Critical Review

3 Pages 838 Words

Critical review of an article from The Guardian 18th December 2003

The article I’m reviewing comes from The Guardian 18th December 2003. Headed “Chirac calls on MP’s to ban headscarves”. A journalist called Paul Webster wrote this article. Briefly this piece is explaining the situation in France regarding President Chirac wanting to ban headscarves and other “conspicuous” religious signs from state schools.

The tone of the article appears to be factual. It does, however seem to be a biased article in favour of the ban. There isn’t much criticism of the President and his decision for legislation regarding this. The French Council of the Muslim Faith is said to have called this a “disastrous” decision. Although the article says that the President is calling for legislation regarding headscarves and other “conspicuous” religious signs the focus of this piece is mainly the headscarves issue. There is an opinion poll mentioned, taken the previous day but it doesn’t actually state where this poll was taken or the cross section of people/religious backgrounds polled. The writer states this poll gave a result of 69% in favour of President Chirac’s decision regarding headscarves and religious signs in schools and public services and “opposed the introduction of public holidays to celebrate Muslim and Jewish feasts”. Paul then goes on to say that two thirds of the leftwing and National Front (rightwing) voters approved, as did 75% of the centre-right. This proposal is documented as “the most popular reform the President has sponsored since he was first elected in 1995”. “Discreet signs” of religious affiliation would be allowed, signs such as the hand of Fatima, the star of David, and the cross depending on the size – which would be determined by parliament.

The writer then goes on to speak about President Chirac’s 35-minute address to an “invited audience” – presumably invited ...