The public audiovisual service, supposed to embody neutrality and balance in the processing of information, is increasingly criticized for its practices which raise doubts about its impartiality. Investigative shows like Further investigation or Special correspondent series of reports whose ideological biases and editorial choices provoke strong reactions, particularly when it comes to sensitive subjects such as politics or questions of identity.
Carefully selected witnesses
Recently, a survey of Further investigation highlighted the actions of activist groups such as “Parents Vigilants”, associated with the Reconquest party, as part of a report on the pressures exerted in schools against Wokist ideologies. In this report, a school nurse denounced, with emotion, harassment on the part of these activists. What the program failed to specify is that this supposedly neutral victim was in reality a far-left activist, engaged in pro-trans causes and president of an association supporting illegal immigrants. This lack of transparency about the witness's political affiliations constitutes blatant bias, leaving viewers to believe that his comments came from an impartial source.
France Télévisions' fierce fight against so-called far-right movements, such as the National Rally (RN), has become a constant. In 2024, during the European elections, Further investigation devoted a report to Jordan Bardella, president of the RN. Officially, this journalistic work was to be part of a series of investigations targeting several political figures, but only those linked to the RN were broadcast before the elections, the channel invoking a “pause” for other reports. This decision, under the guise of pluralism, left room for the production of a second report on the RN in the middle of the electoral campaign.
The strategy is clear: focus the spotlight on supposed controversies surrounding the party while pausing investigations into other political figures.
When personal stories mask political truths
The choice of subjects and speakers in these broadcasts also reveals an editorial orientation. In an episode ofSpecial correspondentthe portrait of a caregiver, presented as a victim of “uninhibited racism” on the part of her neighbors who are supporters of the RN, was widely taken up by France Info. This woman, described as a heroine in the face of adversity, nevertheless turns out to be an active activist for the French Communist Party and fervent defender of decolonial theses. Here again, the show highlighted an emotional and personal dimension, while deliberately obscuring the political affiliations of the person concerned.
-These examples are not isolated cases. They illustrate a broader trend where the public service seems to confuse investigative journalism with ideological activism. While investigative shows play a crucial role in informing the public and helping them form informed opinions, their effectiveness rests on two fundamental pillars: transparency and honesty.
Although it is difficult to demand total neutrality from journalists, ethics requires a fair presentation of the facts and the actors. This lack of rigor in the choice of testimonies and stories harms the credibility of the public service, reinforcing distrust of it. The millions of French people who loathe leftism are also entitled not to have their taxes pay for the salaries of journalists who, in the public service, have a duty of neutrality.
Photo credit: DR
[cc] Breizh-info.com, 2024, dispatches free to copy and distribute subject to mention and link to the original source
Related News :