Back to an incandescent spring

Olivier Niquet studied urban planning before becoming a radio host for Radio-Canada in 2009 on the programs Le Sportnographe and La soiree est (encore) jeune. He is also a columnist, author, speaker, screenwriter and all sorts of other things. He is particularly interested in the media but defines himself as an expert in versatility.

It is fascinating to see, as we mark the 10th anniversary of the 2012 student crisis, how the protagonists of the time have evolved on the media and political scenes. It seems to be a turning point for the careers of many public figures.

This period will have been for them a kind of golden age. The policy of the division (wedge politics) that meets the new era of social networks. It was of course at this time that we met Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, now co-spokesperson for Québec solidaire. But it was also at this time that Éric Duhaime, now leader of the Conservative Party of Quebec, began to be talked about because of his positions against the red squares movement.

I will not compare the two on the merits. They present legitimate ideas. As for the form, let’s say that there is one whose processes I appreciate less. Anyway, I can’t be objective since I have a mutual friend with Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois and we already played a board game together in 2015. I’ve never played backgammon with Éric Duhaime.

The fact remains that the two probably realized in 2012 that social networks are perfect for seizing the subject of the moment in order to mobilize the troops. Since then, they have opted for the strategy of being very present on these platforms and, above all, of not being flat. Subtlety doesn’t pay off on the Internet. It is better to throw grenades. Shooting a video with a wok when François Legault calls you wokeas GND did, or chat live with MP Claire Samson about the delivery of her mare, as Éric Duhaime did.

Conversely, another student spring actor, Jean Charest, never followed the parade, perhaps hoping that the fashion for the Internet would pass quickly. His lack of positioning on social networks could cost him the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada.

The same goes for columnists. We remember Richard Martineau’s famous tweet on sangria: “Seen on a terrace in Outremont: 5 students with red squares, eating, drinking sangria and talking on a cell phone. The good life ! He recently said the tweet changed his life, turning him from cool columnist to public enemy number one. Like the politicians mentioned earlier, he may have realized at this point that pressing the right public opinion buttons could elicit a lot of reactions, contribute to his notoriety, and ultimately be quite intoxicating.

I know what I mean. In 2012, the radio show I’m on was entering its first season, and highlighting the media slippages around the red squares movement was our bread and butter. If since then I haven’t totally succumbed to the intoxication of reacting to accumulate social capital, the temptation is constant.

I notice (it was about time, you might say) that being a little more corrosive could pay off in terms of notoriety. I recently cracked a few posts that, without being particularly brilliant, had a lot of effect on social networks. I was talking about pressing the right public opinion buttons: mission accomplished. My readership has grown considerably as a result of these shock statements. Statements that were ultimately more accurate than shocking, in the sense that they appealed to a specific audience.

All that to say that I understand a little better the rise of certain public figures who don’t have their tongues in their pockets. But between wanting to attract attention and becoming a postmodern Elvis Gratton on social networks, there is a big step.

It reminds me of the letter published a year ago by the former mayor of Huntingdon and ex-radio host Stéphane Gendron, who has long been involved in controversy, when he joined the awareness campaign  » freedom from oppression”. He explained there that he had been drawn into a kind of spiral. “For a long time I sang in this sinister choir with dubious quarter tones and easy dissonances adorned with bad taste and sometimes destructive flourishes. During my years as a TV and radio commentator, I sank into the trash and instant opinion. Discovering the power and influence I had went to my head. It was unhealthy, it led me into a spiral of verbal abuse that harmed the debate. »

I have always dreamed of being inside the head of a professional polemicist to understand the proportion of what he really believes compared to what he says to show off and attract attention. My assessment? 25% convictions and 85% spectacle (a polemicist always gives his 110%).

With public opinion divided, the challenge for politicians is to mobilize the base. To “make the news”, whatever it is, to inspire their followers. This is where the enticing tweets of our political and media figures come in. Because even if only a small proportion of the population is on Twitter, the media elite lives there permanently and will percolate your contents in the traditional media. It was in the spring of 2012 that many people first lit up about this “headspinning influence”. It was an incandescent spring for them.