectuals accused of participating in this sinister enterprise ideological volte face: Raphael Draï, Shmuel Trigano, Alexandre Adler, Alain Finkielkraut, Pierre Andre Taguieff, Orianna Fallaci, Robert Misrahi! The controversial author with his opponents, analyzing a few sentences alleged representative of this "philo-reaction" and pro-Zionist. In short, here is a new and original version of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" conspiracy myth and demonology of the early twentieth century ! .

The text is signed Franklin Rausky. Mr. Rausky is academic, he can read, at least we must assume, as we must suppose that he actually read the book he speaks. Consider the question yet. The book The reaction philo or treason of the clerks is indeed a critical intellectuals mentioned here, with the exception of Raphael Draï as far to criticize, I salute his book Under the sign of Zion (Michalon, 2001). Why did I pay tribute? Raphael Draï Because, unlike hereinafter named, do not confuse the defense of Israel with the defense of the West. The treason of the clerks question in my book is indeed this: the fact that intellectuals claim to the "fight against anti-Semitism" and the "defense of Zionism" to disseminate ideas that contradict the values of Judaism. In other words, I blame them not to be placed under the sign of Zion. And so I "controversy" with them, analyzing "few sentences" I judge precisely "representative" or symptomatic.

I criticize So Shmuel Trigano, who writes for example, about the book St. Paul the philosopher Alain Badiou: "It is surprising how easily Alain Badiou, however famous libertarian and leftist going to endorse any doctrine Paul, up to and including his theory about the gender status of women. Defending the veiling of women advocates that Paul, a sign of "acceptance of gender difference" (sic), he believes it has the sense "is obvious that the universality of this statement includes women who endorse they are women " ( The e (xc) read. Between Jews and Christians , Denoël, 2003, p. 112). This is not Paul who advocates "the veiling of women" is the Jewish tradition. Paul, himself, took up position in the Christian debate, especially against the apostle John, to support the idea that conversion to Christianity does not require the break with Jewish religious practice. The fact is that Shmuel Trigano him, finds that the obligation for a woman to cover her hair is just another "gender theory" , and a philosopher worthy of the name should be indignant .

Finkielkraut I criticize that in a debate with Benny Levy, has taken a stand to ban the Islamic veil and the Jewish kippa in schools, arguing that he believes it is first to distinguish "opposition to any repressive measure" which defend "secularism" yes "to various forms of actual life: the veil, the yarmulke, the cap back, body piercing, the notebook, the baggy pants and navel air" (Book and books, Verdier, 2006, p. 91). Besides that Finkielkraut evades the essential point, namely that the law is perhaps not as innocent as she looks, especially since the ban in question does not on "piercing the notebook, the baggy pants or navel air" , but on the Islamic veil and the Jewish kippa, scarf and hat (or not returned), only referred by the prohibition in terms of Republican clothing, and Alain Finkielkraut also no mention of other religious symbols in its schedule, that Jewish and Muslim, one wonders: is it relevant to compare the "kippa " the" piercing " at " portable " at " baggy pants "or " navel air "? Admittedly, this was originally an oral presentation, but is then published as a book, The Book and books precisely. The speaker then reviewed. Finkielkraut is also a writer, he weighs his words.

I criticize Alexandre Adler, who writes for example in U.S. Odyssey (Grasset, 2004): "Everybody knows that the capital of the Jewish world today n is neither Jerusalem remains a city gripped by the Arab world once within its walls, or even Tel Aviv is almost an intermediate step, but New York " (p. 280). This is the Copernican revolution that we offer Alexandre Adler: "American Odyssey" is central "Jewish world" , as was yesterday, Hellenized Jews, the Athenian Odyssey.

I Taguieff critic Pierre Andre, who in his book The purpose of anti-racism (Michalon, 1995, p. 98), pays tribute to Pope Pius XI and the Vatican for their "texts battle against Nazism 1937-1939 ", and concludes: " Should we add that the Nazi monstrosity, leading the Church to take a clear stand against anti-Semitism, provoked a turning of the utmost importance, allowing the establishment of a Jewish-Christian dialogue? ". But as a" combat text " against Nazi antisemitism, Pierre Andre Taguieff can give us to read a simple "declaration of Pius XI, 6 September 1938, a group of Belgian pilgrims" , in which the Pope should "anti-Semitism is inadmissible" . Furthermore, Peter Andre Taguieff ignores or pretends to ignore that Pius XII, who succeeded Pius XI in 1939, has not said a word about the extermination of the Jews, not even "to a group of Belgian pilgrims" . Finally here Hannah Arendt said that the "combat text" Vatican during the war: "The facts themselves are indisputable. Nobody denied that the pope had all relevant information on the Nazi deportation and" resettlement "Jews. Nobody denied that the pope was careful not to raise their voices in protest when, during the German occupation of Rome, the Jews, including Jews, Catholics (that is to say those who had converted to Catholicism) were rounded up under the windows of the Vatican, and headed toward the final solution ". Is this then the way the Church has taken "clear position against anti-Semitism ", according to Pierre Andre Taguieff?


I criticize Orianna Fallaci writes in The force of reason (Editions du Rocher, 2004), " halal slaughter is barbarian , and states: "It is, I'm sorry to say, in the same felling as shechitah . That is to say, the Jewish, which takes place in an identical manner and is to slaughter animals without stunning them first, so they die slowly. Very slowly, emptying their blood. If you do not believe, goes to a or halal slaughter shechitah, and observes that this agony is endless. Which is accompanied by tearing eyes and ends only when the lamb or calf has a drop of blood. Thus, the flesh has become a "pure" very white, pure ... " (P. 51-52). We know the risks facing today in Europe the freedom to perform ritual slaughter, and even import of meat slaughtered ritually. I also criticized because she writes about how the Koran appropriates the patriarch Abraham "And it goes without saying that if I was Jewish, I do not cry. I think it is better to lose than to have found a patriarche prêt à égorger son propre enfant pour la gloire de Dieu" (p. 162). Je la critique encore parce qu'elle écrit, au sujet du négationnisme de Faurisson et Amaudruz, que leur "révisionnisme" est une manière de "revoir l'Histoire, c'est-à-dire la raconter d'une façon différente de la version officielle" (p. 27).


Enfin je ne dis mot de Robert Misrahi, si ce n'est que je cite un texte de lui paru dans Charlie Hebdo en octobre 2003, dans lequel il rend hommage à la journaliste italienne en ces termes: "On découvre ainsi qu'Orianna Fallaci est non seulement genuine free woman atheist, progressive, independent and courageous, but it is also a real writer ". I do not have the same tastes as Robert Misrahi in literature, is a crime " anti-intellectual "?


short, it will be understood, I manhandled the idols of Professor Rausky and, beyond a certain Judaism and French university. I was told that I am the author a "conspiracy myth and demonology" . With this exception, therefore, that these "few sentences" , I have not invented.

Ivan Segre

What Kind Of Necklace For A Lace Wedding Dress

Rav Elie Kahn z "l, a man Integer

about a year ago that, just before the holidays of Tishrei 5769, we were unpleasantly surprised to learn of the death of Rav Elie Kahn at the age of 51 years.

The familiar site Cheela.org know of course that was Rabbi Kahn. The site's founder and main leader, he never worked hard to meet on the Internet to hundreds or even thousands of halachic issues, from the simplest to the most advanced, the more severe the more ridiculous sometimes. A

of its main features was the tone of the responses: always precise, polite and often with a humorous highly valued by its readers. But more than form, the content of his answers was also very specific. In real Possek (decision), he was careful to always be measured in his responses within 4 cubits of halacha, taking care to offer an adequate response to the profile of the caller.

The Rav Amital at the funeral of Rabbi Kahn has provided education for every Jew very striking face in " outside world, "who will not suffer it but who wants to rub, trying to integrate what seems most important manufacturer and for human existence.

Rabbi Amital very agitated, told shortly before his death, Rabbi Kahn called to tell him how much his comments on a page of Talmud was comforted. At the time, Rabbi Amital took no notice, instead concentrating on the pain of his interlocutor.

But he remembered the event when Rabbi Kahn left this world. For the commentary of Rav Amital was a very special passage in the Talmud, one of those that flourished in the "anthology of the Talmud" and who is regularly reminded to explain the uniqueness of Judaism. This passage is the following:

- Baba Metsia 59b -

"are taught in a Mishna: an oven made of tiles and cut associated with sand n ' is not subject to rules of purity and impurity according to Rabbi Eliezer. Other wise do not. This is called the oven Akhnaï (...). A braying teaches that day, Rabbi Eliezer answered all their objections, but the wise do not accepted.

He told them: "If the law is like me, this carob tree prove it!" The carob tree was uprooted
and ran one hundred cubits. And some say four hundred cubits.
They said: "It does not provide evidence of a carob tree!"
he said: "That this flow of water proves I'm right," and went up the water supply.
They said, "it provides no evidence of flowing water!"

"Let the walls of the home study prove it. "
The walls began to crumble when Rabbi Yehoshua addressed them and said
"If wise men argue about the law, what are you interfering? "
The walls did not fall out of respect for Rabbi Yehoshua stood up and did not, out of respect for Rabbi Eliezer.
He said: "Let the heavens prove it!"

Then a heavenly way came out and said: "What have you against Rabbi Eliezer! The law is always like him! "Rabbi Yehoshua
sat up on his feet and said:" The Torah is not in heaven "(Deuteronomy Chapter 23).

What does this mean? Rabbi Jeremiah said: "The Torah has already been given at Mount Sinai, so we do not take account of a heavenly way, for it is written, according to the majority, it settles the law."

At that time, Rabbi Nathan met Elijah the Prophet and asked, "What do the Holy One, Blessed is He now? He replied:
"He laughed and said: My kids beat me, beat me my children!"

(Translation Akadem)

In general, the text is regularly cited to show the distance that operating Judaism with divine transcendence and in some respects, notably on the question of man's place in the world, this may be the "religion" closest to atheism because of the importance it gives to the achievements of man in this world and its responsibilities, without being oppressed by the presence of God.

But we rarely talk about the basic problem: the furnace Akhnaï (the name of the furnace in question) is it subject to the rules purity and impurity? Is this discussion really Picrochole who lives two dramatically opposing camps? At that point one of them (Rabbi Eliezer) retrouvât be 'excommunicated' and isolated from his colleagues? What is really the question?

resume.
A whole oven is subject to the rules of purity and impurity.
An oven broke and scattered debris that is not subject to rules of purity and impurity.

Akhnaï The furnace is special in that it has both the characteristics the entire kiln and furnace broke. It is made of several pieces (tiles cut from the text). But it still appears as an integer (because the tiles are associated with sand). It is capable of fulfilling its role, function oven.

Rav Amital deepened in his article the question for Rabbi Eliezer Akhnaï this furnace is similar to a broken furnace. Whatever it was patched up, the bottom line is that what the compound is broken, broken, made of several pieces. That counts: we must see reality absolutely. This stove is made of a material whole or broken pieces? If there are broken pieces, it can not be called "Wide.

The sages have a different vision. They take the problem more on: does this oven is capable of assuming the task conferred upon it? If so, whatever its composition, it is quite possible to compare it to an oven "Integer" and assign an all characteristics.

intimate discussion of the Talmud is actually much broader than a simple problem of purity and impurity : It is a confrontation between two worldviews, two ways of apprehending reality: should we see things in absolute or relative? What

said Rabbi Amital and what comforted Rav Kahn is that the Halacha, the law is according to Wise. And this metaphor on the entire furnace applied to a patchwork of debris reconsolidated, it is perhaps applied to himself.

For Rabbi Kahn was a character in the landscape sometimes atypical rabbinical Orthodox but no beard, deeply attached to the Halacha sometimes even its smallest details (many examples attest) but also anxious to give halachic responses corresponding to the level of the speaker, but Ashkenazi very attached to the person and work of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Torah scholar, but also passionate by the secular sciences, literature or history. Perhaps it sometimes arose the question: this diversity of interests, activities, practices made it all the same to me a man "Full" as the furnace Akhnaï composed of different pieces?

According

Rabbi Eliezer, who must always be made from a raw material, unique and absolute, it is not the case. But for refusing to comply with the opinion of the Sages, who instead responded "Yes" resounding to the risk of contradicting God Himself, Rabbi Eliezer has been isolated.

The answer is obvious and it is even more to us: Rabbi Kahn was a true man, whole, worthy of respect, consideration and admiration of his peers and his students real or virtual. And its diverse nature, far from threatening its authenticity has reinforced rather point to make a man unique.

missing for a year already, but his work is still there. This famous phrase takes on its meaning:

"Tsadikim Bemitatan Nikreou Haim" "The righteous after their death are called living creatures."

it be so for the Rav Elie Kahn z "l.

Dark Mucousy Spotting

The hyperbook books: The Future of Internet

The hyperbook proves he be the future of books?

How to reconcile new technology and traditional reading? How to ensure that technological change lives in perfect harmony with the cultural treasure that is the book as object? The solution is it that the technology interferes discreetly and indirectly in the traditional object that is the book? We will focus our study by drawing on the concept of the new book by J. Attali, a book that some are already calling "hyperbook": "The meaning of things."

1) The book should it evolve?
The book is a magical object, a treasure passed down from generation to generation, a secret passage to escape freely. The subject book is a real marvel: he sleeps on a few sheets of paper a set of letters, words, sentences, who assembled, we can embark on a journey that we know of no destination, our greatest pleasure. Even today, it seems inconceivable to be without this book or object to see mutate into another object. The prototype e-book does not convince that geeks. So the solution is to keep all the attachment worn by players at the right traditional book ... by trying to provide value-added does not alter the structure. But the previous question to ask is this: Should the book change or why the book should it evolve? Indeed, have you ever seen someone complain about a book (except as regards its content)? Are not you surprised to see so many people still read with pleasure a book on a park bench or in the secret garden, partitioned in his room? It therefore finds that the pleasure is there. The reader asks nothing else: he takes pleasure in reading and this is essential. But then, why the book should evolve if all goes well in the brave new world wonder I candidly? You will argue that we can do better, that pleasure can be increased while maintaining the full and original qualities of the original book as object. Well, I'll acquiesce, but like any marketing speak, I'm afraid it creates a new need ... which obviously had no need.

2) The hyperbook: a marketing concept?
We have just seen, the book does not need to evolve. But we always want to do better ... Instead, publishers want to regain market share ... But let's be less critical: we want to give more value to the book-object by providing real value and thus might attract new readers. Either, but I am not convinced not. So why start such a book now? The book situation is not the best: there are fewer and fewer readers of literature (but what does the literature ...). However, editorial diversity has never been greater. So every reader will rejoice that this oversupply is so many doors open to the many treasures of the language that they can share feelings and sometimes ... sensations! But who is destined to hyperbook: these players believe in this crowd of players who leave gradually or literature to all those people who do not read (literature)? To all of you will answer on a commercial tone. For it is indeed a trade: open the book by giving it more space. Technically, but without going into details, it is an interactive book by means of mobile phones, the Internet and the Flashcode. With this, we can access more content. But why not add the content directly in the book because we want to add multimedia and interactivity. But then the hyperbook no longer a book. At least, he does not deserve to be called book with whatever prefix or suffix whatsoever. No, because the book is synonymous with escape and I do not want to be guided or directed in my escape. An escape can reach this freedom. And I do not want a probation, let alone driven.

3) Can we expand to greater evasion evasion?
Returning to the concept of books. A book is an object that allows us to escape, to ramble, to wander, get lost often to our delight. Each book is perceived differently by each of us, the fruit of our personal histories, our knowledge, our culture, our resentments. In short, a book found himself personally (but also shares, of course). So why would we want to say more on this subject? Why give to other forms of literature? The literature can be married in multimedia? I think not. Nothing is stronger than the power of words. Obviously, the music also provides an escape, the images give us the ability to dream. But then comes the real question: can we combine literary escape and evasion musical? Delicate and difficult to answer. Difficult to answer because every answer is different for each individual as we are. Some are more sensitive to music, others to the power of words. Which would examine the possible difference between hearing culture and visual culture. Ah! that the subject is interesting, I hope that some philosophers, psychologists and other experts qualified to respond with reliable and valid arguments will focus on the issue as the issues, we have seen, are important.
Thus, the challenge taken up by Jacques Attali with this new book addresses various objectives: to examine "the book can it evolve?" Make a buzz marketing (oh when "attack" the book what strong reactions we can have!) test this new concept on the public.

I do not think one can speak of hyperbook. Subject hyperculturel suit me all better. Indeed, this new object is based on the true object-book, but it exceeds so widely, it appears to other cultures. Talking hyperbook lead me to consider this item as a reading guide. Then I was told to do without these schedules which consist of only a few logos printed, but they alter my view freedom of the book, its wealth, even if here is the author himself, who wants to lead us to more content. That is why I am not against this idea in principle, but that this object is called object hyperculturel. This object and combines diverse cultures: culture and visual culture today hearing tomorrow may be added culture olfactory Culture touch and taste culture. An idea that will surely dig the industrial most advanced.
Do not tell me hyperbook, but this "new cultural object that blends cultures" ... with varying degrees of success and above all ... which has no interest ... in the current state of development. Personal opinion.

Sandrail Project In Usa

book makes us stupid

Internet or the birth of a reflection brutalized

Internet is a technological constant unprecedented. Nevertheless, this set of technologies, highly useful and practical conceals a profound evil that should not be taken lightly: Formatting minds. This format creates minds unfortunately simplistic thinking based on computer logic, which has nothing to do with human logic. Consequence: s'abêtissent minds ...

1) minds formatted computer logic
Younger generations are now fully digital natives. They are even experts in this field. They handle well and a computer system or networks that are associated with considerable ease. We could rejoice that power almost innate to see young people with the pleasure of learning (something they did not even realize), to observe children, tweens and teens who are fully engaged in mastering these tools. Admittedly, this is a very positive point. But it is essential to consider the content of teaching and learning: what is it, their is this really useful, knowledge and competencies are transferable to other areas? Here is the whole point: if these knowledge and skills are only using the tool, they have no obvious interest. But it should be emphasized that mastering the basics of computer science and associated networks including the Internet is indispensable in our industrialized societies. Except for the limited interest
(yet essential) knowledge, is proving a very interesting question. Indeed, outside the strict knowledge (how to turn on computer, go to a chat, chat live, identify spam, etc..), What is the logic of these tools? This is a computer logic. Thus, the spirits are formatted to this mode of thought: there is no reflection on you, the thinking tool for us. While these systems are not very reliable, but unfortunately one day we will perhaps tools that "will read in our thoughts." A simple word and presto, the system will know exactly what you're looking ... and found! I already know most of you do not understand what the problem is: it's great but do you think, thanks to this life will be even easier. But the underlying problem is our mind. The purpose of life is not to find, but to learn to seek and learn to find, to find all answers for yourself, for any occasion. For learning to find one acquires skills that are used in everyday life: we learn to think, we develop curiosity, one feels a need to know, in short form is its spirit of citizen-even have opinions constructed, thoughtful opinions, to speak properly and be understood, to build their knowledge wisely.
Do not overlook the construction of his thinking. This construction is permanent. But some tools to facilitate thinking more and more and better at our place. Certainly, it is quite comfortable. Most of you will rejoice at this: thinking and presto, we have everything we want. But that's not life, this is not the lazy: we must reflect on it to make it even more beautiful. Ode the intelligence ...

2) Marier human thinking and computer logic
The computer logic has nothing to do with human thought, even if it is the human mind that created the computer logic. A computer does not think, he calculates. A computer has no feelings, he tries to understand. A computer has no brain, just a technological system more or less efficient. In short, the computer has nothing in common with humans. But it helps humans. He helps so we have less and less need for humans. I will not enter the debate politico-economic and socio-technological relationship between man and machine, but I will bring about a very human thinking: now instead of working directly in the "how" we arrive at jobs on the "how to do it." It thus creates more jobs in the area of understanding and construction of a logic makes our lives easier. Attention, the purpose of these trades is not to create technologies similar to human thought, but rather tools invulnerable, intuitive and surpassing human thought to answer. Create something that transcends us is it possible? Philosophical subject. Also, what about the marriage of man and machine thinking.
I think that we should not create machines in this spirit: to serve every need in minimum time. By creating this sense that man develops an intellectual laziness. He no longer feels the need to learn, think and be content of what he used.

3) But where is the problem?
The answers to this question will develop and describe the consequences of this general answer: no man will think more "humane". In
no longer feeling the need to reflect and no longer carries this act, the reflection will be truncated to what is today for us evidence. By not reflecting more, man becomes inevitably more vulnerable. He will believe more easily the various ideologies of the most preposterous. It will be more easily manipulated. In short, the man becomes a machine for other men. Hmm, I see already reacted by saying it is already the case, except that here, these men-machine will not be aware of their exploitation. They will wish to bondsmen. In short, we arrive regression of some human thoughts. The logic will prevail like "Ah well you see on Google they told me that as a skilled worker I could not claim more de124, 35 euros per month. Well well too bad we can not eat today. "Obviously, this result will come from the website of the company's CEO. Of course this example is caricatured in the extreme, but unfortunately we could achieve something like that. But not jump to conclusions as they could do in almost each of my messages. I do not want any deletion of the Internet and other technologies. But these technologies are not created to replace human thinking. But it is indeed the key to all industrial if they wish to become extremely rich (an example? Uh ... Microsoft, IBM, Macintosh, Google Inc.., ....). More the tool is simple to use, more people are likely to buy, and the company became rich. But unfortunately, behind all this money, we must not forget that the human is there to think, think, etc.. And for the slackers who have only one desire is to do nothing: more thought is pushed, the more the dream is big and beautiful. And yes, there is also a great pleasure to be smart. The reflection is not there to make a headache ...

Short conclusion as citation:
"More human thought is developed, is the closest spiritual enjoyment ..." Little additional humorous touch to this quote for the most lazy: "... and when we know how the mind influences the body ..."

Do Women Get Jealous Of Other Woman

Tele-déréalité

Reality TV: reality but what do we talk?

means here and there the term "reality TV". Would that be true, the TV could be a reflection of our society?
I will not approach a study of news media (though partly because I can avoid it), but the phenomenon of reality TV and more particularly the effects (mostly negative) that this so-called reality TV has on young people in training and social citizenship.
So why do we talk about reality TV if it is to feed this fantasy inherent in human nature: voyeurism? We can deduce what this show has disastrous consequences on vulnerable minds, especially on the youth who are the staunchest viewers.

1) Voyeurism: a fantasy fueled (but never satisfied) by the media ... sad

Reality TV: Why?
Objective of a private television: ratings. And how do the ratings if it is responding to the desires, even better, to fantasies of the greatest number of potential viewers? So what happened this TV phenomenon called "reality". Operation: watch other human beings, supposedly like us, to see how they live, how they react, how they operate ... Oh, but this operation does not it remind you something? But yes the Tamagoshi or other simulation games on PC. Except that, unfortunately you can not feed these "candidates" (I will return to this term later) ... but soon (if not already done in other countries which did surprise me point) you should feed them by phoning premium rate numbers ... Already you should save them from the terrifying appointment by supporting them through sms or call surcharge of course! Not a good business: ratings, overtaxed resources per call, etc.. ?

Reality TV: This is not true my child!
Well, I hope you realize that reality TV has no reality except the name. Indeed, candidates of these emissions are not chosen by chance: there is a heavy cast first. Similarly we are not talking about gambling issue but then in real life, do you cross that individuals selected on auditions? Did you win (or risk losing) 10000 euros if you cross at the right or the wrong time? QED.
Let us go further than this simple fact. In reality (but no TV :-)), reality TV is a TV déréalité. His goal meets only a logical ratings as I explained above. Worse still, these games require a staging.

Brief analysis type "media literacy" of reality TV
Here, go through a short survey (component of any media education) from the soundtrack, but by Jove, they play on the feelings, they go for the nice nicer still, and lovers for more than they are in love (ok, at first sight may exist even in a game on TV where one candidate has more than actors more or less effective ... ). So, try to put another soundtrack to the speech or the words of a candidate: roh but the turn is quite different, in fact it was nice. Also, analyze the plans shots. He yells over the other and it shows in close-up: roh is not nice and what it is terrifying ... And editing, rah magic media who can contextualize all about: it is not pretty. Reality television: the biggest manipulation!
Now, just take a step back without going into such a media analysis. Why in any kind of television reality shows does one image relates to the candidate or does one of the sayings of their "cage" (as I call these pens candidates)? But yes, it is to construct the scenario of this pseudo reality TV! Why do we involve close candidates, but to make us believe even more that this is real life "Oh yes it's reality, are even family and friends of the candidates!".

Reality-TV whose fault?
But whose fault is it that reality TV? Wrongs are divided:
- The television themselves by selling a TV "reality" when it's just a TV show
- The producers of these programs by manipulating the candidates of these games and mainly by constructing a scenario facing conflict, sex and sadness (a candidate crying and presto, the ratings soar!)
- Those who watch if their major or guardians (unless they are watching keenly aware that reality TV is 100% fake ... but this case they would watch it, except for analysis with a smile as is my case): a look conscious and conscientious about television is all schools world (like I already created a very nice quote!)

2) What negative effects of reality TV?
Television, excuse the obvious, is a model or at least influencing factor for everyone, adult or not. This influence is more or less according to the education we've had and the distance that can be taken over the media. This is a very important problem expounds the reality TV: selling a false reality. So many young people who identify with particular candidates who adopt the mannerisms of one candidate or another, etc.. This would not be a problem if these candidates could serve as models of intelligent thoughts, words and polished sound, a French speaking correctly, etc.. However, we choose candidates stereotyped and of course with features that ensure the ratings ... and unfortunately the culture and intelligence do not collect young viewers. I do not want any young people: television is for them a means of entertainment, they are tired of school. OK, besides that one mission of the school to inform and train these young people what is on TV. But the problem is that the school has neither the time nor the means to counter all these beatings marketing, all more or less intentional manipulation, all these requests from everywhere: a young much more time passes before a screen in front of a teacher, and those who manage the messaging of these screens are far more numerous and more influential than the best educational teams.
This leads us to observe another problem caused by this television show: the future citizen is formed by being irrigated by a model of reality which is actually an illusion (and the producer of this lure ment if not directly what the is at least by omission). And, as I expose the school has too few resources to counter this erroneous message. I'm not asking that the school has more resources (though she never enough but it is not the issue the subject), but that the media are more dignified, more respectful and to work more on building a clear message for children and parents of these children: reality TV is not reality, it is a staging
Finally, another problem, not least, this entertainment ode to laziness. What (s) beautiful (s) image (s) to show that candidates who do nothing and will make lots of money and get a job in the game's release! It's a great message to youth: do not work, it pays. Ha but I'm stupid! It is true that these people are not real people, but actors, so as they work, they deserve a small salary. And it connects perfectly with employee status granted to certain ex-candidate of a reality TV show "Temptation Island".

3) Proposals for a remote sounder that preserves its audience
You will hopefully understand, I do not want the abolition of television, on the contrary, this media is essential to our democracy and even construction of the citizen which I previously mentioned. Indeed, if not by the messages it disseminates, it at least by the study that is being made that are taught the citizen of this reflex to be wary of a image: an image is not reality, just its representation and sometimes more often, it is a manipulation. Misinformation we face and the picture (let alone animated) is the easiest carrier.
Proposition 1: The concept of 'reality TV' must disappear
What nobody ever talks about reality TV. That when we talk about what kind of show we always talk about entertainment, television show (the good thing is not very derogatory term seller ...), TV-comedy (that candidates like it or not, what comedians are handled). Abandon the term reality so confused and dangerous on every mind
Proposal 2: Tele-smart comedy, this is possible?
Why not try a reality TV show (oops!) TV-comedy with people who have a correct language, that are respectful of each other (good human nature can lead to altercations I am aware ), people who live life by working smarter rather than bored and spending time doing nothing to earn € 100,000. In short, people who could serve as a reference ("but would mean that there should also establish a casting and therefore this would again lie to the viewer that! "... except that I'm talking about TV-comedy, not reality TV ...)
Proposal 3 : A TV-comedy influenced less by the producers ... unless they admit it
Tele-comedy, as we have seen, responds to a scenario. We must indeed keep viewers in suspense without What they get bored. Hence the fact that I want full transparency in these issues: it is not a reflection of life, there is an editing team, there are scenarios (Which are built as and when it occurs), the candidates have a role to play, etc.. That all this is admitted by showing this particular dark side of emissions!

But then the big question: what if these conditions are met, that is to say, if you stop making fun of the viewers of these emissions by lying to them and giving them what they want (gossip, lies, manipulation, violence, sex, false feelings, etc..), the ratings would still go? Nothing is less certain.

This allows me to reach a very important point that I address a message to the presidents of TV stations :

"Television is a major medium, a technology that facilitates exchanges, contacts, to disseminate knowledge, share the culture. But it also releases a lot of nonsense, lies, violence, brief , any vector which is in the ratings. However, this vector can be transformed in the ratings. Violence, lies, stupidity is not the dominant traits of human nature. So why not focus the editorial charter around noble values of human nature: respect, solidarity, intelligence, step back. These components are obviously less dramatic and therefore less attractive. This is a challenge for all channels! I wanted to salute (not to flatter a free public service, I really think) efforts in this direction by the public service channels that have this mission in their specifications and who respond perfectly, even if to do more in this direction would still be better ...
television channels, show your strength by developing a ratings centered around the noble human values. You'll do more than thank most welcome, and therefore much more consulted by viewers.
I dream that one day I tell the students in secondary schools: "And do not forget to watch television on arriving home" ² ... and without doubt they will ever come across a bad program. I had a dream ... "

² Small Note: I would say of course students, in addition to watching TV, physical activity and sport regularly (" besides the brain, we must think of our bodies whole ").