Arnaud Benedetti is associate professor at Paris-Sorbonne University. He is editor-in-chief of the political and parliamentary review. He published
How are the politicians dead?
- The great malaise of power
(editions of Cerf, November 2021).
LE FIGARO.- Emmanuel Macron strongly denounced, on Monday March 28, as “an indignity” the fact that Éric Zemmour let the crowd chant “Macron assassin” without reacting during his meeting at the Trocadero on Sunday March 27, advising the “ hearing-impaired candidate" to take advantage of the reform allowing the reimbursement of hearing aids. How do you view the president's communication strategy?
Arnaud BENEDETTI.-
It's fair game.
Emmanuel Macron uses an obviously reprehensible crowd movement to delegitimize Éric Zemmour, and to turn verbal aggression into a political resource.
He does it on a register of humor, with however a very perceptible touch of nervousness in the tone of voice.
He also intends to insist on the hatred against his person on the part of a competitor in order to generate implicit collective support in his favor.
He subliminally calls for a form of solidarity and pushes his competitors to naturally denounce this collective slippage.
From the end of the meeting, the "mainstream media" focused on this moment, neglecting the strong mobilization to which the meeting gave rise as well as the attempt to clarify Éric Zemmour's position on the question of Islam and of Muslims.
The controversy that followed benefits the president, who can thus argue that he is the target of an irrational and harmful hatred for democracy.
The "Macron assassin" covered with their "sound and fury" the mobilizing event that was to be the demonstration of the Trocadéro.
Unsurprisingly, the president uses this event to his advantage.
Eric Zemmour can only blame the uncontrolled exaltation of his supporters.
Beyond the controversy, is this a way for the President of the Republic to campaign without pretending to campaign?
Emmanuel Macron has been dodging the campaign for months.
It is both his right and his choice, as it is everyone's right to criticize, contest or approve this choice.
If it predates the Russian offensive, the war in Ukraine came to ossify this strategic predisposition.
But he must mimic the democratic gesture by consenting at least to the electoral rite.
He takes advantage of a communication error from one of his adversaries to suggest an anti-republican danger of which he would be the best bulwark.
A way for him to reactivate a scene, a bit Manichaean, where the fight of Good against Evil, of reason against passions, of the "preferable" against the "detestable" would once again be played out.
This "this is not a campaign", Emmanuel Macron feeds it to avoid exposing himself, so as not to lose his precious presidential capital.
Arnaud Benedetti
This "this is not a campaign", he feeds it to avoid exposing himself, so as not to lose his precious presidential capital which provides him with a communicating comparative advantage in the categories of collective perceptions, in order to somehow monopolize the representation of the president.
As if it were necessary to prevent any other form of competition from acquiring the potential for “presidentiality”.
As if it was necessary above all to limit the exercise of inventory required by any end of mandate.
As if the whole issue was to create a movement towards a natural renewal, a form of chain without hazard or dispute: a formality or the certification of evidence.
Its objective: to anesthetize the electoral time.
Is this strategy explained solely by Emmanuel Macron's comfortable margin in the polls?
Survey leadership plays a role in this strategy.
Emmanuel Macron manages his lead like a breakaway cyclist.
The fact remains that for a few days this false rhythm has been disturbed.
First of all, because the geopolitical effect of the Ukrainian drama tends to bend.
The amazement of the warrior event fades, collective attention diversifies in favor of other concerns.
It will also be necessary to monitor the impact of the McKinsey affair and the controversy that followed on the massive use of consulting firms by the government, as revealed by a Senate report.
The informational barrier between social networks and mainstream media is about to be crossed.
This infusion could, if it proves to be corrosive,
Doesn't she risk turning against him?
If we follow once again the daily evolution of voting intentions, Emmanuel Macron has experienced an erosion of his potential for a week, mainly compared to Marine le Pen and to a lesser extent compared to Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
A process of "nibbling" of macronist capital has taken shape;
it is not necessarily spectacular, but it seems to have taken hold.
According to some polling institutes, the second round is proving tighter than expected, especially in the case of a repeat of the 2017 confrontation. De facto, Marine le Pen has almost regained the level of its electoral result of 'five years ago.
She can hope to benefit from a reserve of votes, the voters of Eric Zemmour.
One should not confuse the apparently cyclical indifference or resignation with an adherence to the presidential personality.
Arnaud Benedetti
The virulence of anti-Macronism, notwithstanding the magnifying effect of immediacy, remains;
one should not confuse the apparently cyclical indifference or resignation with an adherence to the presidential personality.
If its electoral fragility were to appear, an aggregation of distrust could possibly operate and introduce a real factor of uncertainty for the upcoming election.
We are still far from a "jospinisation" of Emmanuel Macron, but this risk exists.
It is latent.
In this case, the displayed dilettantism with which the president approached this campaign, precisely to lose nothing of his status as head of state, could turn against him.