The 17th Chamber of the Criminal Court of Paris was set to examine whether criticizing the limitations of a survey can be considered defamatory in a case involving the French Institute of Public Opinion (IFOP) and researcher Alexandre Dézé, based on comments published in an article in Le Monde. The survey institute withdrew forty-eight hours before the hearing, so there will be no judgment on the merits. The article in question, dated September 11, 2020, analyzed the style of the news channel CNews and its position compared to its competitors. It referenced an episode of the program “L’Heure des pros” discussing the results of a survey conducted by IFOP for Charlie Hebdo on the Charlie Hebdo attacks trial.
The study titled “Right to blasphemy, cartoons, freedom of expression… Are the French still ‘Charlie’?” revealed that a quarter of Muslims under the age of 25 did not condemn the January 7, 2015 attacks. The survey involved two samples, one with 1,020 respondents representative of the French population, and the other with 515 respondents identifying as Muslim. In the Monde article, political science professor Alexandre Dézé of the University of Montpellier, a specialist in surveys, criticized the survey’s small sample size, stating that with only 515 participants, the survey had no value and its conclusions were debatable due to methodological weaknesses caused by the lack of official data on the population being studied.
The remarks made by Alexandre Dézé led to a defamation complaint filed by IFOP. However, the case could not proceed four years later due to a procedural error, as the individual who lodged the complaint – the chairman of IFOP’s supervisory board – did not have the legal standing to do so. During the hearing, discussions focused on the abusive nature of the legal action taken. Dézé’s lawyer, Me David Mendel, argued that Dézé, as a specialist in polling, regularly discusses survey issues in various forums, including publishing books and participating in conferences where other polling experts from institutes like IFOP also take part. In 2022, Dézé published a book titled “Ten Lessons on Political Surveys” (De Boeck).
The case raises questions about the balance between freedom of expression and potential defamation when criticizing survey methodologies and results. It also highlights the challenges faced by researchers and pollsters in obtaining accurate data when dealing with sensitive or polarizing topics. Alexandre Dézé’s critique of the survey’s methodology underscores the importance of transparency and rigor in survey research to ensure the credibility and reliability of the findings. The decision to withdraw the lawsuit ultimately prevents a legal resolution on the issue of whether questioning the validity of a survey can be considered defamatory, leaving the debate unresolved within the scientific and legal communities.
