“Puff of oxygen” or “lack of nuance”? Our readers discuss “Alive” in “La Croix”

“A peaceful space, where whoever speaks the loudest or the best does not automatically have the advantage, where the objective is not to create a buzz. » This message sent by Jean-Claude, a faithful reader, is a real compliment: it sums up the spirit with which this space for debate « À vive » was created more than a year ago.

Readers appreciate the treatment of “various subjects that pique our curiosity” by promoting “personal views”, as Marie-Françoise writes, who quotes in particular the two columnists of the Monday pages, Jean de Saint-Cheron and Ayyam Sureau. Another message is happy that these contributions introduce “something of the order of freedom in the newspaper”.

For Jean-Louis, “Alive” “helps you think”, and Renaud also appreciates “a good format between hot news and the agreed debate between specialists”. Several thus underline that the contributions make it possible to provide elements in the face of ever-changing news.

Renaud is pleased that we “really respect our charter” by regularly leaving the right of reply to people questioned by a forum. Finally, he appreciates that the texts published are of a certain length, “which allows depth and finesse of the analysis”. Satisfaction with our handling of ethical issues, in a period marked by the debate on the end of life and the Citizens’ Convention, comes up regularly. “I especially appreciate the debates concerning the end of life”, writes Philippe.

However, readers have some criticisms and regrets. On ecology in particular, “I would like the points of view to be even more open”, asks Bernard. “While I generally subscribe to the ecological orientation of your editorial line, I sometimes have the impression that this theme is becoming a real obsession with you”, regrets Jean-Yves, who even sees in it “the underlying desire to return to religious asceticism and rigor”. “For the sake of balancing opinions, you sometimes allow the expression of excessive, even radical remarks”, also notes Jean-Yves.

Other themes are desired: Jean-Louis is very sensitive to “the issue of public service: water, energy, mail, railways…”. He has the impression “that nothing escapes a more or less disguised privatization” and would like us to talk about it more.

Religious issues are of particular interest. “I greatly appreciated what La Croix published on the follow-up to the Sauvé commission and on the reflections in progress in the Church of Germany,” writes Jean-Louis, for example. “I particularly appreciate finding in these columns uncompromising reflections and analyzes on the turpitudes of the Church, because they demonstrate the freedom of tone of your daily life”, insists Bernard. For Jeannine again, “my daily reading of La Croix and especially of ”Alive” is a breath of fresh air in my religious reflection”.

Finally, readers make some suggestions. Béatrice thus imagines that we could “invite readers to suggest a topic for reflection themselves for a future issue”, but also set up a specific “reader’s letter” in the “Alive” pages with “the most argued”. Renaud himself would like the titles of the texts “available on the site” to be given in the newspaper each day.

Source