From journalistic orientalism: When Le Monde reinvents Morocco

Morocco's King Mohammed VI attending a loyalty ceremony to mark the 24th anniversary of his enthronement, at the palace in Tetouan on 31 July 2023 - PHOTO/ MAP

Mohamed Benabdelkader

29 de septiembre de 2025 (16:00 h.)

Traces of Orientalist perceptions

To discern the traces of Orientalist perceptions in the supposed investigation published by Le Monde, we have attempted to identify some characteristic elements that structure this type of discourse. The marks of the leading figures of Orientalism, present in the content of the six episodes of this long and hollow journalistic series, unfold as follows:

Eurocentric vision

The investigation published by Le Monde on the Moroccan monarchy could be perceived as starting from a Parisian, Western perspective that applies a Eurocentric interpretative framework to Morocco. Political reality is reduced to an exotic mechanism, composed of social gossip and personal intrigues conceived as typical of a mysterious Orient. Alliances and rivalries are woven and unravelled as if the political organisation obeyed an almost theatrical staging. This reduction to a folkloric reading, which ignores the modernity, institutional stability and real political dynamics enjoyed by the Kingdom of Morocco, illustrates a Eurocentric vision that fixes Morocco in an exotic stereotype.

Dichotomous stereotypes

Like the traditional Orientalist perception that opposes East and West, the account in the newspaper Le Monde implicitly contrasts a mysterious, opaque and confusing Morocco with Western rationalism, resorting to a vocabulary laden with dramatic terms such as ‘viceroy’, ‘crime novel’, ‘conspiracy’, ‘nervousness’ and “uncertainty”, opposing a supposed Eastern obscurity to a supposed Western clarity. The repetitive use of the term ‘majzén’ as a fixed entity in opposition to a modern state validates these worn-out dichotomies of classical Orientalism. This is how we see the cauldron where progress versus stagnation, transparency versus opacity, and ‘Western’ political modernity opposed to Eastern backwardness in a ‘state governed by the art of secrets’ are mixed together, creating a binary and normative narrative based on a cultural and political hierarchy.

Projection of threat and danger

The investigation hints at a ‘cold war’ at the top of the power structure, with ‘tensions,’ ‘clan struggles,’ and ‘exacerbated rivalries,’ painting a picture of the Moroccan state as a theatre of internal threats, which could be described as an anxiety-inducing and alarmist projection. The foregrounding of figures who embody a supposed “authoritarian drift” is manifested through various spectres such as the “return of the truncheon”, “networks of informants”, “modern surveillance technologies”, as well as an “obedient press”. Added to this are alleged tensions that ‘are felt within the Makhzen’, materialised by ‘poles of competition’, ‘rivalries between networks’, a ‘shadow war’, a ‘time bomb’, ‘conflicting forces’, “disagreements”, ‘manoeuvres’ and other phantasmagorical delusions. This accumulation of dramatic and sensationalist terms contributes to an anxiety-inducing and caricatured representation of Moroccan power, reinforcing an imaginary of chronic instability and amplified or even exaggerated internal threats.

Exotic and essential fascination

The investigation carried out by Le Monde falls into an exotic fascination visible in the vocabulary and dramatisation: ‘club of seven’, ‘unsolvable enigma’, ‘palace secrets’. By constructing almost exotic characters and dynamics, the investigation essentialises Moroccan political reality, reducing it to an orientalist folk tale rather than a rigorous political analysis.

Instrumentalisation of representation

The investigation delves into the creation of an ideological narrative that serves to reinforce Western prejudices, manipulating facts to strengthen a dominant Western imaginary of the ‘Orient’ as a land of secret intrigues and irrationality, thus legitimising a neocolonialist view of Morocco. This narrative produces a discourse of power that does not show the unwavering allegiance of the Moroccan people to the Alawite throne, nor the deeply emotional bond that unites the latter with their monarch, King Mohammed VI, nor the strength and resilience of Moroccan institutions. On the contrary, it presents a fragmented and dominated otherness, built around a reductive and stereotypical vision that obscures the real dynamics of loyalty, unity and continuity that characterise the relationship between the people and the monarchy in Morocco.

At the heart of this improvised, naive and ill-informed Orientalist perception lies a major professional and ethical problem relating to the reliability and quality of the sources of information used. This lack of rigour in the selection and verification of sources compromises the credibility of the narrative and reinforces erroneous stereotypes and unfounded prejudices about Morocco.

The problem of information sources

It should be remembered that, in order to conduct journalistic research in accordance with professional and ethical standards, it is essential to deal appropriately with the issue of information sources by respecting certain key rules. Journalists must seek and report the truth by verifying the accuracy of information and being honest in their reporting. They must disclose their sources of information as far as possible and when relevant, except where secrecy is justified to protect the anonymity of sources (e.g. to prevent danger or to respect a promise of confidentiality). The protection of sources is, in fact, a fundamental principle of journalism, guaranteed by law and professional ethics, which protects the freedom of expression of informants and the right of the public to be informed. This protection obliges journalists not to reveal the identity of their sources when they have requested anonymity or when revealing it could put them in danger.

However, it should be noted that not all sources are necessarily anonymous. In serious investigative journalism, it is often necessary to be able to identify and verify certain sources, particularly those used to guarantee the credibility of the information and ensure transparency to the public. Good journalistic practice therefore consists of clearly citing sources when this does not affect their integrity or safety, and protecting anonymity when confidentiality is justified. However, at Le Monde, anonymity seems to have become the golden rule; there is no shortage of ways to conceal the identity of sources, sometimes even inventing fictional interlocutors to attribute anything to anyone: (it is said... confides a prominent Western diplomat in Rabat... it is believed to be known by an expert in the intrigues of the Makhzen... adds a source well connected to the monarchy... as demonstrated by an anecdote... summarises a regular member of the entourage... recalls a French diplomat involved in the matter... deciphers a source familiar with security circles... points out a Moroccan businessman... confides a regular member of the entourage...). This abundance of circumlocutions reflects a marked preference for systematic confidentiality that is paradoxically ‘enigmatic’, which can sometimes undermine the credibility and transparency of the information. The journalistic challenge lies precisely in finding the balance between the necessary protection of the source and the requirement for sufficient identification so that the reader can assess the reliability of the revelations.

Anonymous research tends to lack credibility with the public. According to recent studies on the credibility of the media, a large part of the public expresses significant doubts about information that comes exclusively from anonymous or confidential sources. This issue is fundamental in journalism, as the frequent and unjustified use of anonymous sources can seriously damage public confidence in the media. Professional ethics recommend that such situations be exceptional and clearly justified, explaining why confidentiality is necessary (e.g., risk to the source). Transparency is therefore a key value in ensuring the credibility and rigour of a journalistic investigation.

Two examples of professional rigour

There are numerous examples of professional rigour in the preparation and publication of journalistic investigations, which are particularly instructive when analysing the case of a newspaper such as Le Monde. Indeed, the depth of investigations, diversity, corroboration and meticulous verification of sources, the quality of information, as well as respect for rigorous ethics, are essential characteristics of investigative journalism that can inspire and clarify editorial practices. However, in order to remain concise and focused, it is appropriate here to retain only two reference examples that fully embody these professional requirements: the Washington Post's investigation into the Watergate scandal and the New York Times' investigation into the Harvey Weinstein case, each illustrating in its own way how rigorous journalism can not only bring crucial facts to light, but also put pressure on institutions to uphold truth and justice.

The film All the President's Men (1976), directed by Alan J. Pakula, presents the investigation carried out by journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post into the Watergate scandal as a rigorous and tenacious piece of work, marked by a patient and methodical search for evidence. At first, the case appeared to be a simple burglary, but the two journalists quickly discover connections to President Nixon's re-election committee, prompting them to dig deeper. The film highlights their determination in the face of difficulties, denials and threats, as well as the crucial role of their anonymous informant nicknamed ‘Deep Throat’, but what is most striking about the film is how it portrays editorial director Ben Bradlee as cautious, emphasising that it is not yet a confirmed story until solid evidence is gathered.

Therefore, rigorous evidence was established that ultimately convinced the Washington Post's management to publish the investigation into the Watergate scandal. Beyond the arrest of five men caught red-handed in the Democratic Party offices with espionage tools (microphones, cameras, tear gas pens) and a lot of material to carry out a clandestine listening operation, the investigation had to reveal the links discovered between these burglars and the Committee to Re-Elect President Nixon, which suggested an operation organised from the White House. Successive key testimonies were collected, including that of James McCord (one of the burglars), who revealed the existence of a political espionage network; They relied on revelations from John Dean, Nixon's legal advisor, which exposed that the conspiracies came directly from the Oval Office. The existence of a secret wiretapping system in the White House was proven, confirmed by the testimony of Alexander Butterfield. Finally, it was confirmed that acts of obstruction of justice had been committed in an attempt to cover up the affair. It was this evidence, accumulated through the investigative work of Woodward and Bernstein, that finally convinced editor-in-chief Ben Bradlee to publish a series of articles exposing the system of presidential abuse of power, triggering a major scandal that culminated in Nixon's resignation.

Another film based on a journalistic investigation was made about Harvey Weinstein, an American film producer. This film, titled She Said (2022) and directed by Maria Schrader, adapts the book by New York Times journalists Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, who conducted the investigation that revealed Weinstein's sexual assaults. The film highlights the journalistic investigation that broke decades of silence in the Hollywood industry and gave rise to the #MeToo movement. It also pays tribute to investigative journalism and focuses on the victims' testimonies and Weinstein's attempt to silence them through financial settlements.

The film reveals how the New York Times' journalistic investigation into Harvey Weinstein was initially marked by internal doubts about publication. Editorial director Dean Baquet supported journalists Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey in their investigative work, despite strong pressure from producer Weinstein to delay or prevent the publication of their article. However, as in all serious investigative journalism, the newspaper's management demanded solid and concrete evidence before authorising the publication of the investigation, in order to avoid any defamation lawsuits and ensure the credibility of the information.

The journalistic investigation lasted several months, during which the two journalists collected numerous testimonies and met twice with Weinstein and his lawyers in search of irrefutable evidence. Weinstein's team attempted to buy time through legal manoeuvres and attempts at negotiation. Ultimately, it was the rigour of the evidence gathered and its validation by the New York Times that allowed the explosive article to be published in October 2017. This context highlights the crucial role of the editorial director in the final decision to authorise a sensitive investigation such as this, demanding tangible evidence and solid guarantees before publication.

Demonstration and quality of information

If the objective of a news report is to ‘show,’ that of an investigation is to ‘prove,’ which highlights a fundamental difference between the two forms of journalism. A news report presents visible facts and testimonies to inform, while an investigation must go further, validating through evidence, verifiable testimonies, and solid documents to construct a rigorous argument and prove a hidden or contested reality.

In investigative journalism, the quality of information is the fundamental structuring element. The professional rigour of an investigation or inquiry is based on the depth of the research, the accuracy of the data collected, the thorough verification of the facts and respect for journalistic ethics. These criteria ensure that the information produced is reliable, impartial and in the public interest. Thus, the very structure of journalistic investigation is based on the search for quality information, because it is this quality that legitimises the social and democratic impact of the investigation.

In the case of the series of investigations by the newspaper Le Monde on ‘The Enigma of Mohammed VI’, this approach to demonstration was not respected at all. Instead of presenting an investigation based on concrete and verified elements, the series relied on salon gossip, anonymous sources and a recycling of widespread rumours, often replicated on social media.

The work of the newspaper Le Monde would be an attempt at media legitimisation of a narrative built on speculation that is not rigorously substantiated, without new evidence and without the claims being corroborated by field research, reliable documents or formally identified testimonies. Paradoxically, this approach may lend an appearance of authority to delusions or discursive constructions originating from the web and disconnected imaginaries, rather than to genuine, solid journalistic analysis.

Legitimising recycling

Thus, the series published by Le Monde appears to be an operation that reuses already known material (rehashed content) and, instead of clarifying its enigma, maintains a nebulosity and uncertainty that do not correspond to a rigorous journalistic demonstration, but rather to a controversial narrative (storytelling). The result is that it generates a lot of confusion without really developing knowledge about the Moroccan political regime or the figure of King Mohamed VI. Although it takes the form of an expert investigation, Le Monde failed to provide the evidence expected of such a work, giving more the impression of a media montage based on rumours rather than rigorous journalistic investigation. It would even seem that the two journalists were content to “sign” an investigation that recycles already known content, based on clichés, stereotypes and old rumours, without providing any real added value or new analysis.

The ‘legitimising recycling’ that Le Monde appears to have engaged in with its investigation into the enigma of Mohammed VI suggests that certain promoters of anti-Moroccan propaganda on social media have decided to elevate their narrative to a higher level of media credibility. In other words, fantastical stories, rumours and delusional discourse that circulated in informal spheres or on social media, where they remained confined to marginal communities, have found an ‘official’ and ‘prestigious’ channel in a media institution such as Le Monde. This gives these unverified and questionable narratives a form of validation by association, as if passing through the ‘house’ of influential journalism legitimises what were previously unfounded allegations.

Legitimising recycling is therefore a dynamic of contagion between alternative and traditional media, where the latter can unwittingly serve as a sounding board for questionable narratives. This poses a major challenge for journalists and traditional media: how to maintain the demand for rigour and evidence while exploring emerging and sensitive issues, without giving credence to what is mere rumour or disguised disinformation. This mechanism illustrates the porous boundaries between information, opinion and propaganda in today's hyperconnected media ecosystem.

As the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard rightly pointed out, ‘There are two ways of being wrong: one is to believe what is not, the other is to refuse to believe what is.’ Unfortunately, Le Monde has erred on both counts mentioned by Kierkegaard: it believed what was not, sometimes allowing itself to be swayed by approximations or biases in its research, but it also refused to believe what is, sometimes lacking rigour or critical distance in the face of certain political or economic realities.

In its six episodes, the newspaper Le Monde claimed that the reign of Mohamed VI is coming to an end, portraying the king as fragile and describing the political elite as divided by palace conflicts and conspiracies, based solely on rumours and speculation. This analysis completely overlooks the fact that, under the impetus of Mohammed VI, Morocco has undergone a major transformation in 26 years, embarking on remarkable social and economic modernisation, while adopting an ambitious policy in Africa in an increasingly multipolar international context.

This double failure affects the credibility of this leading French newspaper and illustrates the crucial importance of reviewing its journalistic practices in order to reconnect with a more professional and rigorous form of journalism, in the image of the great exemplary investigations that have marked the history of investigative journalism. Le Monde would do well to go back to journalism school to learn the lessons of the Washington Post and the New York Times by heart and refresh its seriously eroded credibility.