The Tanganization of Political Journalism

Parliamentary commissions of inquiry are a strange ritual, where not much is actually investigated, but rather the appearances are used to try to create media moments, preferably shareable on social media. That is why subsequent reports are rarely titled based on the truths revealed in these pompous but sterile interrogations: what is highlighted is who has won the rhetorical battle, expressed in terms more of a brawl than a dialectical debate. Several headlines from media outlets aligned with the PP, by way of example: "The PP: Feijóo 'has crushed them without ceasing to be himself'" (The reason), "Feijóo exposes Sánchez in the DANA commission" (OK Daily), "The PSOE and its partners end up asking for the time during Feijóo's appearance before the DANA commission" (The Debate). The agricultural sector clearly dominates and there is no information: only the slogan that Feijóo is very handsome. As expected, on the other side of the spectrum things look very different. Some examples: "Feijóo's seven lies in the commission of inquiry into the DANA storm in Congress" (Eldiario.es), "Lies, accusations without evidence and evasions by Feijóo in the DANA commission" (Public), "The anger of the president of the DANA commission with Feijóo for talking about ETA to avoid the questions" (The Sixth).

Just as in a basketball game everyone claims fouls were intentional and complains that the referees don't let them play when they call fouls on their own team, here too we find ourselves in the arena of factions and entrenched positions. I suppose there's no need to dwell on the futility of this argument: no one will be convinced otherwise. We complain about how social media is an echo chamber, but the media should also rid itself of this form of sectarianism. light Which is the inability to acknowledge the merits of those who are distant or hostile. Or the faults of those who are close, of course.