This article is very interesting, however, the poor quality of the writing (a clear translation) distracts from its initial interest and potentially informative content. I am a big fan of your site, although I often find that the English articles are awkwardly written and lack flow.

In this article, for example, the first sentence begins, “Video surveillance cameras go relatively unnoticed in London, despite it being the most surveyed city in the world.” First, the sentence is awkwardly phrased. Second, in the next sentence you refer to increasing ‘numbers’ without specifying what numbers you are referring. Although numbers logically refers to video cameras, the reader must pause for an extra moment in order to grasp the full understanding of these extremely awkwardly worded phrases. A simple ‘their’ before numbers would have done the trick. In order to link the two sentences, it would have been a wise choice to end the sentence with “the video surveillance cameras”. This way, the reader clearly makes the connection between numbers and cameras and the sentence reads more easily.

Continuing to the next paragraph, “Minister of Interior” is missing a “the”. “Minister of Interior” may be technically correct, but “Minister of the Interior” reads more smoothly. In this paragraph, once again, although logically Michelle Alliot-Marie must be the Minister of the Interior, it should be specified. Additionally, rather than “causing outrage”, a better verb choice which would more accurately represent the polemic this decision has created in France would be ‘provoked’ or ‘incited.’

Additionally, I contest the use of the word ‘scheme’ as a translation for ‘outil’. Even if I did not speak French, the word ‘scheme’ seems out of place here, and ‘tool’ would be more appropriate. Finally, something normally comes ‘at’ a phenomenal cost, not ‘with’ one.

As for Gérard Gachet’s testimony: I have already discussed the use of the word ‘scheme’. Next, one of the uses of the video surveillance cameras is to ‘maintain public order, particularly during ‘big’ protests.” Generally, government officials who tend to stick to a higher level of language don’t use the word ‘big’ which is a word that is used in daily conversation. A better translation of ‘grandes’ would be ‘major’ or ‘significant’. Next, ‘protest’ is not an entirely accurate translation of the word ‘manifestation’ in French which can be either a political protest or a demonstration or even simply an event. “Protest” has a strong negative connotation whereas a ‘manifestation’ could simply be an event. “Demonstration” would have been a more neutral word choice.

Continuing, the Minister of Interior should be happy with “the results” and not simply “results”. Next, I have the same problem with the word ‘bad’ as I did with ‘big’. These are simply not words that a government spokesperson would use. The same goes with ‘many’ (‘many crimes’) and again the word ‘bad’ (‘bad quality’).

I am not going to continue to critic the entire article in this fashion (although I could). I think I have made myself clear. In general, the translation and level of writing is of very poor quality, and it makes the article less interesting to read and does not accurately reflect the original content. I am disappointed at the quality and would have expected more from France 24.