Laetitia Guinand will be hosting «Le PoinG» from Paris this Sunday. Interview

Unpublished article - Jonas Follonier

Laetitia Guinand anime avec une passion intacte son émission de débat «Le PoinG» lancée en juin de l’année dernière et diffusée tous les dimanches soirs à 20h00 sur la chaîne TV genevoise Léman Bleu. Un rendez-vous qui compte aussi sur la participation de l’humoriste et comédien Alexandre Kominek, avec ses chroniques décalées en fin d’émission. Ce dimanche 10 avril, pour le premier tour de l’élection présidentielle française, la table ronde s’exporte à Paris pour accueillir une foultitude de commentateurs et personnalités politiques. L’occasion d’en apprendre plus sur la manière dont la journaliste romande conçoit la mission ô combien nécessaire qu’elle s’est fixée: lancer la réflexion en Suisse romande.

Le Regard Libre: You produce the talk-show «Le PoinG», which appeared on Léman Bleu last June. Why this title?

Laetitia Guinand: The title is a real eye-opener! More seriously, the G refers to a whole series of words (or evils) at the heart of our debates: war, climate (global warming), internet (4/5G), LGBTQUIA+. And then Geneva, in homage to our Léman Bleu channel, and my name, Guinand. Finally, the G-spot I'm playing with is a climax, something we're looking for without necessarily finding. (Smiles)

Is there a great demand for debate in French-speaking Switzerland? With the new fortnightly rhythm of RTS's «Infrarouge» program, you'd think not...

I'm convinced of the opposite, of course! There was a golden age of debate in French-speaking Switzerland; programs like «Infrarouge» and «Forum» on RTS or Pascal Décaillet's «Genève à chaud» on Léman Bleu positively changed our media landscape. It's paradoxical: the more conflictual our society is, the less it should find expression in the media? There's a need for debate, and that's what you're aiming for with your title, quite rightly I think.

This Sunday, April 10, you'll be hosting your show from Paris from 7:30pm to 9:00pm to comment on the presidential election results. You have a wide-ranging panel of guests, from Sandrine Rousseau to Elisabeth Lévy. How do you go about selecting your cast? And will there be a Swiss touch to this TV moment?

Of course, there's also a strong Swiss flavour, as we're bringing along Céline Vara, Green member of the Council of States from Neuchâtel, and Christian Lüscher, PLR National Councillor from Geneva. I love comparative politics. (Laughter) These two personalities will be there to draw parallels with the situation in Switzerland and give us their vision of French politics. As for the guests, the decisive criterion remains the variety of points of view and the quality of the people behind them.

Philippe Val, former editor-in-chief of Charlie Hebdo and France Inter, is the permanent columnist for «PoinG». Why did you choose a French contributor with a very assertive stance?

Precisely to provoke thought. You may not agree with Philippe Val, but you'll recognize that he's a profoundly intelligent man, capable of overhanging even his own thoughts. He also acts as a spur, giving the other guests a boost, in a good way. Even if I find that he has become much more «Swissified» in our contact, and often rounds off the angles - well, more so than on French TV!

After 10 months on the air, how successful have you been?

Audiences were good, in line with our expectations. For example, we had almost 50,000 viewers for the theme «Does socialism still have a future?». The brand has quickly established itself and is taking off on the digital front.

Des controverses sévissent actuellement sur la liberté d’expression, l’idéologie woke… Estimez-vous que l’échange d’opinions a des limites?

I'd be tempted to tell you that we shouldn't forbid ourselves, but the reality is much more complex. Journalism has always been a skilful balance between the desire to reveal realities, at the risk of offending, and the need to be heard. It's not an exact science. I myself deprogrammed Alexandre Kominek and his humor column at the start of the war in Ukraine, believing that the climate was too emotional to mix serious, even dramatic, content with derision on our primarily political program.

That's your business, because you have the freedom - and the responsibility - to make such decisions. But what about the pressures that come from outside, from society, which sometimes get the better of journalists because they're scared or have no choice?

Of course, the pressure today is much greater on the media, due in particular to social networks, but that's not all. Pressures can also be economic, political and legal, and we have to fight to free ourselves from the desire to please at all costs, because this is a very bad advisor for our profession.

Certaines thématiques deviennent difficiles à aborder dans la sérénité… Mais vous les abordez. Et parfois, surprise, des idées a priori irréconciliables s’avèrent complémentaires!

Some themes are more sensitive and polarizing than others, such as identity. But every era has its taboos. The golden rule of debate, in my opinion, is to oppose ideas, even virulently, without personal attack. The subject can be identity-related; the argument, on the other hand, must never be. That's the point.

Emmanuel Macron will not have taken part in any debates before the first round. His opponents are calling it a denial of democracy. What do you think of this criticism?

Emmanuel Macron is trying to be a Mitterand bis, a President above the fray, but times have changed. I don't know what will come out of the ballot box, but if the polls are right, he risks paying dearly for his lack of grassroots campaigning and proximity to the population. More than 50% of French people today claim to be radical, whether they vote or not. And this is largely due to Emmanuel Macron's record.

Your dream guest for a future show?

Madonna? Vladimir Putin? More seriously, the quality of a debate depends very much on the chemistry between the guests. It's not just about one person.

Write to the author: [email protected]

Editor's choice: