It should be obvious which side I'm on — and contrary to all that Lalanne and company's conception of what an inquiry into "cinema" must certainly "mean" to myself and others of the iPhone Generation, I join Andy Rector in asking the following:
More on all this over at Andy's Kino Slang blog, here.
We are the editors of the Cahiers du cinéma.
When Le Monde decided to sell les Cahiers, we took the opportunity to develop a project with the editor-in-chief [i.e., Emmanuel Burdeau] for the purchase of the magazine. That project, born of the desire and the need for critical thinking about cinema, has convinced financial partners: our main shareholder being Thierry Wilhelm — press and Internet editor — along with, among others, Paul Otchakovsky-Laurens, a publisher who has always been close to the magazine.
Our project is also that of a huge number of old members of les Cahiers, like
André S. Labarthe,
and longtime companions like
and Jean Louis Schefer.
They, more than twenty-five in total, have indicated their commitment by signing a letter we published in Libération.
This project was initiated several months ago. It has constructed itself in plain view of everyone, and its aims are now well-known: renewing les Cahiers in-depth by developing a new complementarity between the magazine and the Internet; ensuring the sustainability of the structure in all its activities; guaranteeing continued employment for the salaried staff.
All of this you know. Or rather, no, you pretend not to know it when you maintain your proposal to take over an inside project, announcing among other things further layoffs.
Is it possible that these Inrocks are the same news magazine that displays a left-wing sensibility? Is it possible that you wish to take over a magazine, at this historical moment, that has the will and means to ensure its own future?
We don't believe it. There must be a mistake.
Therefore, do not delay in letting people know it's not true: Les Inrocks don't want to buy les Cahiers. They are too attached to the plurality of the press, and to lively critical debate, for that.