In one of the most sensitive episodes on Médi 1 TV, Mustafa Baytas, Minister Delegate in charge of Parliamentary Relations and government spokesperson, spoke directly about the youth protests sweeping the streets of Morocco for the seventh consecutive day. The government chose to describe them as “youth expressions.”
The broadcast, attended by several channel journalists and national media representatives, appeared on the surface to open a dialogue with the public. Yet it revealed a deep communication crisis between the government and society, particularly with a new generation of Moroccans who no longer recognize traditional political channels or conventional authority discourse.
Since the outbreak of the recent wave of protests across Moroccan cities, the discussion has gone beyond specific social or economic demands. It has raised deeper questions about the state’s ability to understand the language of this new generation – a generation born into an open digital world, rejecting old partisan intermediaries and packaged speeches that do not reflect their daily reality.
In this context, Mustafa Baytas’ appearance on Médi 1 TV was a government attempt to reassure the public and present its narrative of the street events. What initially seemed like a communication initiative quickly turned into a mirror reflecting a deeper crisis: a mutual trust deficit between the authorities and youth, and a communication gap showing that the government has not yet found a language that resonates with Moroccan Generation Z.
Questions left hanging after the broadcast
Has the government truly succeeded in delivering its message? Or was it a belated attempt to bridge the growing gap between the state and society? And can such media appearances suffice to ease public anger, or do they instead highlight the distance between institutional discourse and street reality?
Listening… the repeated but ineffective mantra
During the broadcast, Minister Baytas repeatedly stressed that “the government hears the youth” and considers listening a necessary prerequisite for realistic solutions. Yet, in practice, this discourse felt more like temporary appeasement than a genuine reform plan.
The protests did not arise overnight; they are the result of long-standing frustrations: high cost of living, poor public services, and declining trust in parties and elites.
Yet the government – through Baytas – reminded Moroccans that crises are “inherited since independence,” seemingly seeking moral justification for political inaction rather than presenting a vision to overcome the deadlock.
This approach raised questions:
-
To what extent is the “listening” discourse merely a cover to delay decisions?
-
Is it acceptable for a mid-term government to merely repeat that “problems are old” without clarifying what has been done to address them?
A government on defense, not in leadership
Baytas appeared more cornered by questions than proactive in answers. It was clear the government lacked a unified narrative. Asked about the delayed official response to demonstrations, he replied that “the majority’s tripartite meeting was sufficient,” while the public expected a direct political stance from the Prime Minister or a national initiative for dialogue.
In major crises, people do not wait for communiqués but for symbolic political presence. Observers thus asked:
-
Where is the Prime Minister?
-
Why has he not addressed youth directly via television or digital platforms?
The absence of symbolic leadership at a critical moment made the government appear as if managing the crisis from behind the scenes, leaving social media as the primary arena for discussion.
A communication crisis above all
The broadcast made clear that the issue is not just decisions but how they are communicated to citizens. Baytas, despite his calm political language, offered no convincing new content. He did not explain why ministers of vital sectors avoid media or why invitations for dialogue with youth in the field or via official platforms are ignored.
This silence creates what communication scholars call an “information void,” which rumors and misinformation fill. In the digital age, it is impossible to convince an entire generation to wait for an “official statement” a week after an event. The government has, unknowingly, become a slow institution in a fast era, writing in administrative language for a generation that speaks the language of live videos and hashtags.
Generation Z… adversary or the state’s living conscience?
The government appears to view the youth protests as mere “temporary expressions,” but Moroccan Generation Z, aged 18 to 30, is not a generation of slogans. It is critical, connected, and imbued with dignity and accountability.
This generation does not chant ideological slogans; it questions the state simply:
-
Why aren’t opportunities equal?
-
Why do education and healthcare remain arenas of class discrimination?
-
Why doesn’t the country’s wealth reflect in the dignity of its citizens?
Generation Z does not seek a position but meaning in belonging. Therefore, the problem is not the protest itself but how the elite interprets it. It is a call to open a new page in the state-society relationship, where citizens are partners, not mere recipients of decisions.
Numbers cannot convince the public
In response to criticism, Baytas cited large budgets: raising the health budget from 19 to 32 billion dirhams, opening new medical faculties, programs supporting employment and education. But numbers, however impressive, cannot convince the public.
People live in daily reality, not in financial tables. When citizens queue at hospitals or struggle to afford transport or education, numbers lose all meaning. The trust gap between state and society is no longer financial but symbolic.
Lack of symbolic presence… failure in crisis management
During the Al Haouz tragedy, the country tested the state’s image. Despite extensive efforts on the ground, many Moroccans felt the government was absent symbolically.
Baytas spoke of “field visits” and a “reconstruction plan,” but the deeper question remained:
-
Why did citizens not feel the government’s human, not merely administrative, presence on the ground?
The experience proved that technical success does not compensate for emotional absence, and a state that cannot console its citizens loses part of its symbolic legitimacy.
Justification does not convince a generation of instant truths
By blaming past accumulations for delayed reforms, Baytas echoed a discourse Moroccans have heard since the 1990s. But today’s generation lives in a different time, comparing the country to emerging international models and asking:
-
Why are others advancing while we repeat the same excuses?
The protests were not a rebellion against the state but against continuous justificatory discourse that lost credibility. Moroccans want to hear “the solution has begun,” not “the problem is old.”
The need for a new national vision for youth
If the government has truly “listened to youth,” the next step must go beyond promises:
-
Open direct and regular dialogue channels.
-
Involve youth in shaping public policies.
-
Integrate them into public media to make their voices part of the official scene.
-
Revalue civic and political work as a space for expression, not clientelism.
Rebuilding trust with Generation Z will not happen through statements but through genuine participation proving that the public’s voice is heard and influential.
Towards a state that listens, not just justifies
In conclusion, Baytas’ appearance on Médi 1 TV was necessary but insufficient. He managed to tone down official rhetoric but failed to restore public trust.
People do not want the government to defend itself; they want it to defend them. Until the ruling majority acknowledges that the crisis is as political as it is social, no cabinet reshuffle or additional budget will fundamentally change the situation.
The present moment is not for justification but for redefining what the state means in the consciousness of Moroccan youth. If “listening” does not turn into real institutional action, Generation Z will remain in the streets—not out of anger, but to defend the dignity of a nation they want to see finally rise.
Conclusion
The current protests are not a passing wave of anger but a civic alarm reminding government, parties, and elites that the era of top-down discourse is over.
Morocco faces a pivotal moment: either it treats its youth’s outcry as an opportunity to renew the social contract, or it continues to justify itself until it loses the last shred of trust. Between “listening” and “denial
