In the week beginning February 10, the French online press wrote of Palki Sharma Upadhyay, 32, a prominent Indian journalist and news anchor who “dared” to interrupt President Macron during his “funny” explanation of all that Artificial Intelligence can do.
She interviewed him prior to an AI Summit in Paris. The headline was Elle a osé (‘She dared’). Oh goodness! she dared interrupt the President?
Her interviews are watched by more than double the population of France each month, she pointed out, with a smile, during the news programme in question.
Yet, having a young journalist interrupt the French president is simply not acceptable: ce n’est même pas possible!
If a journalist interrupted the prime minister of the UK or Canada, or the US president, this would neither be shocking nor newsworthy.
For the French, however, such behaviour is shocking.
Why? One answer is ‘power distance,’ or the belief that power within a society is, first, unequal and, secondly, acceptably so.
Those with power use it, express it and expect it to be respected.
Those with little power or those beneath those in power express little in the face of the power before them – just as expected. In simpler terms, don’t dare interrupt or question, as this Indian journalist did.
Understanding ‘power distance’ is important for ‘Anglo-Saxons’ when dealing with the French and French culture – at work, school, in politics and in the French coverage of the news.
‘Power distance’ is a ‘cultural dimension’, as defined by Dutch psychologist Geert Hofstede who in the 1960s started comparing cultures for his ever-globalising employer, IBM.
One can only understand a ‘cultural dimension’ by comparing it between countries or cultures.
The degree to which we accept (unequal) power – high or low – is reflected in the power distance index.
France scores 68/100 in acceptance; the UK half that at 35, and the U.S. at 40/100. How does this play out in life?
The role of authority figures
It starts early – at school. The site theculturefactor. com, devoted to Hofstede’s dimensions, indicates that French children are raised to be emotionally dependent upon their parents and that this dependency later transfers to teachers and then superiors in the workforce.
One can certainly see this dependence in the way French parents do their children’s homework night after night with them.
At school, neither the pupil nor the parent is to challenge the authority of the teacher, his/her sanctions or his/ her grading. French parents understand this ‘power distance,’ as do teachers, and the pupils quickly learn.
Equally, a principal might have no problem dictating policy – his or her own – as well as that from powers above (the rectorat, the ministry).
Each powerful person dictates his will to his inferiors, and hierarchy and authority remain in place.
Do not question authority. Accept it and bend to it.
Another example is with doctors who might simply not discuss a decision made or a diagnosis given with a patient or a family.
Why would they? They are knowledgeable and powerful in this regard; the patient is not. Equally, the French patient, aware of the doctor’s power and their own lack thereof, may not even consider questioning the doctor.
Why would they go against their entire cultural framework from childhood on?
An examiner, say for the baccalauréat, can make or break a person’s future without any recourse whatsoever.
A doctor gives a prescription and the patient follows it.
Finally, at work, one’s supervisor might be open to discussion and consensus if they have been exposed to something different from the French approach to power distance, or they may simply reflect the distance and exercise it.
One could consider it heavy- handed or chauvinistic or egotistical – and it is – but it is also part and parcel of the culture.
I invite you to further understand power distance and the other cultural dimensions of Hofstede.
They are an excellent way to compare cultures and to understand the unspoken rules and practices that play out in every culture, every day.
The incident discussed was during a French programme, broadcast in France and India, as they prepared to co-host the summit, in which Mr Macron said the technology has great promise but must be regulated.
He showed a video of AI fakes of himself in various scenarios to “launch debate” but Ms Sharma said it was “not funny”, expressing concerns about fakes used to usurp people’s identities.
A declaration of principles was signed by 60 countries, but the US and UK declined.
Do you agree that France's approach to authority and power differs from that of the US and UK? What does this look like in your experience? Let us know at letters@connexionfrance.com
