| Revision as of 20:53, 10 November 2006 editSmee (talk | contribs)28,728 edits →Reactions to posting of the video on-line: video streaming location, cited by at least four different web articles/resources← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 22:56, 31 October 2023 edit undoAvatar317 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,107 edits Fix redirect when subsection name was changed.Tag: Redirect target changed |
| (421 intermediate revisions by 88 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
{{Infobox Film |
|
|
|
|
|
| name = Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous |
|
|
|
{{Redirect category shell|1= |
|
| image = Inside Landmark Forum 2 of 6.jpg |
|
|
|
{{R to section}} |
|
| caption = '''"Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus"''', ] |
|
|
|
{{R from merge|Landmark Worldwide}} |
|
| director = ] |
|
|
| producer = ],<br>],<br>] |
|
|
| writer = ]<br>'''(Exhibits)'''<br>French News Program |
|
|
| starring = ], Host/Moderator<br>Laurent Richard,<br> ] ] ]<br>], ] head, ]<br>Sophie McLean, spokeswoman & ]<br>], Attorney<br>], ], author of ''Mechanics of the Sects''<br>], Deputy Mayor, ]<br>], ], ]<br>Jocelyne Berthelot, ] volunteer<br>], former ] member<br>Laurent Mournais, former participant<br>Brigitte Thelier, former participant<br>Pierre, anonymous former participant |
|
|
| music = |
|
|
| cinematography = |
|
|
| editing = Pascal Richard,<br> |
|
|
| distributor = ] |
|
|
| released = ], ] |
|
|
| runtime = 65 minutes |
|
|
| country = France {{flagicon|France}} |
|
|
| awards = |
|
|
| language = ] |
|
|
| budget = |
|
|
| preceded_by = |
|
|
| followed_by = |
|
|
| amg_id = |
|
|
| imdb_id = |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
'''''Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous''''', ('''''Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus''''') is a TV ] that presents an investigation of the activities of ] in France. The documentary was made in ] by the ] program '']'' , and aired in France on ], ] on the channel ]. The documentary has been the subject of various legal repercussions in France and the United States. As of June 2004, Landmark Education ceased its activities in France. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Landmark Forum leaders == |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
Much of the ] focused on ] leader and former head of Landmark Education's defunct division in France, Alain Roth. Roth jokingly referred to Landmark Education as a "]". "Especially, when going to dinner, don’t forget to take off your badge. Otherwise people will think that you are in a cult!" he reportedly said.<ref> |
|
|
, ], French newspaper, ], ], by Marie Lemonnier. |
|
|
</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
The documentary recounts how ''Pièces à conviction'' journalists originally wanted to interview Roth, but that Landmark Education flew Sophie McLean from ] to France to speak with them instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
McLean dismisses the description of her company as a "cult" or as "cult-like" and disparages the view that its ] somehow depends on "]". In support of her contention, she cites three academics: Dr. ] (former president of the ]), Dr. ] (Chief, department of medico-legal psychiatry, ]{{fact}}), and a report prepared by ] ] ]. Landmark paid Abgrall to write a positive report<ref> |
|
|
, ], French newspaper, ], ], by Marie Lemonnier. |
|
|
</ref> on it, but later in the documentary Abgrall denies that he took a position either way on characterising Landmark as a cult or not. |
|
|
|
|
|
In ], the '']'' news magazine gave this assessment of the back-and-forth in the documentary: |
|
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>'''''' The broadcast of ] denounces Landmark Education’s fiscal tax arrangements, the use of an army of volunteers and the existence of involvement as a defendant in prosecutions for "abuse of weakness and mental manipulations" into a murder case. The blow is fatal. A few days later, the organization stages a special evening from which Alain Roth has strangely disappeared. Specially arrived from ], Sophie McLean, the spokesperson for Landmark International, responds to interrogations of assistance, split between unrest and and solidarity. Countering the accusations of ], she distributes to us a denial/disclaimer that carefully avoids the more sensible/delicate points of reporting. Why such determination by/of the news media? Because: "Landmark Education proposes a "leading edge" ] and, as such, it is more succeptible to be improperly understood compare to others."'' |
|
|
<ref> |
|
|
, ], French newspaper, ], ], by Marie Lemonnier. |
|
|
</ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
== On-screen commentators== |
|
|
France 3's ''Pièces à conviction'' brought in several noted ] academicians and authors to sit on its commentator panel during the program. Apart from those discussed below, the program included |
|
|
Jocelyne Berthelot, Landmark Education participant and ], former participants Laurent Mournais and Brigitte Thelier, and a person using the pseudonym "Pierre". |
|
|
|
|
|
=== Solicitor Jean-Pierre Jougla=== |
|
|
] discussing ] with ]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
] works as a ] with the ] in ]. He wrote the preface to the book '']'', and founded the department of "victimology related to the ] harmful effect" at the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jougla was asked to give his expert opinion on the Landmark Forum, and to analyze why individuals did not leave the room. He responded that the enrollees were "in a state that made it impossible to leave." He went on further to describe what he referred to as "]", and stated that this can often be accomplished through methods that seem harmless. Methods he observed included "confining people for 3 or 4 days in a room with no windows." He went on to state that "] is just that: it happens without the ] knowing it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Later, Jougla comments on what he percieves as "doctrine" inherent within Landmark Education, stating: <blockquote>What influences public opinion is only the storefront. The cults you cited have a religious pretense, and hide behind that screen. Here, there’s no religious element. But there’s still a doctrine. The basis of Landmark’s doctrine essentially rests on a philosophical concept. It’s the concept of authenticity. "We’re going to teach people to be authentic"</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
===Psychiatrist Jean-Marie Abgrall === |
|
|
], ], a French ], ], specialist in ], and graduate in ], wrote ''Soul Snatchers: The Mechanics of Cults''. He has served as an ] in the Supreme Court of Appeal and in the Court for Businesses in France on the subject of cults.{{fact}} Landmark Education paid Abgrall 45,600 ] to write a positive report on the company, and to assert that the organization is not a "cult". |
|
|
|
|
|
Abgrall was interviewed by ''Pieces a Conviction'' staff, and asked to comment on his alleged assertion that Landmark Education is not a cult. He responded by saying "It's not true that I said it's not a cult! I neither wrote that it is a cult nor that it's not a cult." He went on to complain that "There is no control of a psychologist." He went on further, elaborating on his concern of the lack of training of the individuals who lead the Landmark Forum, saying "These guys aren't trained, as if tomorrow you set up shop as a psychotherapist. I mean, that's what's shocking.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
===Deputy mayor Jean-Pierre Brard=== |
|
|
], the deputy mayor of ], served as the vice-president of the now defunct investigating committee on ] in the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Brard was asked by host ] to explain why his committee had classifed Landmark Education as a cult, without performing direct ] research through observation. ] explained the investigating committee on ]' position, by focusing on three points: his opinion that individuals in the Landmark Forum "relinquish critical thought", the presence of "a network of money" and "]". These were the main reasons that he felt "it's a cult. |
|
|
|
|
|
===Psychoanalyst Christian Lujan=== |
|
|
Dr. ], a ], psycho-] and professor at ], has written two popular French books on ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
He appeared in the documentary and commented on why the Forum Leader, Alain Roth, brought out "fears from childhood". When questioned by host ], Dr. Lujan responded that "The goal is to destabilize the individual and to negate - and I emphasize this - the notion of the subject. The individual doesn't own his own past. Only they know what's good for him. At any moment, an exercise like this can take away a person's introspection. |
|
|
|
|
|
=== Mona Vasquez=== |
|
|
] discussing similarities between the jargon of ] and that of ] with ex-Scientologist and author, ].<br>part 5 of 6<br>in documentary.]] |
|
|
|
|
|
] is the author of the book ''Satan Created the Cult: Memoirs of an escapee''. A member of ] for seven years, she appears in the documentary addressing what she believes are similarities between Scientology and Landmark Education, such as the use of ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
== France 3 television channel and the documentary == |
|
|
=== Reported fine-payment === |
|
|
According to a statement released in ] by Landmark Education, ] reportedly paid a fine for a violation of the media's ]: |
|
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>Unfortunately, considering that the fines paid were tiny for a violation of the media's ], ] decided that it was better for its TV rating to pay these symbolic fines rather than offer the public an objective report.<ref> |
|
|
, Landmark Education Corporate Website, response to ], ], {{fr icon}}. |
|
|
</ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
===Landmark Education's reply=== |
|
|
Under European law, when journalists and the media criticize an entity, the entity has a legal right to force the journalist or media to publish the response{{fact}}. Landmark Education's started off by thanking France 3 for publishing the response without adding extensive sound effects as it did in the broadcast. Landmark Education refuted the points made in the documentary. ] subsequently cancelled a scheduled rebroadcast{{fact}} and removed the transcript from its web site. |
|
|
|
|
|
In Landmark Education's legal ] to France 3's video, a woman explains how her interaction with the Landmark Forum leader was twisted out of context by the journalist after having seen the broadcast: |
|
|
<blockquote>My face is hidden, but my voice is not masked. I feel betrayed by this journalist who did not respect the necessary confidentiality in this broadcast. And moreover, by showing only part of the conversation, the journalist draws conclusions which imply that I feel mistreated. From this conversation, which I admit was difficult, I had considerable insights which enabled me to live better and to have a better relationship with my daughter. And I owe it with the conversation which we had during the Landmark Forum. <ref> , </ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
This person thereafter declared in public she had had a very positive experience and to date continued to take part in the programs of Landmark Education. |
|
|
<ref>, </ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
Landmark Education responded to France 3's insinuation that Landmark Education gained large money sums by using volunteers in France. They state that Landmark Education lost money each year in France, but maintained its center open for its participants. France 3 estimated that the receipts of Landmark Education amounted to nearly 1.5 million ]s per annum, whereas according to Landmark Education's assertions, they did not exceed 590,000 ]s per annum. <ref> , </ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
Landmark Education commented on Dr. Jean Marie Abgrall's position in their reply: |
|
|
<blockquote> |
|
|
Dr. Jean-Marie Abgrall, the principal expert on cults in France, declared in connection with the ten elements identified by the parliamentary Commitee as being constitutive of a sect: “None of the six relative major elements of a cult applies to Landmark Education. ” As for the four remaining elements, Dr. Abgrall pointed out that they are “minor characteristics which could be also found in many conventional organizations.” <ref> , </ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
Art Schreiber, the General Counsel and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Landmark Education, commented: |
|
|
|
|
|
<blockquote> |
|
|
On May 24, 2004, in the program "Pieces A Conviction," France TV3 broadcast a report on Landmark Education. The apparent purpose of the report was to portray Landmark Education as a harmful cult. There were many wholly inaccurate and biased statements in the program, as well as some extremely serious accusations that were totally and absolutely unfounded. TV3 operated completely unprofessionally, using tactics including lying, manipulating, using illegally obtained materials, and intentionally presenting materials out of context. TV3, without authorization from Landmark Education, used confidential footage of the Landmark Forum that was shot undercover by a reporter who falsified his personal information and did the filming in violation of his signed legal agreement protecting the privacy of the other participants in the course. |
|
|
|
|
|
When this program was broadcast in France, Landmark's attorney in France sent a detailed letter to TV3 in which he refuted, point by point, the gross inaccuracies and defamatory and libelous representations in their program. Upon receipt of the letter, TV3 removed the transcript of the documentary from its own web site. ... |
|
|
|
|
|
Surveys show that 94 percent of Landmark Education's customers say, upon completing their course, that The Landmark Forum has made a positive, profound and lasting difference in their lives. Nearly 1 million people around the world have participated in The Landmark Forum. |
|
|
<ref>, ], October 2006</ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Raymond Fowler's letter, which reflects his own opinion, is cited in Landmark's reply: |
|
|
<blockquote>In my opinion, Landmark Forum is not a cult, nor anything of comparable with a cult, and I do not see how a reasonable and responsible person could say otherwise. I did not see anything in Landmark Forum in which I took part who can harm to the participants. In my capacity as expert in this field, I am certain that once the French government takes the advice of looking at the question more closely, it will conclude that Landmark Education was included wrongly on the list of the cults.”<ref>, ], '''Corporate Website''', Document number '''"L-014E"''', Official Document, Landmark Education.</ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
=== Current Commentary from ''France 3'' === |
|
|
After having pulled the transcript of the broadcast, France 3 now only has the reference to Landmark Education's French web site with Landmark Education's legal-right of reply, including a description of Landmark Education: |
|
|
|
|
|
Translated: <blockquote>Landmark education is the result of a research into the effectiveness with which the individuals and organizations act and their way of communicating. |
|
|
''www.landmarkeducation.fr'. 'France Télévisions cannot be held responsible for the contents of these links.</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Repercussions == |
|
|
In France, Landmark Education "assistants" had the apparent French legal status of volunteer unpaid workers. In June ], a month after the program aired, the ] government (L’Inspection du Travail) investigated labor practices regarding these volunteer workers. Shortly thereafter, Landmark Education ended operations in France.<ref> |
|
|
. |
|
|
</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Sectarian Risks report == |
|
|
{{details|Parliamentary Commission about Cults in France}} |
|
|
The documentary refers to the ] ''Interministerial Mission for Awareness against Sectarian Risks'' (now defunct) report which listed Landmark Education (''Landmark education international - Le forum"'') as a ''secte'' (cult). In 2005, Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Rafarin issued a circular stating that the list of groups in the report should no longer used to identify cults in France.<ref></ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reactions to posting of the video on-line == |
|
|
{{currentevent}} |
|
|
In September and early October 2006, anonymous users posted copies of the '']'' ] documentary, ] to ], the ], ], ] and BitTorrent site ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
In October 2006 Landmark Education issued ]s pursuant to the ], a piece of United States legislation which allows content-owners to issue subpoenas to identify alleged infringers, even without filing a lawsuit. Landmark Education sent subpoenas to ], ] and the ], demanding to be informed of the identity of the person(s) who had uploaded copies (with English-language subtitles) to these websites. |
|
|
|
|
|
Challenges to Landmark Education's efforts have arisen on multiple fronts. The Internet Archive has commenced fighting its , and the ] (EFF) has filed official objections on its behalf. The EFF will also file a motion to quash , on behalf of the anonymous entity who uploaded the video. Google has advised Landmark that it will not produce the requested information pending a ruling on that motion. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena, and plans to give the user a reasonable opportunity to move to quash it. |
|
|
<ref> |
|
|
. |
|
|
. |
|
|
. |
|
|
. |
|
|
</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
], Chairman of the Board of Directors of Landmark Education, commented on the issue in ]: |
|
|
<blockquote> |
|
|
“The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) challenged our actions and alleged to the press that our copyright claims were bogus, which statement was then disseminated on the Internet. |
|
|
Landmark Education’s goal is not to silence anyone, but to protect its core IP resources, which were infringed by the video. |
|
|
While we appreciate the work of the EFF, the allegation that our copyright claim is bogus is entirely inaccurate. The facts are clear that the Landmark Forum program has for many years been copyrighted. Materials covered by this copyright registration were included throughout the video.” |
|
|
<ref>, ]</ref></blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
On November 8, 2006, the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted a "" on their website, . On November 9th, the Electronic Frontier Foundation responded to Art Schreiber's commentary, in a post entitled "". |
|
|
|
|
|
The video is currently available in ], from the . This location has been cited by the Electronic Frontier Foundation<ref>, ], case page, Landmark's Misuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act</ref>, in an article at the ] Web site<ref>, ], November 3, 2006</ref>, at the ] site<ref>, November 10, 2006, ]</ref>, and by the ]<ref>, ], Introduction, 2006</ref>. |
|
|
|
|
|
== See also== |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ], French book on cults |
|
|
* ], ], Landmark Education |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ], |
|
|
* ], ], Landmark Education Business Development |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==References == |
|
|
<div class="references-small"> |
|
|
<references/> |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
|
|
|
==External Links== |
|
|
* |
|
|
*, ] |
|
|
*, November 8, 2006 |
|
|
*, PressZoom, November 1, 2006 |
|
|
*, p2pnet.net News, November 10, 2006 |
|
|
*, ] |
|
|
* , ], ], '''' |
|
|
* , Landmark Education's response to the ] documentary. |
|
|
* , Interdepartmental Mission of Vigilance and Fight Against Sectarian Drifts, |
|
|
* , '']'', French newspaper, ], ], by Marie Lemonnier. |
|
|
* , Recorded with the Presidency of the ] on ], ], Mr. Alain Gest, Reporter, Mr. Jacques Guyard, Deputies. ], Tenth Legislature. |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|