To publish or not to publish, that is the question

The subscriber Joan Talarn sends me a complaint about the conference Green energies: yes, but not in my town, co-organized by the newspaper and the IEC, and covered in a chronicle by Pol Casaponsa published last the 5th, the day I receive the reader's email, which I reproduce: “I thought it was a title to attract an audience and promote debate, because I couldn't believe that ARA would promote anti-renewables. To my surprise and that of some attendees, we found a table of retardist speakers who say “not like this”, but who don't know how to do the math to explain “how”. Luckily, some attendees expressed diverse opinions, because otherwise we would have been very disappointed. Please, have another talk with different points of view to correct this very biased talk”.I take note of the criticism and forward it to the management, which nevertheless specifies that “it is doubtful that the speakers invited by the newspaper should all be considered latecomers” and that the speaker Joan Nogué, a professor at the University of Girona, was simply advocating for a gradual approach: “One should start with urbanized areas, such as industrial estates, reservoirs, or roads”. The majority of comments addressed to me by readers follow this pattern, which, moreover, is the norm in the task of journalistic ombudsmen: a criticism and a request for correction or improvement, suggestions, a comparison with the corresponding section, and possibly an expert commentary from outside the newspaper. In the case of subscriber Talarn, the conventional dynamic is further refined because it appeals precisely to comparison, which is normative in all professional ethics. But I also detect a change in trend. In my two years as Reader's Advocate, I have received quite a few critical comments about the newspaper for having published certain articles. These complaints, added to the comments at the foot of the article, have been exponentially boosted around the publication of Elena García's article on Noelia Castillo's euthanasia. I dealt with this in my chronicle of April 12, titled "Euthanasia, journalism, tolerance". Following this piece, I have received criticism again, which now includes me for having defended its publication. Elena García's article on Noelia Castillo's euthanasia. I dealt with this in my chronicle of April 12, titled "Euthanasia, journalism, tolerance". Following this piece, I have received criticism again, which now includes me for having defended its publication. about the euthanasia of Noelia Castillo. I dealt with it in We live in a world where intolerance has gone viral; you only have to take a stroll through social media, to see day in and day out that society is becoming judgmental, the presumption of innocence has been reduced to ashes, politics lives in the courts and Parliaments in investigatory commissions and summary control sessions. Intolerance is neither created nor destroyed, it transforms, if you allow me to parody Einstein's reformulation of an old physical principle; religious sin has mutated into civil sin, and the spread of the far right urbi et orbi – as evident from last Sunday's ARA poll— is a breeding ground that favors and spreads it environmentally.In this extension, we find intolerances based on the usual reactionary principles – in the case of euthanasia, those vaunted by Abogados Cristianos – and in general the far-right, easily detectable; others that nevertheless express themselves from the progressive side, captured in the unwritten code of the politically correct; and, finally, the contradiction in terminis where defenders of progressive principles, on the other hand, invoke reactionary practices to limit the open expression of opposing positions. A social conquest, however advanced and legitimate it may be, must be open to criticism, and the medium that decides not to publish a criticism will have to resolve whether the non-publication is in accordance with the law or is censorship. Always following the maximalist guarantor principle in dubio pro reo, it is necessary to publish if the argumentative battery for non-publication presents doubts, and removing from the equation that the media have the right to choose whether or not to publish an article or even an advertisement, which is a commercial transaction, which they have not requested.Fortunately, however, the deployment of restrictions on freedom of expression in the journalistic field admits a protective umbrella which is the concept of veracity, which can prevail over other assumptions, and which is set out in Article 20 of the Constitution. Some of the drafters of the Constitution were very sensitive to this issue, because Francoism had eroded, persecuted, and repressed freedom of expression. Jordi Solé Tura, one of those "fathers of the Constitution", an excellent jurist expert in constitutional law, in addition to his knowledge, knew from personal experience what it was like to defy censorship from exile and the clandestinity of Radio Espanya Independent, the famous Radio Pirenaica. I am in this situation, I produced clandestine press very intensely, I dealt as best I could with the risks it entailed and, following Voltaire, Griffith, Todorov... I cherish the right to speak, even if I do not like it or detest it in substance or form. Being the Defender of the Reader a personal institution, I can conjugate this delicate subject in the first person, and I understand that the most honest way I have to exercise this function is by defending freedom of expression at its widest wavelength, even that of readers who will not agree with this article.Subscribers who wish to know my work live are invited next May 13, at half past four, in the Sala de les Sirenes of the Hotel Espanya on La Rambla. The Reader's Advocate takes note of doubts, suggestions, criticisms, and complaints about the newspaper's content in its digital and paper editions, and ensures that the treatment of information is in accordance with the deontological codes.To contact the Reader's Advocate you can send an email to eldefensor@ara.cat or record a message of no more than one minute to the WhatsApp number 653784787. In all cases, identification with name, surnames and DNI number is required.