Journalism playing with fire: the role of certain media outlets in the violence against Vox

Just as in France, Spain has a real problem when it comes to far-left violence.

Violencia de ultraizquierda en La Coruña con el fin de impedir a Vox expresarse libremente
Far-left activists throw punches and stones at Police in La Coruña: twelve police officers injured

This week we have seen, once again, the lengths to which such violence can go: a violent act of harassment against a democratic political party in La Coruña, which resulted in stones being thrown, punches being thrown, and twelve police officers injured. This was not a street brawl. It was not an altercation where it would be difficult to determine who was at fault. The far-left went to La Coruña to attack members of Vox and the police, yet some media outlets pretend to ignore what we have all had the opportunity to see.

To be fair, there are media outlets that have done their job—which consists of telling the truth, rather than hiding or disguising it. ABC ran the headline: "Left-wing radicals attempt to disrupt Abascal’s rally in A Coruña." This is exactly what happened, and the text clearly identifies the aggressors. Libertad Digital noted: "Police charge against BNG youth members who threw cobblestones and firecrackers at a Vox event in La Coruña." The report confirms the presence of the youth wing of that far-left party at a counter-protest that ended with attacks on the police. Vozpópuli reported: "The radical left tests the waters for the November 11th general strike by stoking unrest on the streets of La Coruña." The headline refers to the serious disturbances incited by the far left on the streets of that city, which continued into the night.

However, there are media outlets for which the far left is like an invisible man—someone who carries out actions without them being able to identify who is responsible for those acts. Let’s look at a few examples:

• Efe: "Tension and police charges, with two arrests, at a Santiago Abascal event in A Coruña." This news agency—controlled by Pedro Sánchez’s government—fails to identify the perpetrators of the violence in a misleading headline that implies the entire situation stemmed from Abascal’s event. It is a clear example of a lack of professional ethics—a crude form of manipulation designed to deceive the audience and conceal the far-left ideological affiliation of the aggressors.
• La Sexta: "Tension, disturbances, and police charges at an Abascal event in A Coruña." Another example of manipulation that employs the same deceptive tactics as the Efe agency: obscuring the fact that the violence was instigated by the far-left, while effectively pinning it on Vox—the very party being targeted by those violent individuals.
• Eldiario.es: "Police charges in A Coruña following a Vox event in the Plaza de María Pita". This left-leaning digital newspaper—run by Ignacio Escolar and aligned with the Sánchez government—omits who triggered the police charges and instead attributes the violence to Vox, much like Efe and La Sexta have done.
• El País: "An event featuring Abascal in A Coruña ends with police charges and injured 'antifascist' youths". This socialist-leaning newspaper has produced one of the most manipulative headlines regarding these altercations: it creates the impression that Abascal’s event was responsible for the police charges and that the "antifascist youths" were victims—when, in reality, it was the far-left extremists who were the aggressors.
• El Mundo: "Unrest and police charges in A Coruña against protesters demonstrating at a Santiago Abascal event". This newspaper, which is very popular among those on the political right, omits the fact that these "protesters" were far-left extremists who attacked the police—an act of aggression that triggered the police charges.
• La Voz de Galicia: "Street violence in A Coruña following a Vox event casts a shadow over the race to the polls". This La Coruña-based newspaper fails to mention that the perpetrators of this violence were far-left extremists, and its headline attributes the violence to Vox—implying that it stemmed from an event held by that party.

The manipulations we have just seen are not an isolated occurrence; they are repeated in every attack by the far-left against Vox. They seek to create the impression among the audience that Vox—a party that is, in fact, a target of such violence—is actually responsible for it, while simultaneously obscuring the far-left militancy of the perpetrators —as if it were somehow unidentifiable, despite being a matter of public, well-known fact. Would we see headlines like these if the perpetrators had been far-right extremists? In such a case, would these same media outlets display that peculiar inability to identify the ideology of the aggressors?

This lack of journalistic ethics is akin to playing with fire. Such manipulations serve to whitewash far-left violence and demonize its victims—simply because the victims’ ideology does not align with the editorial stance of these media outlets. What will happen if, one day, those left-wing extremists attack these media outlets or their journalists? Let us recall—in case anyone has forgotten—that a year ago, left-wing extremists linked to those who were present in La Coruña brutally beat a journalist from El Español in Pamplona. Many media outlets did not even report on this assault, demonstrating a curious sense of professional solidarity.

In a democratic society, violence for political ends must always be rejected, regardless of its source or the political or ideological pretext that those who use violence might invoke to justify their actions. Whenever certain media outlets downplay or cover up far-left violence, as seen this week in the violent act of harassment directed at the party Vox in La Coruña, they are undermining our democracy and aiding those who resort to violence. Such behavior is highly objectionable and deserves the most unequivocal condemnation, regardless of any veneer of respectability that these media outlets may attempt to project.