In the slow twilight of a decades-old public institution, there are few moments as quietly jarring as watching something once taken for granted fade from view. 60 Millions de consommateurs has long been one of France’s most trusted voices in consumer information: a monthly guide to the goods and services that shape everyday life, from food labels to electricity contracts, from toys on a shelf to the safety of household products. In recent days, staff and supporters have watched with a mixture of disbelief and sorrow as the government’s budget decisions moved to extinguish this light, not with a roar, but with the bureaucratic rustle of line items and rhetoric.
On a cold February afternoon in Malakoff, near Paris, the headquarters of the Institut national de la consommation (INC) — the public body that produces the magazine — was the site of protest. A small crowd of journalists, employees, union representatives and citizens gathered, holding signs, voices hushed but firm, challenging a choice they see as emblematic of a deeper retreat from public service. Among them was Lionel Maugain, a veteran journalist and union delegate, who described the justification offered by the government as “only a smokescreen.” To him, the argument of making savings simply does not hold up against the years of public value that 60 Millions has delivered.
The roots of the controversy lie in the 2026 state budget. The law of finances, in its final shape, includes a provision to dissolve the INC and place it into liquidation by March 2026. This decision, confirmed even as motions of censure were debated and narrowly avoided, effectively marks the end of 60 Millions de consommateurs in its current public form. Although the government has floated the possibility of a private buyer stepping in to carry on the magazine’s legacy, the uncertainty of that future looms large for those who have devoted their careers to its mission.
For Maugain and many of his colleagues, the magazine is more than a publication — it is a counter-power. Tests, studies and investigations carried out in-house have, over the years, revealed health risks, misleading marketing practices, and systemic weaknesses that might otherwise have gone unnoticed. “Public service is not an expense; it is an investment,” he and others argue, their voices threaded with frustration and disappointment at what they describe as a choice made not for the public interest but in the name of short-term bookkeeping.
Behind the scenes, the numbers tell a story that is both prosaic and poignant. The INC recorded a deficit in recent years, according to staff, yet its overall turnover far exceeded the figures used to justify its liquidation. Even unions acknowledge the financial strain, but they also point to years of constrained budgets, underfunded digital transformation and shrinking resources that long preceded the final decision.
Outside the walls of the institute, consumer associations have rallied in support. Groups such as the Union nationale des associations familiales (UNAF) have warned that transferring the magazine to private ownership might erode its independence, leaving consumers with less neutral, less robust information at a time when product markets are ever more complex and opaque.
In the round of speeches on the pavement, among the banners and murmured conversations, there was a sense that something fundamental was at stake — not just the future of a single title, but the role of informed public scrutiny in everyday life. As the editorial staff, union representatives, and readers look ahead, the question lingers: when public service itself becomes a matter of balance-sheet calculus, what then becomes of the voices that once spoke for the public?
AI Image Disclaimer “Images in this article are AI-generated illustrations, meant for concept only.”
Sources :
RTL Sud Radio Le Parisien CB News UNAF (association statement)