The programme “Tout beau, tout n9uf”, shown on 1 December 2025, featuring an interview on CNews

A complaint was lodged with Arcom regarding a segment from the programme *Tout beau tout n9uf*, shown on the W9 channel on 1 December 2025, during which a panellist discussed the case of a man with a severe disability, who was being treated at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, and whose deteriorating health had led the medical team to take a decision to limit treatment.

Meeting in plenary session on 15 April 2026, Arcom deliberated on the matter.

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 2-3-8 of the W9 agreement, ‘The broadcaster shall comply with the decision of the French regulatory authority for audiovisual and digital communication concerning the integrity and independence of news and the programmes contributing thereto. ’ However, Article 1 of the decision of 18 April 2018 concerning the accuracy and independence of news and the programmes that contribute to it makes provision for the broadcaster “must ensure the accuracy of news and the programmes that form part of it […] It must demonstrate rigour in the presentation and treatment of news .” Finally, in accordance with Article 2-2-1 of the W9 agreement, ‘The broadcaster is responsible for the content of the programmes it shows. It retains control of its airwaves at all times.’

Arcom considered that the columnist’s presentation of the facts, which omitted the existence of the decisions handed down by the administrative courts and adopted a particularly accusatory tone towards the hospital, resulted in a partial and biased treatment of the information, which did not provide the public with all the contextual details necessary to understand the case, thereby failing to meet the aforementioned requirements of honesty and rigour in reporting. Arcom also noted the particular sensitivity of the debate concerning therapeutic limitation, which called for it to be addressed with all the more care and rigour.

Furthermore, Arcom considered that the absence of any context or counter-argument in response to the contentious remarks reflected a failure to exercise proper control over the broadcast, as required by the aforementioned provisions of Article 2-2-1 of the W9 agreement.

Consequently, Arcom demanded that the broadcaster ensure, in future, compliance with the aforementioned obligations.

However, as regards the potentially defamatory nature of elements of this sequence, its assessment does not fall within the competence of Arcom but within that of the civil court.