2023-05-16 19:22:47
Behind this Anglicism hides a technique to dissuade actors who do not respect the laws and the measures of the executive.
The «name and shame“Was recently put forward by members of the government, such as Bruno Le Maire or Olivia Grégoire. Their objective: to deter actors from violating measures or laws put in place by the executive. If the expression means “name and blame or humiliatein French, what is really hiding behind this Anglicism? And above all: is it an effective communication technique? Le Figaro make the point.
In a very concrete way, this techniqueis to publicly reveal the identity or actions of a person or organization for the purpose of criticizing, denouncing or discrediting them», Details Carina Cheklit, communication strategist. Well aware of the repercussions that thename and shamecan generate, the government published a decree at the end of December allowing the Repression of Fraud (DGCCRF) to be able to “reveal the identity of companies sanctioned for any illicit practice“, in order to strengthen “the dissuasive nature of the follow-up that it implements following the checks».
Read alsoAmerican fugue, by Bruno Le Maire: lost illusions
A “public disgrace”
And now, the executive no longer hesitates to use this strategy. As part of the implementation of the bill on the regulation of influencers, Bruno Le Maire explained on May 3 on France Info that the government was going to “give the names of influencers who broke the rules in the coming days“. A week later, on May 10, it was the turn of the Minister Delegate for Trade, Olivia Grégoire, to warn food manufacturers who would not lower their prices: “We will do “name and shame”, we will publicly quote the brands that do not want to negotiate downwards and I am not sure that [leur] advertise.” A proposal encouraged by Arnaud Rousseau, the new boss of the National Federation of Farmers’ Unions (FNSEA), who called on May 14 “to designate those who abuse».
If, for the time being, no name of influencer or industrialist has yet been published, “the aim is to dissuade them» et «to encourage othersto act correctly, emphasizes Carine Cheklit, and to add that “this technique is based on the idea of a “public shame” which can have negative consequences on the reputation, career or activities of a person or an organization, thus causing them to change their behavior».
For the specialist, this is not the first time that the government has resorted to “name and shame» : «He has already used it on subjects of public utility such as the transparency of pay gaps, the fight against tax evasion or even abusive commercial practices. This strategy is now more publicized than before, with politicians choosing to use this method to mobilize public opinion.And the executive is not the only one to use this technique. NGOs denounce, for example, “companies that do not respect environmental standards or human rights, while consumer groups use it to highlight unfair commercial practices“says Carina Cheklit.
Read alsoChallenged by Greenpeace over its greenhouse gas emissions, TotalEnergies strikes back
Serious financial consequences
In the age of social networks, thename and shame» can thus prove to be terribly effective and be relayed massively by Internet users, directly tarnishing the reputation of a company. “Let’s take a very concrete example, in the field of food safety, cases of recalls of contaminated or dangerous products have led to the public disclosure of the names of the companies concerned. This aims to inform consumers and deter companies from neglecting food safety standards. We still remember recent brand scandals Buitoni or Ferrero who made an impact on public opinion“recalls the communications strategist.
However, the “name and shameis not a risk-free solution because, “in some cases, public exposure may lead to significant negative consequences or have a more limited impact“. For example, “some people may question the whistleblower’s motives, credibility or the validity of what they say“. Conversely, “the financial consequences can be serious for whoever is reported with reduced sales, loss of contracts or partnerships, legal disputes, fines or other financial penalties» insists Carina Cheklit.
According to the strategist, this practice still raises “questions of fairness and transparency because it can lead to unilateral denunciations, without the possibility of a balanced response, or to unfair stigmatization». «The application of “name and shame” must therefore be used with caution and balance to avoid abuse or injustice.“, concludes the specialist.
#Industrialists #influencers.. #shame #government