New twist in the affair surrounding the interview with an Israeli army spokesman broadcast on November 15 on the French channel TV5 Monde. The audiovisual police officer in France has just issued a statement supporting the journalist of Algerian origin Mohamed Kaci, author of the interview that caused a stir.
In the program “64' le monde en français”, broadcast on November 15, more than a month after the start of the Gaza war, journalist Mohamed Kaci interviewed an Israeli army spokesman, Olivier Rafowicz.
The journalist was not happy with the official and asked all the questions he felt were necessary about the Israeli army's attack on a hospital in Gaza. This “hard-headed” interview provoked the reaction of many pro-Israelis in France, who believed that Mohamed Kaci had not respected journalistic rules.
On November 20, the channel's management released a public statement in which they made the same criticisms and distanced themselves from the journalist. The affair became a scandal when members of the editorial team denounced putting pressure on the management of TV5 Monde to disavow journalist Mohamed Kaci. Among the authors of this print, the name of the host Arthur was mentioned.
Complaint against Mohamed Kaci and TV5 Monde: Arcom announces its verdict
For his colleagues, Mohamed Kaci respected all professional rules. “We still don’t understand what mistake our colleague allegedly made.
Mohamed Kaci asked the IDF spokesman about the IDF's methods, echoing the colonel's comments. His question is therefore completely legitimate, answered on condition of anonymity a journalist from TV5 Monde, a channel whose viewers are mainly based in the Maghreb and Africa, where the Palestinian cause is supported by the population.
Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, director of the American Jewish Committee in France, was the first to protest the interview. Pro-Israel lobbies then contacted the Audiovisual and Digital Communications Regulatory Authority (Arcom).
More than three months after the affair broke out, Arcom issued a statement in which he also assumed that the journalist was not at fault.
For Arcom, the Israeli army spokesman “had the opportunity to fully express his point of view and respond in detail to the journalist's comments.”
It adds that “the choice of questions that journalists ask their guests is a matter of editorial freedom and that the ethical obligations that apply to journalists are not enforceable by Arcom against editors of services”. Consequently, it concludes, it “did not intervene against the publisher of the service.”