The leaders of the trench media and the grass at the feet

The UCO IS LIKE those handbags without compartments, which always when you stick your hand in up to your elbow, something unexpected comes out. Only that instead of a pack of tissues, a matchbox from a pretentious hotel or an umbrella cover (but not the umbrella), out comes a small file, some unpublished documents, or a piece of research that hadn't emerged until now. One factor unites all these sudden appearances: they arrive at the precise moment to tip the scales of public opinion. The new UCO report has generated headlines such as “The UCO confirms that Begoña Gómez used Complutense software for commercial purposes and manipulated contracts (“El Debate)” or “The UCO detects 'premeditated awards' or 'without complying with regulations' in the UCAM software for Begoña Gómez (“El Español)”. But also “The UCO concludes that Begoña Gómez's chair was created in accordance with the norm (“La Vanguardia)” or “The UCO finds no opaque income for Begoña Gómez in its latest report on the case (“Eldiario.es)”. And so on for all of them: the trench media squeeze every leak to make it pass, with a hammer blow, through the hole of their editorial alliances.

The result, of course, is that the public that does not blindly adhere to a party's narrative comes to the conclusion that it is impossible to know if things are white, black, pink, or brown. And informational disconnection ensues. Some leave due to the overwhelming stimuli. But others do so simply out of weariness of hearing one thing and the opposite every day (seasoned with a barrage of insults from both sides if they get their information from social networks). The journalists who command these political battering rams know they are cutting grass at the roots. Four years ago, 60% of "media leaders" trusted the future of journalism. Now the figure has fallen to 38%. But they insist, insist, and insist.