EDITO - World Cup in Qatar: the boycott, the demagogic weapon of French cities?

Lionel Rosso & Virginie Phulpin 10:49 p.m., October 03, 2022

Several French cities have already announced that they will not broadcast the football world cup on giant screens. 

The list is growing day by day.

Paris this evening, Marseille a little earlier in the day, Strasbourg, Reims, Lille, Bordeaux yesterday.

Who's next ?

We are a month and a half away from the opening of the Mondial, and other municipalities will follow suit.

As is the case with some of our neighbours, in Belgium in particular.

The reason given is simple.

Above all, do not endorse the World Cup in Qatar, do not put yourself in the colors of an event that these cities refuse to support.

So why not ?

There are many reasons to want to stand out from a World Cup organized with ecological aberrations in spades.

Between the air-conditioned stadiums and the 160 flights a day planned to transport supporters who cannot stay on site and who commute between the stadiums and their hotels in neighboring countries, for example.

There is also obviously the problem of human rights, between the 6,500 workers who died on the construction sites of this World Cup and the various forms of discrimination.

All this is true, and the protests can only be heard.

But they come late, and brandishing the demagogic weapon of boycott is a bit easy. 

There are other reasons that come into play.

First, there are many cities where giant screens have never appeared during group matches.

Even during the world cups which were not controversial.

They are installed if the French team has a good run, ends up in the last four or even in the final.

So some municipalities communicate hand on heart about the absence of giant screens when they are not usually there either.

First point.

Second thing, you won't have missed it, it's autumn, not June.

Football enthusiasts are less likely to jostle at the fan gate areas open to the four winds than during the long hot evenings of early summer.

They are more likely to want to be in the warmth of a bar or organize a football party with friends on the couch.

So it's also a question of supply and demand, but it's less of a seller than dangling a boycott.

And third thing, the cost.

Installing a giant screen and making it work is usually already expensive.

200,000 euros in Bordeaux only for the 2018 final for example.

But there, in addition, there is the rise in energy prices.

This means that municipalities are also looking to save money.

Which is commendable, but has little to do with a moral boycott.

The city of Angers, for example, was transparent today.

We call everyone to sobriety, we are not going to sink into mismanagement.

It has the merit of intellectual honesty.

Installing a giant screen and making it work is usually already expensive.

200,000 euros in Bordeaux only for the 2018 final for example.

But there, in addition, there is the rise in energy prices.

This means that municipalities are also looking to save money.

Which is commendable, but has little to do with a moral boycott.

The city of Angers, for example, was transparent today.

We call everyone to sobriety, we are not going to sink into mismanagement.

It has the merit of intellectual honesty.

Installing a giant screen and making it work is usually already expensive.

200,000 euros in Bordeaux only for the 2018 final for example.

But there, in addition, there is the rise in energy prices.

This means that municipalities are also looking to save money.

Which is commendable, but has little to do with a moral boycott.

The city of Angers, for example, was transparent today.

We call everyone to sobriety, we are not going to sink into mismanagement.

It has the merit of intellectual honesty.

but which has little to do with a moral boycott.

The city of Angers, for example, was transparent today.

We call everyone to sobriety, we are not going to sink into mismanagement.

It has the merit of intellectual honesty.

but which has little to do with a moral boycott.

The city of Angers, for example, was transparent today.

We call everyone to sobriety, we are not going to sink into mismanagement.

It has the merit of intellectual honesty.

Are these municipalities right or wrong not to install giant screens for the World Cup?

Everyone will judge, our experts in particular.

But saying loud and clear that we don't want to echo a World Cup whose values ​​we don't share, is that effective above all?

The World Cup is about to take place.

And the echo, it will have.

Not installing giant screens will not change anything.

So isn't it mainly the football fans who are being punished, more than Qatar and its oh so open to criticism?

And since there will be an echo anyway, why not take advantage of this moment to highlight everything that is wrong?

And there is the choice.

The NGO Amnesty International, for example, produced a documentary to denounce all the aberrations of the Qatari World Cup.

It might be worth showing it on a giant screen at half-time.

That's just one example.

Take the opportunity to educate everyone behind the scenes of this World Cup.

It is perhaps more constructive than blocking your eyes and ears.