Martin Ajdari, President of Arcom, concludes the "Grand Débat" at the La Rochelle Drama Festival.

Check against delivery,

Madam Chairman, dear Sophie Révil,

Ladies and Gentlemen, Presidents, General Managers, General Secretaries,

Dear friends of creation and drama, dear Marjorie

Thank you very much, dear Sophie, for inviting me to bring this debate to a close in a slightly new format, with a shorter introduction, followed by a few questions.

I'd like to start by saluting the vitality of French drama, as confirmed by the annual Arcom study presented yesterday by Antoine Boilley. Success in terms of audience (with 57% of program consumption in 2024 compared with 43% in 2019, and a top 10 audience rating of 100% French) - success in prime time and out of prime time (10 million daily viewers for soap operas); in linear and non-linear formats; success also on the export market, with quality recognized by numerous awards. A vitality of drama that is not only French, but also Francophone.

Many reasons for satisfaction, of which you can all be proud. But there are also a few points to watch out for, in particular an ageing audience trend, and the fact that French drama has some room for increase in SMAD audiences.

And above all, there's the economic reality, which conditions its dynamism: through the three pillars of advertising, contracts and public audiovisuel. Because before a work can circulate, it has to be written, directed, produced and therefore financed.

We are emerging from a very dynamic cycle overall, with production obligations rising from 860 million in 2019 to almost 1.2 billion in 2023 (+40%). This dynamic is due to the increased contribution of private channels, the increased commitment of the public audiovisuel sector (440 million in 2024 for France Télévisions, not forgetting Arte) and the successful integration of SMADs, which now account for 1/4 of audiovisual production obligations.

The final figures for 2024 are not yet known in detail, but they will confirm this positive trend, with a roughly stable contribution from TV channels and an 18% increase in SMAD investments (nearly 400 million in 2024, including 317 million for audiovisual production).

This would lead to a 3% rise in total obligations (drama + cinema) in 2024, a rise that should continue into 2025, since 2024 was a very good year for both advertising and public funding, and SMAD contract revenues up significantly.

Unfortunately, this positive cycle, this virtuous chain of quality, audience success and rising funding, is now turning on its head:

- in the first half of 2025, the television advertising market acknowledged a decline of almost 5%, despite the success of non-linear supplies;

- the subsidy paid to France Télévisions fell sharply in 2025, and threatens to increase further (FIPU constraints, in fact; but it is also the role of the regulator to warn of budget cuts that are too brutal in their intensity and suddenness);

- and even the rate of increase in SMADs seems to be slowing in France.

Without wishing to paint too gloomy a picture, there is no reason to believe or hope that this is simply a cyclical blip, either in terms of the medium/long-term advertising outlook drawn up by Arcom and the DGMIC a year ago (now confirmed), or the state of public finances. All this in a context marked by powerful and disparate competition from video-sharing platforms.

These prospects are not inevitable, provided we react collectively. The answer lies first and foremost, of course, in the imagination and talent of creators and producers. And then there are the industrial, editorial and commercial strategies of publishers: i/ the remarkable success of TV publishers' non-linear supplies; ii/ today, the new type of distribution agreements signed by TF1 and France Télévisions with Netflix and Prime Video, which, as we have seen, raise many questions.

For the regulator, it is of course too early to draw conclusions from these agreements, but anything that facilitates the circulation of works is a step in the right direction, especially if it helps to maintain or even increase the base of production obligations. On condition, however, that these agreements do not ultimately result in the erasure of publishers and their brands (which are at the heart of regulation and audiovisual ambition), and that they preserve the possibility of virtuous co-financing agreements.

But above all, more than ever, in the face of this economic adversity, the authorities need to respond to your efforts to structure the industry (creation of LAFA) with a genuine industrial policy, combining the CNC and its various support tools, intermittence, public audiovisuel (whose weakening could affect the entire industry), the regulatory framework and regulation.

As far as regulation is concerned, I see three main challenges:

1/ The first is to provide visibility by clarifying the short- and medium-term horizon for DTT diffusion, since it is still terrestrial diffusion that structures the audiovisuel landscape, and the number and visibility of channels. This is the reasoning behind the decisions we made public this morning:

• in the short term, not to reallocate the frequencies freed up by Canal+'s withdrawal from DTT, as the market does not currently seem capable of absorbing new channels;

• and, in the longer term, to launch a collective debate - along the lines of the White Paper on Radio - on the future of this broadcasting method, which was predominant in the past and is still indispensable in many households, but which is in decline in a world of hyper-digital and largely non-linear supply: what modernization, what objectives, what associated regulatory tools, to preserve the visibility and funding of an ambitious supply. In a way, these are the foundations of our model that we want to revisit, together with all stakeholders... with a view to the 2027 deadline.

2/ The second issue is related, and concerns the disparities of all kinds that audiovisual publishers have to contend with in the face of their direct competitors. These disparities summon solutions:

• at European level, by completing the 2019 revision of the AVMS Directive to unify the rules between incumbent publishers, SMADs and video-sharing platforms (this is already at the heart of our exchanges with our counterparts),

• and at national level, by re-examining advertising regulations (the prohibitions and limitations of the 1992 decree, certain aspects of the Sapin law), not out of a dogmatic concern for liberalization, but because these texts (and their inspiration) are 30 years old.

• A simple principle: a legitimate constraint (deontological, environmental, public health, consumer protection), if it applies to some (i.e. television), must apply to all. To put it plainly: a restriction such as television's cannot apply only to it, at the risk of giving a de facto competitive advantage to other players (and must therefore be lifted).
  
• The same goes for transparency in audience measurement and taxation. We are ready to listen to your proposals, to examine them (with DGMIC), and to question the authorities, both European and national.

3/ The third challenge (for the regulator), more topical than ever in this shifting context, is to facilitate and support inter-professional agreements - for example, those signed by Disney, which raises its commitment to funding creation to 25% of sales, agreements that we have managed to reconcile with a regulatory framework that did not lend itself easily.) We also accompany capital movements that may become necessary in a more adverse environment, and in the interests of the players involved (e.g. Chérie HD approval in three months). With openness, availability and vigilance regarding the effects on cultural diversity and plurality.

This openness, availability and vigilance will be at the heart of our actions over the coming months.

Thank you for your attention, and I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have.