Comedian Guillaume Meurice “wants to end up at the stake” says journalist Jean-Michel Aphatie

Jean-Michel Aphatie evokes “political dogmatism” regarding the public broadcasting merger project. EPA/MAXPPP – ETIENNE LAURENT

The editorialist of the show Quotidien, on TMC, returns in an interview to Midi Libre on the Guillaume Meurice affair (the France Inter comedian risks dismissal after his joke on the Israeli Prime Minister, "a Nazi without a foreskin" Jean-Michel Aphatie also discusses his skirmish with C8 host Cyril Hanouna, "delivered to himself", according to him. 

Jean-Michel Aphatie is not worried about freedom of expression in France. MAXPPP – Nicolas Kovarik

What does the planned dismissal of comedian Guillaume Meurice by France Inter inspire you ?

Honestly, I'm a little torn. Everyone comments on that. Does this represent something about society, the Meurice story ? I'm not sure. At first he uses humor. And then he makes the joke again. Maybe he wanted to be punished. It’s all in the bath of Radio France. In a way, I think it only interests them. I tend to give a little shit.

The director Adèle Van Reeth had said that you don't fire a comedian for a joke, and that's what the management s& rsquo;preparing to do. You think Meurice wanted to be fired ?

I think he knew where he was going the second time, yes. I don't think this story has anything to teach us. I don't think freedom of expression is threatened. He wants to end up at the stake. And he ends up at the stake, that's it.

Doesn’t that say something about an attempt at political control, in a large whole which would then be called fusion of the ;public audiovisual ?

That’s something else. It teaches us the dogmatism of politics. Public radio is doing better than it has ever done in thirty years and public audiovisual is also doing well with quality productions. If we want to merge companies that have a certain success, we take the risk of unbalancing, of disrupting.

Why we take this risk ? There is no serious study that explains it to us, no study of the impact of the merger of these companies, no in-depth parliamentary report. Political power says "We have to do it because’we will be more effective". From what point of view ? Creation will be better ? Radios and televisions will have more listeners and viewers ?

Existe-t-il une étude d’impact sérieuse qui confronterait les facteurs positifs et négatifs d’une réunion en une seule de toutes les entreprises de l’audiovisuel public ? Et comment évoquer d’éventuels aspects bénéfiques ? En qualité de créations artistiques ? En nombre de… https://t.co/AnRWTQOTiF

— jean-michel aphatie (@jmaphatie) May 24, 2024

The only thing that Rachida Dati (the Minister of Culture, Editor's note) is capable of saying is "Wow, there's Netflix, we need to get together& ;quot;. That’s not an argument! Yes, there is Netflix, the platforms are shaking up the audiovisual landscape, they concern traditional television more than radio, all of that is not coherent. This is pure dogmatism. And typical of governance that is not good.

Once again, public radio is a hit like it has never been a hit. It has an identity, a know-how. There are gems inside public radio. Why are we going to drown all this in a larger whole ?

You're talking about nuggets. We were talking about Meurice and freedom of tone. Some at France Inter will perhaps go with the handbrake from now on…

I don't think at all that France Inter comedians will go with the handbrake, that it alters freedom of expression. I think it’s an epiphenomenon. I think Meurice is a touch of humor. We either like it or we don’t like it. Besides, I didn’t see many people who liked him, but, a touch of humor which comes at a time when emotion is very strong, around the October 7, of the attack on Israel by Hamas.

This is a bit of humor that is poorly received. The management of France Inter manages this with tact. Guillaume Meurice is temporarily removed from the air then returns and he can continue to do what he has always done. Afterwards he sets the table again, it's a bit his story, because he wants to end up at the stake. And he ends up at the stake, that's it. How does this bully others ? I don't see any censorship.

What types of risk are there between an interventionist State with the merger project and private channels in the hands of big bosses who reign supreme ?

We cannot say that freedom of expression is threatened, any more with the merger than with private companies. There is a plurality of expression today and everyone can find something they want on the airwaves or on television. The projects of Europe 1 and France Inter are not quite the same. And the Cnews project is special. Anyone who wants to listen to Cnews can listen to it.

There is another question, which is that the media are owned by people whose job it is not. Why do they want to make information? Why does Saadé buy everything he buys today? Why he buys BFM  ? I don't really know.

You have a little idea anyway…

Bolloré, we understood why. He has a vision and a social project. It’s part of freedom of expression, he has the right. Saade, I don't know. What good does it do him in his business to have the newspaper in Marseille, to have BFM ? In a way, fortunately he is there, because Patrick Drahi has so many problems with his creditors that he was going to default on BFM.

Only downside: there is no extreme left channel while there is a channel which flirts with the ;rsquo;far right.

This is because the extreme left is not capable of organizing itself, to present a coherent project to Arcom. La France insoumise launched Le Média in 2017 with great publicity, and it was a total disaster. They could have developed something. The sectarianism, the violence of expression, the absence of professionalism means that all of this is quickly forgotten. They all argued, divided. Sophia Chirikou has not done much to ensure that rebellious France or the extreme left have a media capable of reproducing their ideas. Instead, she dug the vault and put a coffin in it.

You reacted a lot, sometimes overreacted on X (ex-Twitter), about Cyril Hanouna. Do we let ourselves get caught up in emotion in these cases when we are insulted, provoked ?

De @Cyrilhanouna jeudi soir sur @TPMP à mon propos (je n’ai pas tout mis) : « Les mots qui sortent de sa bouche, il ne les contrôle pas. Le mot est déjà parti, il remet son dentier. »
Les chroniqueurs rient.
Du même (c’est un court extrait) : « Avant, il me lustrait les… https://t.co/AVs8tRQAwm

— jean-michel aphatie (@jmaphatie) April 5, 2024

I don't know if I overreacted, I didn't feel that way. There is no example of this kind of rudeness. "He polished my nails," he said. But anyway, how you speak ? It's not okay, no ? It's nonsense. I was surprised by the absence of hierarchy. If this vulgarity becomes the norm, we will all suffer.

Je veux consigner ici les propos tenus sur moi par @Cyrilhanouna le 4 avril dans l’émission @TPMP, et cautionnés plus tard par @PascalPraud : « Lui, c’est le bébête show, les vieux là. Il ne comprend plus rien, il ne sait plus ce qu’il dit, les mots qui sortent, il ne les… https://t.co/x0KphLcPaB

— jean-michel aphatie (@jmaphatie) April 10, 2024

There were follow-ups, an official reaction from the channel for example ?

No nothing. Only reactions from Hanouna: "You're tight with the thong, Jean-Michel !". We have rarely seen this mediocre. He is still fifty years old, Cyril Hanouna.

Il est de retour, lui. @Cyrilhanouna est à lui tout seul un modèle de mépris, de violence, d’arrogance. Et toujours sous jacente, une menace diffuse.
Etonnant, non ? https://t.co/WoPNdBJH4g

— jean-michel aphatie (@jmaphatie) May 2, 2024

The jester has become a bit of a king and he feels himself growing wings ?

Yes, I think it’s an interesting case to analyze, Cyril Hanouna. He is someone who is left to his own devices. Normally, there are always rappelling ropes, advertising agencies, editorial bosses who tell you "Look, no, not like that!". He doesn't have a rappel rope, he does what he wants.

I saw him the other day interviewing Jordan Bardella. The questions are not prepared. These are questions where the doors are about as wide as the largest French cathedrals. These are questions spoken in a hesitant tone. Whoever puts them down doesn't really know where they're going to land.

It’s very rare to see this, it’s exceptional. And it doesn't make good TV. It’s flaccid. I don't know how a broadcast director lets this happen and doesn't tell the person who hosts the show and who has talent to “Work a little harder!”.< /p>

What do you think of the fines from Arcom, with regard to Cyril Hanouna and Geoffroy Lejeune, the latter explaining that what’ he says it is said everywhere and that there is no one to be offended by it ?

One of Hanouna's biggest fines is the insults against Louis Boyard. This goes back to what I was saying about the polishing of Glaouis, we don't express ourselves like that on television, even if 3.5 million euros is a bit salty. As for Lejeune, he's not wrong: Zemmour says racist things and he's not condemned on television in any case or not enough and when he says it he's condemned. So he says “Damn…”. Yes, Lejeune is not Zemmour. I would prefer that Zemmour have less access to television when he says racist things.

Lejeune learned the hard way that racism is not an opinion, it is a crime. To say that Arab-Muslim immigration is responsible for anti-Semitism, as he did, is the very definition of racism. We lump everyone together based on origin and we attribute to these people that we have lumped together an attitude and reasoning. Not all Scots are stingy and not all Muslims are anti-Semitic. He only took 50,000 €, that's not a lot to pay.

You regretted that Arcom did not react to the organization of the debate between Gabriel Attal and Jordan Bardella…< /p>

This debate is shocking. Why put one head of the list and not the others and why have a head of the list debate against someone who is not, in an electoral period.

Arcom could have banned the debate, but above all I think that the channels which organize it and the journalists who applaud and who are all candidates for this type of debate do not think much about the functioning of democracy, about equity, the expression of universal suffrage. At these times, if there are debates, it is between the heads of the lists. And fairly.

You have a sense of formula, a voice that snaps, even beyond the accent. How would you define your style ?

I can't talk about myself, that would be outrageous. I do things the way I feel. I like speaking. I have never given much thought to the way I speak. I'll take it, whatever. With my sensitivity and always in my head, and in a strong way, the fact that I am a journalist and not an actor. I'm making a salad that's just mine.

How do you feel in this team of young, trendy people from Quotidien ?

These are people I've known for a long time, the ones who run it all, who are the spirit, a little bit the soul. These are people I met at the Grand Journal (on Canal +, Editor’s note), it’s not a discovery for me. My state of mind when Laurent Bon asked me to come to Quotidien was more like 'Finally!'. I was happy. It was rather one of the places I wanted to be.

Why ?

Because we have a somewhat similar vision of journalism, a way of looking at society. I have that in common with them and I didn't have it through contact with them, it pre-existed. Intellectually, I feel good with the team that makes Quotidien. I like this ironic, detached way of looking at politics. I like the values ​​that this show conveys. And I think that Barthès embodies all of that with real talent. It's a very good show. In these moments when the national attention prevails, I like being on Quotidien. I prefer to be on Quotidien than on national attention shows.

Ce soir, on revient sur le conflit israélo-palestinien qui s’invite dans la politique française… pic.twitter.com/tEgWhqnKnk

— jean-michel aphatie (@jmaphatie) May 28, 2024

The woke side of Quotidien is mocked by some. What do you answer ?

I'm not sure that Quotidien has a woke spirit. And on my Twitter banner, I put 100% woke journalist, so if it turns out I'm more woke than the Quotidien team. Those who mock, they have the right, but I prefer to be woke than not woke.

I subscribe to read the rest