It's simple, one was a "surprise" the other was not. One was local, the other not.
In Africa we have a known quantity that we can simply dismiss as the acts of evil.
Part of the reason why they refuse, yes refuse, to talk about it is that they want to
avoid the elephant in the room, which is religious motivations for the acts.
In France they did not have the option to ignore the event.
Instead, they will classify it as the acts of "extremists" in an attempt to maintain
the illusion that having the enclaves within countries can work. There are enclaves
where the regular law dares not enter, forbidden by the higher ups to act and allowing
religious laws to override those of the country. This is done because the citizenry there
listen to the Imans and vote as a block and the cowardly politicians pander to them rather
than looking towards the needs of the country. Such enclaves prevent assimilation and
Because this event could not be ignored, it creates a need for introspection.
You have some news organizations like Al Jazeera America act to minimize
the nature of the event. Unfortunately for them, the talking notes on this
This introspection requires the new organizations to think whether or not their
policies of appeasement have just made things worse. At the heart of it is the
idea of not offending others. It's one thing to attempt to not offend because you
want to be nice, its quite another to be told that if you do offend that you will be
killed. Perhaps the lessons of Neville Chamberlain have not been completely
lost on the reporters of today, though sadly I think most would need to wiki him
to know what I'm referring to.