Credits: Presidencia de la República Mexicana / Wikimedia Commons — CC BY 2.0.
Filmed in a behind-the-scenes video at the Folies Bergère on Sunday, December 7, Brigitte Macron called some #NousToutes activists who had disrupted Ary Abittan’s show the day before, a comedian cleared by a dismissal of charges in January, “dirty bitches.” The clip, provided by the French tabloid agency Bestimage and published by Public, has ignited the debate: what is the value of the public interest versus backstage access, and what does this Bestimage leak reveal about our dependence on spin doctors?
At The Folies Bergère, The Moment That Changed Everything
On Sunday, December 7, 2025, the halls of the Folies Bergère were buzzing with restrained activity. The day before, four activists from the #NousToutes collective had interrupted an Ary Abittan performance. Tonight, the comedian is about to go back on stage. In the dressing rooms, Brigitte Macron appears, a familiar silhouette, measured gestures, words of comfort. In a low voice, a phrase slips out, caught by a cameraman working for Bestimage: “dirty bitches.” The remark targets the masked activists who, the day before, had held up signs bearing the word “rapist.” They were also wearing masks emblazoned with the comedian’s face.
The Established Facts, Without Hype
On the weekend of December 6 and 7, 2025, four #NousToutes activists interrupted an Ary Abittan performance at the Folies Bergère. The next day, Brigitte Macron attended the show. Backstage, she spoke to the comedian and referred to the previous day’s action. She also uttered the word that, captured by a cameraman, would set the internet ablaze. The French tabloid agency Bestimage, which had exclusive access to film backstage, sold the footage to several outlets, including Paris Match, Closer, and Public. It was the latter that posted the leaked video with the audio and the damning word. On December 9 and 10, 2025, several media outlets picked up the story; Bestimage acknowledged a leak and called it a “blunder.”
The first lady, caught by an open mic, was immediately criticized for the harshness of her remarks, while Maud Bregeon, the government spokesperson, urged restraint and recast the words as criticism of the activists’ “radical method,” not of the feminist cause. Her entourage said she was not attacking the cause, but the “radical method” used by the activists. The activists defend an action they consider necessary. Indeed, they want to denounce a culture of impunity around men accused of sexual violence.
Legally, one essential reminder is needed — Paris Court of Appeal, January 30, 2025, “for lack of sufficiently serious and consistent evidence”: Ary Abittan benefited from a dismissal of charges, upheld on appeal on January 30, 2025. The court found there was not enough serious evidence. In addition, no consistent evidence justified sending him to trial. Under the law, he is innocent in this case. That clarification, while it does not end the public debate, is the safeguard for any serious analysis.
Bestimage, A ‘Blunder,’ And An Editorial Blind Spot
At the center of the mechanism that made Brigitte Macron’s statement public is Bestimage. The agency, long run by Mimi Marchand, says it mistakenly passed along the sequence that included the audio. Its video team admits it checked the image quality and facial clarity, but not the soundtrack. The cameraman who shot the footage offered his resignation. The agency, which called her “responsible but not guilty,” rejected it. One organizational factor is being cited: Mimi Marchand was absent, grieving, and the usual editorial filter therefore failed.
The explanation is also a vulnerability report. It shows how fragile a validation chain is when it relies on a single guiding figure. It also highlights a paradox. Indeed, society is debating what is private and what is in the public interest. Yet an agency known for its eye for framing let a backstage open mic slip through. That changes everything.
Public, ‘Public Interest,’ And The Tightrope
The magazine Public stands by its decision to publish the sequence, which it presents as a matter of “public interest.” The argument rests on the identity of the person involved and the subject being discussed. Indeed, the first lady is speaking backstage at a theater. She is talking about a feminist mobilization and a comedian involved in a sensitive case. The publication does not confirm the exact source of the footage, but justifies it based on the nature of the statement itself. The decision, in the age of virality, pushed the story far beyond the celebrity sphere. It set two democratic demands against each other: the public’s right to know and the protection of privacy off-mic and off-camera.
Mimi Marchand, A Trajectory Beyond Celebrity
To grasp the shock wave, one must consider Mimi Marchand’s place in the French ecosystem. Her career spans a series of worlds: the margins, the press, the tabloid press, then the orbit of Élysée communications and, more broadly, politics. Close to the Macron couple and a skilled gatekeeper of access to images, she made Bestimage a required stop for anyone who wanted to see or be seen. Her influence is such that it creates a halo of ambiguity: where does the media narrative end and the staging begin? In the middle of this maelstrom, a recent court ruling serves as a marker. On July 1, 2025, the Paris criminal court sentenced her to 18 months in prison, suspended. She must also pay a €25,000 fine for blackmail against Karine Le Marchand. This involved stolen photos of the host’s minor daughter. Mimi Marchand has appealed, so the ruling is not final.
This trajectory indirectly sheds light on the Folies Bergère affair. The mistake by Bestimage happened precisely within a system known for controlling sensitive images. When the puppet slips away from the puppet master, the scene shown to the public wipes away years of reputation engineering.
The Activists, Anger, And The Grammar Of An Action
The #NousToutes collective did not improvise its intrusion. It targeted a prestigious venue, a popular show, and a comedian marked by a highly publicized case. It chose disruption to attract attention. In doing so, it aims to force a debate about social tolerance toward allegations of sexual violence. In the activists’ view, the dismissal of charges does not erase the violence experienced by women. It also does not satisfy the demand for symbolic justice. The theater and the stage are used as a platform. That strategy shocks, irritates, persuades, or exhausts, depending on your perspective. In any case, it produced a notable effect. Indeed, that includes people who would not have paid attention to a simple press release.
The response took the form of a hashtag echoed in chorus. It also included testimonies and analysis on the meaning of words. Many voices turned the insult into a banner, showing that the battle of narratives is underway. Indeed, it is fought as much in words as in facts.
Brigitte Macron, The Tarnished Image, And The Defense Line
Since 2017, the president’s wife has cultivated an image of being discreet and empathetic. She is also attentive to education and to social issues. Her intervention, even if captured surreptitiously, stands in contrast to that public portrait. Her entourage says she wanted to reassure a rattled artist. She also wanted to disapprove of a method seen as brutal, not of the feminist cause. The nuance is real, but the digital age pays it little attention. Online, one sentence becomes a totem. The irony is that a specialist in calm interviews and restrained gestures was swept up. Indeed, those two words trapped her.
Even so, caution is in order. The filmed moment was not a rally or a speech. It was a backstage moment, with its share of awkwardness and frankness. One can see it as a slip of the tongue. One can also see an equipment failure: a backstage open mic that should never have been captured. In addition, a broken validation chain is possible, as is a media outlet choosing to publish. That is done in the name of the public interest.
What This Case Says About Our Time
By extension, the case reveals the extent of institutions’ dependence on private communications intermediaries. The Élysée, like other organizations, entrusts agencies with managing access and shaping the setting. They are also responsible for setting the distance. This outsourcing creates an ecosystem in which control is the main currency. As a result, the slightest failure becomes an event. The public discovers a fragment of unguarded speech where a staged scene was expected. The accident becomes a revelation: the obsession with framing ends up weakening the speech itself.
This dependence also explains the speed of the pile-on. A video escapes, social media accounts seize it, news outlets amplify it, political figures comment. The progression follows a syncopated rhythm in which corrections always come after the screenshots.
Law, Ethics, And The Gray Area Of Backstage
By “public interest,” we mean what sheds light on a major public debate beyond mere curiosity about private life. For a public figure, disclosure can be justified if the information is necessary and proportionate. It must also be verifiable and placed in context. Supporters of publication invoke this tightrope: informing without voyeurism. Opponents, however, strongly disagree.
One troubling question remains: should it have been published? The law does not forbid showing what illuminates a public-interest debate. It does, however, require prioritizing information and considering proportionality. On screen, the statement looks raw. Off screen, it sums up a conflict in which justice, activism, and communications are intertwined. The public has the right to know that the first lady speaks this way. It also has the right to be protected from the effects of escalation that turns an aside into a verdict.
Finally, two guideposts must be remembered. The first is the presumption of innocence: it applies to Ary Abittan, and to every defendant. The second is the duty to listen to victims or alleged victims: in France, 3919 answers women facing violence. Between these two demands, society must learn to navigate without name-calling or denial.
After The Firestorm, The Questions That Remain
One sentence, two words, one spark: a week was enough to place Brigitte Macron in the middle of a storm she had not sought to ignite. At the edge of the stage, Ary Abittan continues his dates, weighed down by a dismissal of charges that does not silence suspicion for some, or conviction for others. In the shadows of the spotlights, Bestimage is patching up a blunder that says a lot about the era: every form of control eventually meets its blind spot. As for Mimi Marchand, her appeal will be heard tomorrow. That hearing will determine whether the court upholds the conviction. It could weaken the central figure behind the images of power.
In this theater where the state flirts with staging, and where private agencies hold institutions in check, the public has become a permanent jury. It rules with screenshots, comments, and shares. Only at that pace do words regain their weight, and anger stop making the rules.