Le Monde reports on a gendarme (a law enforcement corps, mostly for rural areas, placed under military command), referred to as "G.H.", who was active on the Facebook site.

G.H.'s activities on Facebook caught the reporters' attention because of what he said and what groups he chose to join on Facebook, including:

  • identifying himself as "extreme right wing";
  • having as a motto: "work, family, country" (the motto of the Vichy regime);
  • claiming interest in: the crusades, nationalism, and beating up North Africans; and
  • joining a group "for law enforcement to charge left-wing demonstrators with drawn sabers".

Le Monde brought G.H.'s case to the attention of the national gendarmerie headquarters. The press office expressed shock, pronounced the situation unacceptable, and promised disciplinary action.

I have no sympathy for the views espoused by G.H. and can imagine that disciplinary action would be appropriate, because G.H. used a profile picture in uniform, blurring the line between the uniform and the man.

But I'm an American, so I have an exalted view of freedom of speech. The Le Monde article makes me uneasy. Here's why:

  • There's a bizarre sort of outing going on. G.H. presented himself on Facebook, for (almost) all to see. He wasn't sneaky or clandestine. The reporters, however, turned him in to his superiors behind his back, without first asking G.H. to comment. And in their article, the reporters disguised the subject's identity, referring to G.H. by his initials only, not by his name. For this reader, using initials suggests that G.H. has something to hid or wants something kept quiet, whereas on Facebook his interests and group memberships were openly displayed.
  • We're supposed to feel satisfaction in a gotcha! moment: a gendarme has affinities with extreme right wing causes. But is this really a scoop, or only the result of snooping? Of all the gendarmes in France, is it really surprising or newsworthy that one is on Facebook and presents himself as extreme right wing? Is this anything more than an anecdote that supports stereotypes that many already hold about gendarmes? Isn't there something creepy about wading through Facebook profiles in search of such a person?
  • Why take everything literally? Lots of Facebook content is second-degree and joking. The jokes may be in bad taste, and may even give offense to some, but they are intended as jokes. And some Facebook initiatives are attempts at self-invention, at putting on a certain face for friends.
  • What if G.H. were on an official mission to infiltrate right-wing extremist groups in France? Unlikely, but not impossible.
  • Why single out Facebook? What's special about this site? I imagine that there are many sites and discussion forums for right wing extremists. Was G.H.'s offense that he expressed his views openly, rather than only among like-minded people?