“On the internet, moderation has its limits, and it is necessary to relearn netiquette.”

Google News Subscribe

In the summer of 2025, tens of thousands of spectators watched the staging and encouraged the humiliation of "JP" [Jean Pormanove] with messages or donations. But those who did so went beyond the role of spectator: through their suggestions for scenarios, they were also co-producers of this distressing entertainment.

Also read

Decryption Death of Jean Pormanove: Kick, the platform where barbarism can become a business

The problem is not directly linked to digital technology and could have existed off-screen—imagine a theater where, for days on end, a volunteer would be humiliated in front of an audience that voted to prolong the humiliation. Thus, thirty years ago, dwarf-throwing shows led to the Morsang-sur-Orge ruling: the Council of State affirmed that respect for human dignity could justify banning this show, even if the victims consented. Nothing has changed, and the shameful remains shameful, in a nightclub as well as on the internet.

The success of films like "The Goat" (1981) or "The Bronzés" (1978) is essentially based on the humiliation of an antihero. But with one essential difference: the viewer laughed at a fictional performance, with consenting actors, in a masterful staging. With Web 2.0, co-produced by Internet users, this old comic device is shifting into a new reality: it is no longer a scenario, but a real and prolonged humiliation. With the Internet user becoming a co-producer, the search for responsibility cannot focus on the organizers of the show; it must also include the Internet producers. We must therefore remind the platforms of their responsibilities as publishers. This will require going beyond the reporting mechanisms used by Internet users, which are ineffective on private channels reserved for those attracted by these shows. The moderation through artificial intelligence and the community championed by Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg finds one of its limits here.

Also read

But it is also necessary to examine the responsibility of producers, particularly Internet users. The idea that Internet users are jointly responsible for the Internet atmosphere and that this climate can be improved through common rules is not new. In 1995, at the time when the web was opening up to the general public, the organization that defines Internet standards published RFC 1855. It defines "netiquette," a list of good practices intended to promote debate and respect for online debate: writing a message without attacking the other person, avoiding "shouting" in capital letters, or verifying information before relaying it. Thirty years later, we have forgotten this legacy. At a time when every message can contribute to the negativity of the Internet or incite behavior that would be denounced if it took place in the street, a relearning of "netiquette" is more necessary than ever.

It is therefore necessary to learn how to express oneself on social media, but we must also learn how to obtain information there. Media and information literacy is lacking in a digital world in which our children are left to their own devices. This objective must mobilize scientists, teachers, and journalists to enable each student to learn how to obtain information in the digital space as they did yesterday in their school textbooks. We must develop a true information culture and digital decency starting in school, and complement it throughout life, particularly through awareness campaigns and parental support or initiatives such as "AI Cafés." Just as it would no longer occur to organize a dwarf throwing, it should become unthinkable to participate in cyberbullying online.

Also read