Comment: France needs to protect its satirists
Columnist Nick Inman says we need their regard on society - even if we do not like what they say
French comedian Guillaume Meurice was sacked by Radio France in June
magali r
Driving across the Pyrenees from Spain back into France one Sunday evening a few months ago, I tuned the car radio to France Inter to listen to the news.
Instead of talk, I heard non-stop music being played. This was not the first time this had happened and I knew what was going on: The journalists and presenters were on strike again.
Normally, this happens because of a dispute over rates of pay, or the raising of the retirement age, or else the threat to privatise the state’s TV and radio stations.
This time, it was none of the above.
The ‘content producers’ had downed microphones in solidarity with one of their number, Guillaume Meurice, a humorist and chroniqueur (one employed by a publication or radio programme to deliver a personal point of view on current affairs).
This individual had been suspended by the management of Radio France for making an offensive joke on air.
I will not repeat what this man said, let alone translate it, but I will tell you that it was a scathing remark about the prime minister of Israel.
The chroniqueur had been deploying his caustic humour to attack Israel’s policy in Gaza. There was an immediate reaction of outrage in the media to the phrase he had used.
Talking heads appeared on television saying that Meurice’s choice of language proved he was antisemitic.
There had to be limits on what a satirist could say, they said. Getting a laugh was no excuse for reinforcing stereotypes and stirring up hate.
Radio France was put on the spot: would it defend the humorist's right to say whatever he wanted, or would it condemn him for going too far?
Staff at France Inter urged their employer to stand firm. Yield to censorship for whatever reason, they argued, and where would it end?
Eventually, the company decided it had to do something or it would look as if it was unable to control its own output.
Meurice was suspended while the case was considered and later his contract was revoked on the grounds that he had committed “a serious mistake” and shown “repeated disloyalty”, ie. disobedience.
Several contributors to France Inter were so offended by this verdict and sentence that they resigned in protest.
Meurice declared that “liberal France” had played into the hands of an extreme right that wants to limit freedom of expression.
This episode reminded me immediately of the similar circumstances in which The Guardian in the UK lost its long-standing cartoonist, Steve Bell.
The paper and its website, and our understanding of current affairs, are diminished without his incisive creations.
If you are unsure what to think about this issue, let me remind you that authoritarians generally never have a sense of humour and that satire is a sign of a free society asserting the value of its freedom.
When laughter is sanctioned, we must all be wary of our liberties being taken from us. Yes, satirists are always offensive to someone: that is their job.
They are licensed fools who can come across as being malicious and cruel, but they must dare risk receiving such accusations and be prepared to defend themselves if necessary.
If they play safe, they are no longer doing satire and we are no longer learning to see the world critically. It is right that Meurice should be made aware that some people disagree with him and that they found his phrasing hurtful.
However, we should be wary of policing what a radio humourist can and cannot say. If he has to ask permission for every gag, we might as well get the Politburo to write his script for him.
What do you think about French humorists? Is France right to rein them in or do you agree with Nick Inman? Let us know at letters@connexionfrance.com
