MAINTENANCE. Clash Boyard – Hanouna: "The audience is not the vote or the credibility" denounces a specialist in political communication

the essential
The public debate has not emerged from the heated altercation that took place at the end of the week between the host of C8 Cyril Hanouna and the deputy Louis Boyard, former columnist for the program “Touche pas à mon poste”. Philippe Moreau-Chevrolet, specialist in political communication, founder MCBGConseil and teacher at Sciences-Po, agreed to decipher this sequence for the readers of the Dépêche du Midi.

Is the pace of clashes involving politics accelerating on television.

Yes, it is accelerating, because they have understood that, in order to exist, they had to produce clashes, confrontations and therefore radicalize their positions. This allows him to be known to people beyond his usual sympathizers. When they go on set with Cyril Hanouna, either as a columnist – as was the case with Louis Boyard before – or as a guest, they know that it’s the rule, that you have to produce transgression, unexpected, shock. So it completely changes the political grammar on television. We are no longer there to convince, to try to have people with us, we are there to produce an audience.

Philippe Moreau-Chevrolet.

Yes, but that is communication, business. Is this politics?

That’s the right question. At what point do you destroy politics and destroy yourself by doing this? And, is it basically constructive? It would seem that the answer is still no. When we look at the itinerary of Eric Zemmour in particular, we see that his logic was totally that of clash and confrontation, until he had extremely tough positions. And we can clearly see that, outside of social networks, in real life, when it comes to voting, voters can sanction this type of behavior, because they may deem it not credible. Voters may be afraid of these types of profiles.

Not all voters. Others have made more votes than Zemmour on the far right of the political spectrum and are very present in the Hanouna program, as researcher Claire Sécail has demonstrated. Moreover, Bardella was there 3 days before on a more polite tone. Doesn’t that reinforce Hanouna’s bias and the questioning of the strategy chosen by LFI?

Read also :
Clash with Louis Boyard on the C8 set: does Cyril Hanouna support the far right?

Indeed, either because Hanouna is different with the RN, or because they have a different strategy, they do not produce the same thing. For example, the RN will not provoke. While Louis Boyard is in provocation compared to Hanouna and can expect a fairly strong response from him. However, this does not justify the insults which are completely reprehensible. But the thing is, the RN will never do that. He tries to be in collusion with Hanouna and to win as much public sympathy as possible from viewers. It’s different. The RN is in a strategy of seduction when it is at Hanouna and LFI wants to be in a strategy of confrontation. So afterwards, I don’t know if Hanouna’s attitude will reinforce that in one way or another. Tells him no.

Is show politics on television a danger to democracy?

There is a danger for democracy which is clear, which is to unleash a very great violence vis-à-vis politics and that politics becomes pure entertainment. That is to say, we empty politics of its meaning to make it an object of entertainment that will seem less essential, something we watch for fun and not to think about. We could end up finally considering that it is the actors, comedians like the others, not people to whom we can entrust the country.

Under these conditions, should politicians continue to go to Hanouna or not?

It is one of the few places on television where you can talk to the unemployed, to the French who are on the RSA, to the working classes as a whole. For politicians, there is a real interest. The problem is that it’s a trap. Once you’re there in that format, you don’t control anything. Hanouna, he is there to make the audience. He is constantly connected to social networks, whereas what happens on social networks is not relayed by any other channel of information concretely, politically in any case. With that, Hanouna is a woolen stocking.

There remain the insults vis-à-vis a deputy of the Republic. Should Hanouna be banned from the air?

No, aerials should not be banned, that would be the worst of all. But the Arcom must act at the level of C8 in an extremely strong way. The problem is that it is a precedent. We cannot let deputies, whatever the quality of Hanouna, be insulted on an antenna. Because it will end up making Poutine. The trivialization of violence against politics is what worries me in this sequence. This means that in the long term we will be able to insult deputies in programs, we will be able to call them shit. We can be extremely violent with them. It’s not prudishness. It’s just that you have to have a minimum of respect for elected officials. We have to manage to build the commons. For me, it’s the drift towards violence that worries me. A deputy is still a deputy, whether we agree with him or not. Hanouna apologized. But an apology is not a punishment. He gives credence to those who accuse him basically of not being a democrat, and of favoring the extreme right, of favoring authoritarian solutions to the exercise of power. This is where there is a real mistake on his part. He spends his time saying, I’m not far right, why not, but by doing that, he’s on the far right. This is what is already dangerous for him, and for his channel. The Arcom should react quickly. If not, what is the next limit?

What to think of Louis Boyard’s complaint against Cyril Hanouna?

It is fortunate and desirable that this complaint be filed, so that limits are set to violence, symbolic, against elected officials.
Now LFI must be consistent and announce that it is boycotting the TPMP set. Otherwise we will be faced with a double language that is difficult to understand. Politicians must not forget that they must be elected. But that Cyril Hanouna, he only seeks to make the maximum audience. But we must learn the lesson of Zemmour: we can achieve 50% market share on television and… 7% in elections. The audience is not the vote or the credibility.

Leave a Comment