Mònica Planas: "Many of those who have booed or threatened me wouldn't have dared to do it to a man."

BarcelonaMònica Planas (Barcelona, ​​1975) is the first guest in the 2 x 100 interview series, which we are launching in ARA. A conversation, two people talking, and an audience of one hundred readers and subscribers of the newspaper. The setting will always be the same: the rehearsal room of the Orfeó Català, in the Palau de la Música Catalana. Planas is a journalist and has worked in The morning of Catalunya Ràdio, in itThis year, 100 from TV3, in Domestic problems and sub-directed The world on RAC1with Xavier Bosch. In 2007 he began writing television criticism in Sports World And since 2010, her thoughtful, precise, and incisive articles have consistently been among the most read and discussed pieces in ARA.

You've just turned 50, and you started writing television criticism at 32. Who has changed more in these 18 years, Mònica Planas or television?

— Wow, I think we've both evolved at the same time. I hope I haven't changed like television, that I haven't deteriorated.

Do you think it has deteriorated in these 18 years?

— In some ways, yes. It's still a place to find interesting things, a window worth looking at if you can be selective and choose what interests you. But above all, I think the entertainment has deteriorated a lot, yes.

Tell me about Mónica Planas before she became a television critic. What family do you come from? Do your parents have anything to do with journalism?

— No, not at all. My mother is a child psychologist. She always worked in a public school in Hospitalet. And my father was a pharmacist and pharmacologist. He had a pharmacy in Molins de Rei and, above all, he dedicated himself to scientific research. For many years he worked researching in pharmaceutical laboratories.

A mix of science and literature. And where did your journalism come from?

— I liked science, I really liked languages, literature. I think I was interested in so many things that journalism was the space where I knew I could find many different things.

In an interview with Quim Miró in Comunicació 21, you said you had decided to do television criticism not by playing it safe, but by going all the way. What are those consequences?

— They probably think you're very unfriendly, and that some people might not want to greet you or might get angry. That rarely happens. In fact, compared to the articles I write every day, the sour or harsh reactions are a very small percentage.

There are jobs where you make friends.

— Yes, but criticism isn't one of them. In fact, when you write criticism to make friends, your readers detect it so easily that they lose interest, because they realize you're not thinking about them. If your aspiration is to work in television or have dinner with famous people who appear on TV, criticism isn't a good path.

Having worked in television, I've sometimes heard the phrase, "This critic has it in for me." Do you have it in for someone?

— I don't hold a grudge against anyone. If I felt that kind of grudge or hatred—I've even been told—I wouldn't be able to work. When a job has made me feel unwell, or when I've had a boss I couldn't stand, I've left that job. Besides, when you're a professional, you have to put that kind of grudge aside. It's not about "I like this one and I don't like that one." On the contrary, when I sometimes think, "This one won't do very well" or "Let's see how they do," for me, it's a very interesting exercise to have my expectations challenged.

Earlier you mentioned some reactions, calls, etc. What's the most unpleasant thing that's happened to you?

— I won't go into detail, but it was a threat. A threat with all that a threat entails, yes. He delivered it with such logic and ease that I thought, "Wow, this person must be used to making threats."

What's your WhatsApp status message?

— "Arguments and parrots, please refrain"In Spanish, too."

What day did you decide to put that message on yourself?

— The day I saw that there was a man who had found it recurrent to call me and first justify himself, then complain, then get angry, then shout...

And did it work?

— I blocked him.

I couldn't do your job. I'm probably not as brave as you, or maybe I just don't handle conflict well, I don't know.

— I don't handle conflict well. I try to avoid it. I don't consider my work to be conflict-prone. And I have to tell you that the vast majority of the profession has no problem with it. That is to say, I've been able to continue interacting with the people I've criticized. Some people have an extraordinary sense of humor, a wonderful ability to adapt. I'd say women perhaps better than men. Women find it easier to examine themselves, to accept that sometimes they've been wrong, to try to correct themselves, or at least to continue thinking what they thought but reflect on it.

Would you say you are braver now than when you started 2007?

— No, no, not always. It's just that I don't approach what I do with any kind of grandiosity. Critics should try not to take themselves too seriously, but they should still consider the importance of their work. What matters is the work we do, not us.

We come from a tradition of television criticism in Catalonia, with names like Josep Maria Baget Herms, Víctor Amela, Ramon Miravitlles, Ferran Monegal... I haven't mentioned any women.

— I don't know if in theToday There were some women who did criticism...

Yes, in theToday Gemma Busquets wrote about television. Because she's a woman, do you think it changes anything about the reactions you've encountered?

— Absolutely. I've spoken with colleagues, with Sergi Pàmies, for example, and indeed, many of those who have dared to shout at or threaten me certainly wouldn't have dared to threaten Víctor Amela or Sergi Pàmies in this way. Certain people take criticism worse because it comes from a woman. Generally speaking, men are always considered an authoritative voice, and women are seen as intruders in the profession. And this happens in journalism and in many other fields. Television professionals, who already produce very testosterone-driven, very sexist television, imagine a woman offering criticism... And, moreover, a woman they don't know at all, whose background they don't know... "Who is this woman, who thinks she has the right to criticize me?" It's not well received, no.

I get the feeling you've been messing around a lot lately on public television, both TV3 and Televisión Española. Why is that?

— First, because public television is essential and must strive for excellence. It's the only one we can hold accountable. At a time when we need it most, during a period of great political upheaval, I've noticed poorer content and lower standards.

Does this apply to both TV3 and Televisión Española?

— Yes, yes. It's a strange time for public television. I have the feeling it's a reaction to having to compete with private channels, and that in many ways they've tried to emulate them. But, of course, if we let public television deteriorate, there will come a time when someone will say we don't need it because it's rubbish, right? Or that we can't maintain this kind of television. And then, if they get rid of it, we'll be left without an essential state structure: public media.

What show could you offer on television right now that would make you quit being a critic?

— None.

None?

— None. I mean, I was clear, when I decided to become a television critic, that I wasn't going to do any television programs, and that's how it's been. There have been times when I've said no.

You once did a collaboration on theIt's happeningIt seems so to me. But have you had the opportunity to do a show and you said no? Do you think that's a decision you'll stick to until you retire?

— I think so. I have a job that, so to speak, I can do in my pajamas.

Would you like to retire as a television critic?

— Yes of course.

I'm raising the offer. Director of TV3.

— Even less. Even less.

Or has this already happened?

— No, no, it hasn't happened. I've already told you that being a TV critic doesn't make you any friends, much less enough to get you a job offer. Look, I've never seen criticism as a stepping stone to something else. Never. Besides, I really enjoy what I do.

That feeling that's in the air, that we used to notice here among the audience that accompanies us, that TV3 was better before... Do you agree with this statement?

— Memories are always better than what we saw. And there's always been crap everywhere, in every era. We can't fool ourselves about that. But I do think that at times there's been better entertainment than what's on TV3 now. It's mainly related to this obsession with attracting a young audience. I understand they want to attract a young audience, which I'm not sure they're fully succeeding at, but they're certainly driving away a lot of people who were there waiting for something interesting that never came. And this idea of what young people supposedly want... Well, they're young, but they're not idiots. The young people I know and interact with...

You have one at home, let's say.

— I have a house and I have one at the university. They don't feel represented by this kind of idea of what a young audience is. When I ask very young people, teenagers, what they watch on TV3 and what they like, they love it. CrimesIt's a show not aimed at young people, but everyone watches it. Beyond what I might think of the true crimesThat would be another topic altogether, but it's a well-made program. It's well-crafted, with a very clear idea of what they want to achieve. There's potential for well-made entertainment that can also appeal to a wider audience. I get the feeling they make series about young people where everyone has a lot of sex, takes their shirts off a lot, and very erotic things happen, all to piss off kids who, since they were 10, have been watching absolutely terrible porn on social media. This obsession with a young audience has infantilized their content. Or take the justification of 3Cat, with a huge amount of content that has arrived all at once with a criterion I don't quite understand, nor do I understand who it's aimed at. And, furthermore, in many cases I don't see the cost of these programs as justified by what the viewer actually sees.

But 3Cat, the platform, is a success, isn't it?

— I don't have much faith in 3Cat. I mean, with the data they provide, I just don't believe it. I don't get the feeling there's complete transparency with 3Cat's data. I understand that a single click at a specific moment is different from someone actually binge-watching eight entire episodes of a particular series, for example.

And do you think La 2 Cat is competition for TV3?

— No, for now it's like a strange channel, like a staged version of a channel that isn't quite a channel, because it only works intermittently, and sometimes it stops broadcasting in Catalan. Practically the entire channel has the budget of what would be a good television program. And then it's so underfunded that I don't know what kind of image it ends up projecting of what a Catalan-language channel should be. For now, beyond a few specific programs that are interesting and well done, I don't see it as competition for TV3.

Monica, we're finished. What would you say about television to the audience that's come to listen to us?

— They can turn it off. I sometimes get the feeling they forget that: people can turn it off. And then, television is never innocent. In the most absurd entertainment, there's always a message and there's always some idea they want to get across.