RSS
|
 Oriane Cohen began her journey at Sciences Po, the institution known for shaping the French elite. While the academic structure felt rigid, it provided her with invaluable insights into political strategy, influence, and power dynamics. She then transitioned into journalism, reporting from Israel and the West Bank, one of the most intense geopolitical hotspots in the world. This experience provided her with a first-hand understanding of media influence, narrative control, and perception management. It was also where she began building a high-level network across political, tech, and business circles, learning to navigate conflict zones and decipher power structures beyond the headlines. Disillusioned with the industry, she left journalism and entered the world of intelligence and strategic advisory. This shift led her into HUMINT, influence operations, and high-stakes decision-making, deepening her expertise in understanding human behavior, negotiation, and covert influence. After years of working within structured organizations, she chose to create her own path. In 2024, she founded OC Strategic Advisory (OCSA) - a firm dedicated to helping bold, visionary leaders navigate complex decisions with intelligence-driven insights and strategic thinking. A scandal that seems grotesque at first glance but uncovers a much deeper fracture in how power, perception, and narrative now operate. The story behind the story A prominent American commentator, Candace Owens, suggests that French First Lady Brigitte Macron is transgender. She does so publicly, repeatedly. When Owens began releasing her video series on Brigitte, I watched. And I felt a profound discomfort. Owens is skilled... very skilled.
Verifying the story through open sources? It's nearly impossible. The internet is flooded with contradictions, dead-ends, mirrors. Even if you tried to trace what's "true", you'd drown in noise. And to be honest, I did not try because I don't care. I'm ok living with the contradiction. I'm not interested in settling this story and knowing what's in Brigitte's pants. Because this is not the real story. The real story is what this event reveals about us, about our systems, about power in our modern world. In response to this viral humiliation, the French presidential couple launched legal proceedings for defamation. Oh and there's another bizarre twist in the timeline of events. Allegedly, Owens declared that Donald Trump himself intervened behind the scenes months ago, urging Owens to back off because Emmanuel Macron is - supposedly - blocking diplomatic discussions due to the scandal. Whether it's true or not is almost irrelevant. The moment Owens says it, she injects the idea into the global narrative. Suddenly, what seemed like a grotesque obsession to identify what's in someone's pants becomes something else: a lever in global power dynamics! There was a time when a president's authority, or a court's ruling, carried weight. That time is over. Today, even heads of state must defend their legitimacy in the court of public opinion! A court that updates every second and rewards outrage over coherence. Owens understands that very well! The Macrons' decision to file a lawsuit is the reaction of a system still trying to play by the rules of another era. An era where truth was legal, not viral. This gesture reveals more weakness than strength. Litigation is slow. Perception is immediate. Justice is institutional. Scandal is emotional. The courtroom is analog. The feed is digital. The real battlefield isn't the tribunal. Owens clearly knows the game Candace Owens is not confused about the terrain. She plays with volatility. She thrives on provocation. And she understands a core principle of the attention economy: It's not about being right. It's about being watched. She can direct mass attention with a few words. She has this ability to shift narratives, destabilize figures of authority, and reshape public discourse far beyond her immediate audience. If Donald Trump really did urge her to stand down, it's because he, too, understands the stakes. A single controversy, no matter how grotesque, can derail global agendas. What is Owens really after? To dismiss Candace Owens as merely provocative would be a mistake! Her moves are calculated. So what might be her underlying objectives?
Owens is a master of information warfare in the age of algorithms. She doesn't need to be right, she needs to be watched. By pushing boundaries, she guarantees: viral engagement, media amplification and increased influence. Oh and more 💸.
Owens is a political operator. She has an agenda and she's not hiding from it.
By linking a personal rumor to geopolitical deadlock, Owens crafts a story that taps deep into public suspicion. True or not, the narrative lands. It reinforces the idea that the world is governed by narcissism and ego.
Owens may also be probing the system itself. How far can she go? What will provoke censorship? What triggers legal backlash and what doesn't? This is classic edge warfare: you push until you meet resistance. When you don't, expand the territory of what's speakable. Each successful escalation normalizes chaos.
At the most strategic level, her actions may serve broader agendas, intentionally or not. She becomes a useful anomaly in the architecture of narrative warfare. Narrative overload and the collapse of meaning What we're witnessing is an ontological crisis. Too many narratives compete. Too many actors claim truth. Too many realities are layered on top of each other. In this fog, even the absurd becomes plausible. Did Trump really intervene? Is Macron really delaying diplomatic discussions because of this? Did Brigitte Macron need to respond at all? These questions are structurally undecidable. Power? From authority to influence The Owens-Macron affair is not interesting because of what it claims. I mean... who truly cares about what is or what is not in Brigitte Macron's pants? What's interesting in this case is what it reveals about POWER. It shows us where power resides and where it no longer does. The Macrons' choice to respond through the courts is tragically symbolic: it's the last move of an old system trying to maintain dignity in a world that no longer plays by those rules. Meanwhile, Owens - like many others - navigates a post-institutional terrain where power flows through perception, speed, and chaos. To laugh off this affair would be a mistake... This is absolutely not funny. This affair reveals the fracture between :
We are witnessing a strategic collision between the remnants of institutional order and the rise of cognitive warfare by other means. And that collision is the real story. | ||||
|
Horizons: Family Office & Investor Magazine
What the Owens-Macron scandal really reveals |
|
