The most important feature with this emerging outbreak is that it gathers numerous mediatic elements. There are a lot of facets and angles to discuss, to cover the subject, to look into the future, to remember the past and to emphasise the various issues it all rises. From that angle, the topic is quite interesting and it is an outbreak that, in my opinion, differs from previous ones, without going back to AIDS, but looking at huge recent outbreaks such as the avian influenza, H1N1 or even Ebola, there are several differing elements which mean that this outbreak has been, is and will be treated in a different manner. It is a virus, of course, but a virus carried by mosquitoes, that is already a specific feature of an uncertain scale : the mosquito. Moreover, this disease has been known by epidemiologists and virologists for half a century, the risks existed but were totally unknown or misunderstood, or underestimated in general, or for the public at large as we say. With the current outbreak, we have rediscovered that there have been small epidemics here and there, and we can see that Zika has an interesting story. Then were raised the issues of Latin America, the outbreak, Brazil, the growth of the epidemic and of the number of people concerned, and here again, a specific feature makes this outbreak uncertain and quite mysterious, that is its asymptomatic nature. It is a viral infection that you can get if a mosquito bites you, it is the female mosquito that carries the virus, which bites you to take your blood but in doing that it inoculates you with the virus. But, in at least 80% of cases, this infection shows no symptoms, which in itself is a problem. Then another dimension appeared, a quite rare issue, which refers to poorly known data : the Guillain Barré (GB) syndrome, as commonly mentioned by the media. It is a neurological disease not very well-known that can be severe or only leave some sequelae, so this was a new scale to explore for the media. Then another aspect appeared, way more important in terms of public health : the potential risk for babies whose mothers got infected during their pregnancy. This has given cause to intensive discussions, on the reality of this link, on the scientific and almost ethical issues of the causal relationship, even if we observed children with neurological sequelae, we talk about microcephaly, born from infected mothers, or thought to be infected during their pregnancy, this link was not really established, so during several months we have seen, and it was widely covered by the media, scientific publications, different information, discrepancies, and it seems that gradually, when we are recording this MOOC anyhow, the link of causality is quite established, even if some data are still to be confirmed. After that, another scale appeared which is the possibility of sexual transmission, mostly from men to women, a man carrying the virus, showing the symptoms or not as the case can be, could infect his partners through sexual transmission, this fact addressing again the issue of the asymptomatic nature of the disease, but also the issue of the potential effects of a sexual transmission if the woman infected is pregnant. It is like an interwoven story. In terms of the media, Zika allows to approach all those aspects, it is very diverse and led to numerous articles and subjects on the radio and TV, and I don't even talk of social networks which also address all those issues. But if we want the picture to be complete, we have to mention in the background, what partly dramatises the Zika, is the effect of the WHO decision, which determined quite early that according to what was happening in Latin America, this outbreak constituted a global health emergency. The problem here is that the same WHO had been accused, that is another media issue, to be too slow, to give a very weak response to the West African Ebola outbreak which was clearly rising issues of seriousness, death rate, and of the very contagious nature of that deadly viral disease. In this context, on one hand we have a WHO facing a well-known lethal disease, Ebola, and doing nothing or very little about it for months, and on the other hand with Zika and all its uncertainties, its issues grew, they declared it nearly at the beginning as a global health emergency with different consequences, economic ones for instance, as soon, in Brazil, there will be the Olympic Games. Is there a risk to go to Brazil ? Can tourists be safe in Brazil ? What will happen if they are infected in Brazil and then return home ? With the potential consequences of sexual transmission and so on. Eventually, in my opinion, all that ranges of mediatic issues that were presented from prioritising risks, if we were comparing risks, in terms of public health, between Zika and Ebola outbreaks, or others, we might discover surprising things, meaning that this massive mediatic coverage, particularly aroused by WHO and it is not clear where it stands in relation to the West African Ebola ? This is a real issue, and this lack of public health prioritisation is a real concern, not in terms of media because issues are treated more or less well, but very often they are treated in an occasional manner, whereas, if we think as a policy maker, risk prioritisation is very important : an asymptomatic disease, nearly always benign, with here and there some effects on pregnant women and on babies born from women infected during pregnancy. That is the real issue. The outbreak is not over, there will be other media coverage on the matter and that issue might rise at one point. The outbreak of a disease is a matter the general media favours. Because there is a threat, but also it is emotional which is always an essential component. We often wonder why the media drops a topic after having massively used it. First, because they cannot sustain constantly every topic or there would be no time for other matters. Then, there is a kind of intramediatic dynamic which makes a subject, at one stage or another, runs out of interest, it cannot be treated like a serial. Outbreaks can easily be treated in chapters but at one point or another, it depletes the value of the topic, there is nothing new, there are still Zika cases in Brazil, there will be others, there is now an outbreak in Colombia, we might have cases in the United States, so we talk about it and so on. Time comes when it is too much, people get tired. And then, after a few weeks or a few months, the topic is resuscitated. We've seen this with Ebola, we had a massive coverage during weeks, months, and gradually it disappeared yet the gradual but likely eradication of Ebola in the three West African countries, did not receive any specific coverage. We talk about the tragedy, but when it is over it loses its interest. Zika, media and politics. When it comes to an outbreak, towards this public health issue, there is always a back and forth movement between the media coverage and political decisions and reactions. Political movements must act, but their actions depend on the resonance it will or will not have in the media and in the opinion issuing from this media coverage. We particularly saw that in France, where there was a great response from the French Health Authorities toward the Zika outbreak, mainly because of the Departments in French west Indies. As a result the Ministry of Health has taken an increasing interest on this matter, as it had also done during the Ebola crisis where the purpose was mainly to achieve the closure of the boarders. Examples of the response here are "we are here, checking, if there are any cases in which case we will act" although, acting against mosquitoes is not that easy, In terms of prevention, giving advices, is more effective, so for example, if you are planning to have a baby, postpone it and try to take the necessary precautions in terms of sexual transmission, such preventive actions also received a high coverage in the media as they are closely linked to the worries of people. Another big question is whether the Summer 2016 will see outbreaks of vector mosquitoes of dengue, which is quite prevalent in the hexagon or at least in south of the hexagon. What will be the situation for Zika ? I think that 500 cases of Zika, with more or less symptoms, often without any, have already been enumerated in people coming back from countries where the outbreak is raging. So, that is where we are now, it is obvious there is a high sensibility from politics and media are echoing any decisions taken. All of this creates a sound box which amplifies the treatment of this issue. I am rather confused about the numerous media coverages of the Zika issue, and I have treated this matter the best way I can, but with a quite intensive approach, on my blog "Journalism and Public Health" where I have tried to decrypt what is happening, in various areas, but particularly this one. Among huge ethical or controversial topics, there was the fact that this outbreak was raging in countries where, quite often, abortion is illegal, even though the risk of transmitting a malformation was acknowledged, or was being acknowledged, scientifically. So among advice, and particularly that from WHO, to women who could be infected, if there was a viral confirmation, was the encouragment to abort. It raised a huge issue, and in countries directly concerned it might have become a kind of taboo. This issue added to the already extreme complexity as to how the outbreak could combatted and of its effects.