Patrick Lagacé, star journalist for La Presse and host of 98.5 FM, once again finds himself at the center of an unprecedented controversy.
This time, it is his role in the public stigmatization of Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, in the midst of a health crisis, which comes back to haunt him.
In September 2021, Patrick Lagacé and Hugo Dumas published an article in La Presse revealing the vaccination status of Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, claiming that the actor had lost a directing contract for District 31 due to his refusal to be vaccinated.
This article sparked a media storm, leading to the loss of several contracts for Lemay-Thivierge, including its lucrative partnership with Hyundai.
Lagacé then justified the publication of this information by asserting that it was a subject of public interest.
However, for Lemay-Thivierge, the article represented a serious attack on his private life and his reputation, reducing him to an “anti-vax” in public opinion.
In the Quebec media whirlwind, Guillaume chose a difficult path: to remain faithful to his convictions, no matter the price to pay.
And Lagacé was not the only one who struggled. Guy A. Lepage and Louis Morissette joined the gang of dominant thought, ready to crush those who thought otherwise.
Lemay-Thivierge found himself isolated, targeted, and mocked for daring to diverge from the collective line of conduct.
Today, when everyone now knows that the health policies applied during the pandemic have been destructive for the population, their fight appears in a different light — a fight for freedom of thought and expression.
Recent revelations on the ineffectiveness of certain health measures, notably prolonged confinements and the wearing of masks, shed a harsh light on the way in which the media, Lagacé in the lead, treated those who dared to question the unique thinking of the ‘era.
The recently published US Congressional report harshly criticizes several policies implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, describing some of them as “harmful” and denouncing major attacks on individual freedoms.
Among the notable conclusions:
Lockdowns: Described as ineffective and destructive, leading to the closure of 160,000 businesses in the United States and incalculable economic and social losses.
Wearing a mask: deemed unnecessary to slow the spread of the virus.
Vaccination: vaccines, although effective in reducing severe forms, have not prevented transmission, making vaccination obligations particularly controversial.
Attacks on freedoms: millions of people forced to abandon essential elements of their healthy and happy lives.
These conclusions echo several of the arguments put forward at the time by Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, who had publicly expressed reservations about health measures and vaccines.
At the time, however, these positions were swept aside by dominant voices in the media, notably that of Patrick Lagacé.
If Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge has often been criticized for standing up to his convictions, we must recognize the courage he showed in exposing himself in this way.
Unlike many, he refused to give in to social and professional pressure. This choice, although costly for his career, underlines a strength of character and a loyalty to his principles which deserve to be saluted.
Lemay-Thivierge appears more and more as a man who has chosen to defend his rights and his values, even if it means sacrificing his reputation and his career.
And he is not the only one to have suffered the consequences of controversial health policies. Montreal, like Quebec, was heavily impacted by confinements, with both economic and social repercussions.
One of the most notable examples remains the deprivation of Montreal Canadiens fans during the Stanley Cup final in 2021.
While the CH played its first final in almost 30 years, the Bell Center, with a capacity of 21,302 seats, remained almost empty, limited to 3,500 spectators due to health restrictions.
This decision, strongly criticized at the time, deprived thousands of Quebecers of a historic moment and proved the emotional impact of confinements on the population.
The figures speak for themselves: the metropolis has seen tens of thousands of jobs disappear, businesses close permanently, and a population plunged into unprecedented social isolation.
The decisions, while intentional, left deep scars. Today, US and international reports reveal that some of these measures, such as extended lockdowns, were not only ineffective, but also harmful and destructive.
Faced with this reality, Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge appears to be one of the few to have had the courage to say out loud what many were thinking quietly.
Mocked by Guy A. Lepage and Louis Morissette, betrayed by Patrick Lagacé, he nevertheless maintained his position, refusing to deny his principles despite the derogatory comments and the professional consequences.
Today, his courage to stand up for his beliefs, even in the face of an industry that ridiculed him, resonates as an example of courage.
For Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, the future remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: his fight for the freedom to think and express himself, even in a hostile environment, will long resonate as an example of courage in an industry often dominated by conformism.
The actor filed a $1.85 million lawsuit against La Presse, claiming the article contained “falsehoods” and “sensationalist allegations.”
Although he withdrew his prosecution in 2023, the recent conclusions on health measures call into question the way in which Lagacé handled this matter.
Because after investigation, Lagacé did not respect the law.
By publicly revealing the actor’s vaccination status, the journalist crossed a fundamental legal limit.
-In Quebec, the Act respecting access to documents held by public bodies and the protection of personal information and Law 25 strictly regulate the disclosure of personal information, including medical data.
These laws clearly state that a person’s health information is strictly confidential and cannot be published without their explicit consent.
In addition, according to current case law, vaccination status is considered sensitive medical information.
Disclosing it without authorization not only violates the privacy of the individual concerned, but also their right to dignity and integrity.
This situation is all the more worrying given that medical data confidentiality laws, such as those of Canada and the United States (HIPAA), are strict and universally recognized.
Unauthorized publication of such information may result in serious consequences:
Civil sanctions: damages for invasion of privacy.
Criminal sanctions: fines and legal proceedings.
Reputational consequences: loss of public trust in the media.
By ignoring these rules, Patrick Lagacé not only endangered the private life of Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, but he also contributed to creating a dangerous precedent, where the quest for a “scoop” takes precedence over respect for individual rights.
Such an approach raises fundamental questions about journalistic responsibility and the need to reconcile press freedom with respect for fundamental rights.
Finally, this controversy is not limited to a legal debate. It reflects a worrying trend where public figures are transformed into media targets under the pretext of public interest.
Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge, who nevertheless had the right to the confidentiality of his medical file like any citizen, became a scapegoat for an era marked by polarization and hasty judgments.
With the publication of the American Congress report, many voices are being raised to emphasize that Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge was right on several points, notably on the impact of confinements and on the ineffectiveness of wearing a mask to slow the spread of the virus. .
These revelations put Lagacé in a delicate position, because they suggest that he helped make a scapegoat of Lemay-Thivierge without solid scientific justification.
Social networks quickly caught fire:
“Lagacé destroyed a man’s career because he did not conform to dominant thinking. Today, we realize that he was right on several points. Who is going to fix that now?”
“Patrick Lagacé owes a public apology to Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge. The report proves that the measures he defended with such zeal were far from perfect.”
Faced with this new wave of criticism, Patrick Lagacé remains silent for the moment.
Contrary to his habit of responding quickly to controversies, he has yet to comment on the report’s findings or calls to recognize his role in destroying Lemay-Thivierge’s professional life.
This silence is all the more notable as Lagacé often used his platform to denounce those he perceived as obstacles to the management of the health crisis.
Today, when the facts prove some of these dissenting voices right, his lack of reaction is seen by many as proof of bad faith.
The controversy surrounding Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge and Patrick Lagacé raises important questions about the role of the media in times of crisis.
While journalists have a duty to inform, they must also exercise caution and avoid stigmatizing those who express divergent opinions.
In this specific case, the rush to condemn Lemay-Thivierge had devastating consequences on his career and reputation, consequences that today seem unjustified.
As the revelations continue to pile up, one thing is clear: Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge deserves public rehabilitation.
He paid a heavy price for expressing reservations which, in hindsight, were far from unfounded.
As for Patrick Lagacé, he will have to answer difficult questions about his role in this affair and the way in which he uses his media platform.
The public, fed up with media excesses, now demands more responsibility and fairness from those who claim to defend the truth.
Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge saw his professional career turned upside down by revelations about his vaccination status. A personal and free decision.
Was it fair to penalize one of the most popular actors for a personal choice, in a supposedly free society?
The story of Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge is also a lesson for the public, the media and decision-makers. It reminds us of the importance of nuance, empathy and respect for individual choices, even in times of crisis.
As the world continues to learn lessons from the pandemic, these stories will serve as powerful reminders of the challenges — and mistakes — of this unprecedented time.
In the end, Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge sacrificed himself…in the name of freedom…
Related News :