Question 16010 — Status

Summary

Mrs. Sabine Rubin alerts Mr. the Prime Minister to the suspicions which weigh on the conditions of organization of the great national debate initiated by the majority, in accordance with the legitimate aspirations of confidence and transparency which are those of the French in this period of exceptional social mobilization. A citizen took care to question the MP on the choice of the company charged by the Government with organizing the management of the large public debate on the web: Collective course. The latter was founded by Mr. Cyril Pereira-Lage, a former associate of the company Spinpartners, specializing in cyberlobbying. However, this company stood out in October 2013 with the publication of a study on the means of deploying an “adapted and effective online influence strategy”. On the presentation made on the Échos website, we can notably read this: “In the era digital, with social media (blogs, Facebook, Twitter, etc.), the messages of companies and institutions are now in constant competition and contestation by all kinds of actors: competitors, associations, NGOs, consumers, citizens, activists... to sustainably defend their interests and values, companies must develop influence strategies adapted to this increasingly complex environment. Drawing on perception management (PM) tools, such a study mobilizes research findings in the human sciences on the mechanisms of human cognition in order to lastingly influence the representations and choices of the actors concerned. This company had, for example, marketed its know-how to Lyonnaise des Eaux through the organization of an online debate on the future of water. We can therefore be surprised by the choice made by the Government to use a company whose founder has built a reputation as a cyberlobbyist: in fact we could happily speculate that the latter would be tempted to bias the very terms of the debate, both from the point of view of data collection and processing, by mobilizing real expertise in terms of “influence strategy”. This would of course be contrary to the principle of the greatest transparency and neutrality under the auspices of which a debate must take place which truly meets the expectations of citizens, particularly in terms of the revaluation of purchasing power or tax justice. In this context, it therefore wishes to know what the principles will be which will guarantee the transparency and sincerity of this debate, in accordance with the objective declared by the majority of renewing the dialogue with citizens.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.