Those Lazy EuropeansPosted by Joerg Wolf in International Economics, Transatlantic Relations on Saturday, July 21. 2007
Comparing vacation days in the US and Europe, Reuters writes "Europe heads to beach, Americans head to work:"
Finland, followed by France, offers working people the most statutory vacation, at more than six weeks per year, the report, an international snapshot of how much paid leave people get by law and in practice in 21 countries, says. The United States is the only country where employees have no statutory leave, and they get about half as much time off in reality as Europeans get, according to the report, compiled by the Washington-based Centre for Economic Policy Research. 'The United States is in a class of its own,' the report says. 'It is the no-vacation nation.'Liz Ryan writes in Business Week about the vacation customs in France and wrongly assumes that all of Europe is like France: The Europeans Do It Right: I applaud a whole continent shutting down for a month. The only way we can really shut down and enjoy time off is with our colleagues' help.All of Europe shutting down for a month? How silly is that? Why do quite a few Americans consider "Europe" synonymous with "France"? Related: Longer vacations => more happiness? Transatlantic ObsessionsPosted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, May 31. 2007
Europeans and Americans should mind their own business. That's the main thesis of watchblogs for Anti-Americanism and French-bashing.
Blogs like Davids Medienkritik complain that the German media is obsessed with America's real and imagined wrongdoings, while blogs like SuperFrenchie complain about the American media's obsession with France's domestic politics. So, I guess, it is time to acknowledge that both Europeans and Americans have their obsessions about their distant relatives on the other side of the Atlantic. Prejudices and unfair reporting is not unique to one side, as some people sometimes seem to claim. It is not rocket science to come to this conclusion, but I guess it serves as a good reminder. Still, it remains weird and unfortunate that the German media is soo obsessed with the United States and that the US media is soo obsessed with France. Both country's media outlets would do good to reduce the obsessions on some silly topics and cover more important issues like poverty in our own countries and around the world, wars and conflicts in Africa, how to increase energy efficiency etc. Two relevant quotes from the watchblogs: Flocon asks in SuperFrenchie: "Will you please mind your own business?" The recent presidential elections in France have been a renewed opportunity for most of the American MSM to display a permanent feature that is to be found in many articles reporting on our country: an obsession which translates into an incessant set of criticisms about how France is run, particularly its economy. Above all, the 35-hour workweek, the 5-week paid vacation and the free and high-quality healthcare and educational systems seem to be particularly unbearable to those many journalists, columnists and reporters who also seem to have trouble understanding why the labor market is regulated, why workers are entitled to social rights and protections, and even sometimes are allowed to go on strike.Likewise, Ray D. has listed some "Pet issues common in German media coverage of the United States" in Davids Medienkritik: # Perceived American religiosity.I do not fully understand the irrational obsessions with the US and France. I sort of know why it is popular, but I do not fully understand the feelings. Besides, I also do not fully understand why soo many Americans and French are interested in reading about the latest Anti-American headline or the latest French-bashing comment every single day. No, I am not envious of the huge readership of Medienkritik and SuperFrenchie, but I simply fail to fully understand the huge interest into such single topics. Anti-Americanism and French bashing are pretty boring to me: The same magazines and the same politicians make the same stupid statements. Why do I want to read about (more or less) the same stuff every single day? Americans Appreciate FrancePosted by Editors in Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, May 31. 2007
Watching America has translated a Figaro article:
Gone are the days of Francophobia and “with us or against us” on Iraq. For 80 percent of Americans polled in a survey conducted by the French-American Foundation - an NGO dedicated to strengthening Franco-American relations - it is “very important” or "somewhat important” to maintain good relations with France over the next few years. But a significant majority (62 percent) say they are unaware of how the Presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy will affect ties between Paris and Washington. Four Myths About Transatlantic RelationsPosted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Wednesday, May 16. 2007
William Drozdiak, president of the American Council on Germany and the former chief European correspondent for The Washington Post, wrote an op-ed about transatlantic relations. (Hat tip: Don) Unfortunately, the Washington Post editors chose an headline "4 Myths About America-Bashing in Europe," although only two of the four myths could be put into the category America-Bashing. The headline choice indicates that they find the term "America-Bashing" more profitable than the term "transatlantic relations." So it is not just the European media, which focuses on the negative aspects on the other side of the Atlantic.
Excerpts from Drozdiak's op-ed: Opinion polls cite widespread dismay with the Iraq war, our dog-eat-dog social model and the arrogance of an imperial superpower that places itself above international law. But behind the surveys about "why they hate us" lies a reservoir of goodwill waiting to be tapped among foreigners who would prefer to see the United States succeed rather than fail. This love-hate melange has perpetuated four modern myths about transatlantic relations that deserve to be debunked. Schadenfreude? How the Smearing of Iraq War Critics Has ChangedPosted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Tuesday, April 10. 2007
"Monday marked the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein. But instead of celebrations, the tone in Iraq was set by angry anti-American protests," writes Spiegel International and then translates several German editorials on this subject.
None of the editorials has any Schadenfreude. Die Welt for instance points out that "the dissolution of the Iraqi army and of the structures of the ruling Baath party was too hurried and in retrospect counter-productive," but also stresses "all of this is easily said four years later. At the same time, nobody has a blueprint for the new Iraq, which consists ethnically and religiously of three parts and which only achieved a forced unity under Saddam's iron rule. ..." Still, some supporters of the Iraq war perceive a lot of Schadenfreude in the media. Why? Shaun Carney, associate editor of the Australian paper The Age, describes in his opinion piece Who'd gloat about it? how critics of the Iraq war have been given different labels by the war advocates in recent years. Before the Iraq war started, skeptics were compared with "appeasers of Hitler in the '30s" (or labeled as weasels, cowards, surrender monkeys, one might add). According to Carney, this phase was followed by the immediate post-invasion demands for all sceptics to apologise because the defeat of Saddam had taken only a few weeks and the 2004-05 insistence that occupied Iraq was really a good news story that a twisted media refused to report. The latest mantra, now that it's clear the whole enterprise is a frightening mess, is: stop gloating.Pretty popular in US blogs and newspapers is also to use the German word "Schadenfreude" to describe this alleged gloating: • James Taranto writes in the Wall Street Journal blog about the "Iraqschadenfreudegruppe," but his only "evidence" is a quote from Karsten Voigt, the German government's coordinator on relations with the U.S. in response to the Iraq Study Group report: "We should be happy that there is a course correction in the United States." as well from Andreas Schockenhoff, a deputy leader of Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives in parliament, who "warned" the U.S. against thinking there are "obligations for other NATO partners" from a withdrawal. Mr. Taranto does not explain why he considers this to be Schadenfreude. Instead he complains about Germany's alleged "freeloading off American strength" and wonders "why in the world would they be pleased at the prospect of American retreat from Iraq?" Well, I wonder, why in the world would someone from the respected Wall Street Journal misinterprets the above politicians in such a way... Schadenfreude is a German word, but it does not mean we are full of it. Predictably, Davids Medienkritik, has approvingly linked to the Wall Street Journal. Fortunately, they did not delete a comment by Amelie de Saintronges, which the James Taranto should read: Schadenfreude is something you feel when you are happy about the misfortune of somebody else. It is not Schadenfreude when you are happy that somebody finally tries to correct a (perceived) error you told him about time ago. There maybe a certain "toldya so" factor to it but it's not Schadenfreude. Schadenfreude would be stupid since U.S. failure in Iraq would not be to the advantage of Germany, quite the contrary. A "failed state" of Iraq does not help anybody, not even trade. A Middle East in chaos does not inspire Schadenfreude to anyone.• Likewise, Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum complains about gloating from "Old Europe," after the publication of the Iraq Study group report. Fortunately, many Washington Post readers criticized her column. According to SuperFrenchie's count "out of almost 150 comments, just 8 of them were some sort of Euro-bashing, and none of them was true French-bashing, despite the easy opportunity. The other 140 comments were bashing… Anne Applebaum!" SuperFrenchie, a blog about "adventures in French-bashing America," has written an excellent criticism of Ms. Applebaum's column. In the debate in his comments section, SuperFrenchie discusses the difference between gloating and "I told you so" and makes this statement: My feeling is that there isn't much gloating because the European media is simply not used to gloat about much. They are used to criticize heavily, whether it's American policies or European policies or French policies. Cheerleading media, as exists here (Fox, NY Post, etc…), doesn't really exist in Europe. They have their opinions, but they don't cheerlead.
« previous page
(Page 2 of 2, totaling 17 entries)
|
SponsorTips From Our Readers
The above links on transatlantic issues have been recommended by trusted readers. More information about this web 2.0 project ;-)
SUPPORT THIS SITEGoogle the SiteBlogroll
Hot TopicsClick on one of the following links to see all Atlantic Review posts about this topic in a chronological order with the latest post on top:
Afghanistan Anti-Americanism Economics Iran Iraq Merkel Polls Terrorism Click here for the full list of all topics. Read posts from specific Atlantic Review authors |
Home - About Us - Newsletter - Transatlantic Relations - US Foreign Policy - Various RSS Feeds Designed for Atlantic Review by Carl.

Latest Comments
Let's lift a beer to our mutual sanity, then. :)
Anton about War in the Caucasus
I hope yours vote for Obama... Nostradamus spoke third world war starts from [...]
Zyme about War in the Caucasus
Without a healthy dose of cynicism, observing contemporary politics can drive you [...]
Anton about War in the Caucasus
Oh... Main word in this post SOVIET :)))) LOL SOVIET=FEAR LOL!!! :))) Russia eager to [...]
Andrei Li about War in the Caucasus
You are right. The question is why CNN cover the story in that way. What might happen [...]
Zyme about War in the Caucasus
To everyone trying to unfold conspiracies - please do it in ordinary letters.
Zyme about War in the Caucasus
Thank you for the link!
SC about War in the Caucasus
Oh, but Zyme, "Change" is in the air! Don't you feel it? Why it was in Berlin just a [...]