Moncloa endorses Interior dossier that classified journalists by their political position
The Spanish government has approved a secret dossier compiled by the Ministry of Interior that classifies dozens of journalists based on their political positions. The document includes figures such as El Confidencial’s editor, Nacho Cardero, and ten other journalists from the same outlet. This classification has led to condemnation from the Federation of Associations of Spanish Press (FAPE), which considers it contrary to the rule of law. The government defended the dossier as an internal communication tool used to understand journalists’ work and political stances, but critics argue it undermines press freedom. The Ministry of the Interior claims the dossier was never used for any action, while opposition voices, including PSOE spokesperson Patxi López, criticize the practice of categorizing individuals based on ideology.
The Spanish government has approved a secret dossier compiled by the Ministry of Interior that classifies dozens of journalists based on their political positions. The document, which includes photographs and commentary on the ideological leanings of media professionals, was revealed by El Confidencial and has sparked widespread condemnation from press associations. Among those listed is Nacho Cardero, editor-in-chief of El Confidencial, along with ten other journalists from the publication. The approval came during a meeting of the Council of Ministers, where the presidency endorsed the internal document prepared by the Ministry of Interior. According to the ministry’s explanation, the dossier was created in 2024 as part of an effort to better understand the work of journalists who frequently appear on television programs. It includes assessments of their political alignment, such as whether they "support" or are "critical" of the government. However, the document does not include any official sanctions or disciplinary actions against the journalists mentioned. Minister of the Interior Fernando Grande-Marlaska described the dossier as an "internal working document" aimed at improving communication efficiency. He emphasized that its purpose was solely informational and had no "spurious intent." In response to questions raised by opposition parties, he reiterated that the government respects freedom of the press and that the dossier was never used for any punitive measures. The president's spokesperson, Elma Saiz, defended the decision, stating that the government "deeply respects the work of the media" and "acts accordingly every day." She dismissed concerns over the classification of journalists, asserting that the goal was not to "point fingers," "censor," or "limit" journalistic freedom. She also noted that the government does not engage in practices such as "entering with a flamethrower" into public broadcasting institutions. Despite these assurances, the document has drawn sharp criticism from the Socialist Party (PSOE). Its parliamentary spokesperson, Patxi López, called the practice of compiling such a list an "absolute disgrace" and warned against categorizing individuals based on their beliefs, ideology, race, or any other factor. He urged the Ministry of Interior to provide further clarification, expressing concern that the dossier could set a dangerous precedent. The Federation of Associations of Press in Spain (FAPE) and the Association of Parliamentary Journalists (APP) have condemned the document, demanding an immediate halt to similar practices. They argue that the creation of such a list violates the principles of free speech and democratic values. Meanwhile, the Popular Party (PP) has also criticized the move, accusing the ministry of engaging in tactics reminiscent of past authoritarian regimes. According to reports, the dossier, titled Tertulianos: Radio and Television, was compiled by the Interior Ministry’s Office of Communication. It contains detailed profiles of journalists, including their affiliations with political parties and their stances on specific issues, such as the amnesty law or views on independence movements. Some entries describe journalists as "pro-government," "aligned with right-wing positions," or "critical of the amnesty." The dossier was reportedly kept within the Interior Ministry’s communications office and was not shared with senior officials or politicians. Officials denied using police data in its compilation and insisted that the document remained strictly internal. However, there is still uncertainty regarding whether other ministries have engaged in similar activities. As the controversy continues, the debate over the ethical boundaries of governmental oversight of the media remains unresolved. While the government maintains that the dossier serves only an administrative function, critics argue that its very existence raises serious concerns about the independence of the press and the potential for abuse.
Go to the primary sources (2)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
The Spanish government has approved a secret dossier compiled by the Ministry of Interior that classifies dozens of journalists based on their political positions. The document includes figures such as El Confidencial’s editor, Nacho Cardero, and ten other journalists from the same outlet. This classification has led to condemnation from the Federation of Associations of Spanish Press (FAPE), which considers it contrary to the rule of law. The government defended the dossier as an internal communication tool used to understand journalists’ work and political stances, but critics argue it undermines press freedom. The Ministry of the Interior claims the dossier was never used for any action, while opposition voices, including PSOE spokesperson Patxi López, criticize the practice of categorizing individuals based on ideology.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the government's approval of the dossier as a legitimate internal administrative measure, emphasizing the ministry's commitment to press freedom and dismissing concerns as unfounded. The language used to describe the dossier, such as calling it a 'document of work' and highlighting
Why factuality (85): This article confirms the existence of the document and states that it was approved by the Presidency. It provides specific examples of journalists listed and includes quotes from officials like Elma Saiz. It aligns closely with the cross-source consensus regarding the nature and content of the docu
Why objectivity (70): The article has a more critical tone towards the government’s actions, using phrases like 'normaliza el dosier secreto' and highlighting the condemnation from FAPE. While it presents facts, it frames the issue in a way that suggests potential bias against the government.
The Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE) has strongly criticized the Ministry of the Interior for compiling a dossier containing information on journalists, including their photographs, political affiliations, and ideological leanings. This document was revealed by El Confidencial and has been condemned by professional journalism associations, who demand an immediate halt to such practices. PSOE leaders described the dossier as an 'authentic barbarity' and called for explanations from the ministry. The Ministry defended the document as an internal informational tool used to engage with all media outlets equally. Meanwhile, the Popular Party (PP) also criticized the practice, accusing the minister of focusing on labeling journalists rather than addressing more pressing issues like migration.
Bias read (Center): The article presents multiple perspectives without overtly favoring any side. It includes criticism from both the PSOE and PP parties, along with reactions from professional journalism organizations. The language remains neutral, and there is no clear indication of biased sourcing or framing.
Why factuality (80): The article accurately reports the PSOE’s strong criticism of the document, citing specific concerns and quotes from party leaders. It also mentions the reactions from professional associations, aligning with the cross-source consensus on the controversy and the perceived political classification of
Why objectivity (75): While reporting the PSOE’s position, the article uses emotionally charged language such as 'auténtica barbaridad' and emphasizes the party’s stance, which may reflect a slight editorial bias. It presents the criticism but does not balance it with equal emphasis on the government’s defense.
The Spanish Ministry of the Interior has acknowledged the existence of a list of journalists that classifies them by ideology and alignment with the government, but described it as an 'internal informational document' with no 'spurious purpose'. The list, titled 'Tertulianos', was created in 2024 and includes opinions on topics unrelated to the ministry’s activities, such as views on the amnesty law, support for Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, and stances toward independence movements. Journalist Alejandro Requeijo, who investigated the issue, criticized the list's existence, calling it concerning. The ministry emphasized that it treats all media equitably and respects press freedom, while the spokesperson, Elma Saiz, reiterated the government's commitment to press freedom and dismissed claims of censorship.
Bias read (Center): While the subject involves potential ideological classification of journalists, a politically sensitive issue, the article presents balanced perspectives from both the ministry and critics. The framing does not clearly favor one side over another, though the controversy itself suggests a high level of
Why factuality (75): The article reports that the Ministry of Interior acknowledged the existence of a list of journalists but clarified it was an internal informational document. It aligns with the cross-source consensus that the document was created internally by the ministry and used for communication purposes. Howev
Why objectivity (80): The tone remains neutral, presenting both the ministry’s explanation and the controversy surrounding the document. The article avoids taking sides and presents multiple perspectives, including the government’s response and the criticism from media organizations.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
%3Aformat(jpg)%3Aquality(99)%2Ff.elconfidencial.com%2Foriginal%2Fbad%2F262%2Fb1b%2Fbad262b1bc92a494c2c17ea85e58015b.jpg&w=3840&q=75&output=webp&we)
Spain
