Jordi Wild ahead of the 29N: when his interviews come out and what he thinks of left and right

In Spain, there is no single “official procedure” for verifying data in political interviews, but rather fairly standardized professional practices among serious media outlets. Verification combines three levels: prior preparation, real-time cross-checking during the interview, and post-interview verification for complementary pieces or corrections.

1. Preparation before the interview

Before a political interview, newsrooms usually conduct intensive documentation work to anticipate the topics that will arise and possible doubtful data:

• Review of archives and previous statements: previous interviews, press releases, parliamentary interventions, and social media of the politician or their party are consulted to detect contradictions or changes in position that should be questioned or clarified.
• Consultation of official sources: statistics from the INE, Bank of Spain, ministries, budgets, official bulletins, or reports from regulatory bodies are used to have “reference data” on economy, employment, health, education, etc.
• Cross-checking with specialized reports: on complex topics (energy, pensions, taxation), studies from think tanks, universities, international organizations, or NGOs are reviewed to understand how the same data is interpreted from different perspectives.
• Script of follow-up questions: based on this, the team prepares sheets with key figures and possible corrective follow-up questions (“that unemployment rate is from such year, the current one is different,” “that data includes/excludes X…”), which the interviewer can use live.

2. Verification during the interview

During the interview itself, the ability to verify in real time depends on the format (radio, television, live digital) and the program’s resources:

• Informed interviewer: the first filter is that the journalist carries the “cheat sheet” with prepared data. When the politician gives an inaccurate figure, they can correct or clarify it immediately (“the latest data says…”).
• Parallel verification team: in some programs, editors are connected to databases and official sources while broadcasting; if they detect objectively false or outdated data, they pass the correction to the presenter to mention live or at the end of the segment.
• Distinction between fact and opinion: the journalist usually marks the difference between verifiable facts (rates, dates, amounts, approved regulations) and political assessments, which are not “verified” in the same sense but are contrasted with other arguments or viewpoints.
• Practical limits: in very dynamic interviews, not everything is corrected immediately. Often it is noted that “that data does not match official records” and it is announced that it will be clarified later.

3. Post-interview fact-checking

After the broadcast, many media outlets prepare specific verification pieces on the most relevant statements from the interview:

• Selection of verifiable statements: phrases with verifiable content (figures, temporal comparisons, attribution of decisions to other parties, scope of a law, etc.) are identified.
• Systematic source search: official documents, statistics, parliamentary session records, and regulations are consulted to validate each statement. Usually more than one independent source is used.
• Labeling of results: each phrase receives a rating (“true,” “misleading,” “incomplete,” “false,” depending on the media), accompanied by a detailed explanation and links to sources.
• Corrections and updates: if a manifestly erroneous statement remained uncorrected in the interview, some media publish a clarifying note or include the correction in subsequent programs.

4. Ethical frameworks and legal limits

Although there is no specific law on verification in interviews, there are frameworks that influence it:

• Journalistic codes of ethics (FAPE, professional associations) that require cross-checking information, differentiating facts from opinions, and diligently correcting errors.
• Editorial responsibility: media can be criticized or even sued if they disseminate harmful false data without any reasonable attempt at verification, especially in matters of honor or reputation.
• Electoral periods: during campaigns, the Electoral Board can intervene regarding fairness and informational neutrality of public media, although it does not delve into each data point but rather the overall balance.

5. Recent trends

In recent years, specialized fact-checking units have grown (both within media and independent platforms) that analyze debates and political interviews in detail. They publish verifications with explicit methodology, cited sources, and transparent criteria; their work complements but does not replace the basic responsibility of each newsroom to prepare interviews well and correct erroneous information when detected.

The President of the Government is the highest authority of the executive power in Spain and occupies a central position in the constitutional system designed by the 1978 Constitution. His competencies and functions are mainly dispersed in articles 92, 97, 98, 99, and 100 of the Constitution, as well as derived from other provisions and the laws that develop it.

Firstly, the President of the Government is the head of the executive power. Article 97 establishes that the Government directs domestic and foreign policy, the civil and military administration, and the defense of the State, and that it exercises executive functions and regulatory authority. Within this collegiate body, the president is the one who directs the Government's action and coordinates the functions of the other members, being ultimately responsible for the general political orientation.

Linked to this leadership, an essential competence is to set the guidelines of general policy and ensure their compliance. The president defines the major lines of government action, arbitrates among ministers when there are conflicts of competencies or criteria, and guarantees unity of action in areas as relevant as the economy, social policy, foreign policy, or security and defense.

Another key function is his role in the relationship with the King and the Cortes Generales. The President of the Government is the main political interlocutor of the King: he proposes the appointment and dismissal of ministers (according to article 100, the other members of the Government are appointed and removed by the King at the president's proposal), informs him of State matters, and endorses many of his acts in governmental matters. At the same time, he is politically accountable before the Congress of Deputies, which can demand his responsibility through a motion of censure (article 113) or deny him confidence in a vote of confidence (article 112).

Regarding the formation of the Government, the president is the result of a specific constitutional procedure. Article 99 establishes that, after each renewal of the Congress (and in other cases), the King proposes a candidate for the Presidency of the Government, who must obtain the confidence of the Congress through an investiture vote. Once elected, the president has the power to configure his team: he proposes the number, denomination, and basic structure of ministries and proposes the appointment and dismissal of all ministers.

The president also has the important competence to dissolve the Cortes Generales or one of its Chambers and call elections, through a decree formally issued by the King but always at the president's proposal and under his responsibility. This power is subject to certain temporal and material limits set by the Constitution itself but constitutes a politically significant instrument to unblock parliamentary deadlocks or reorient majorities.

In the normative field, the President of the Government participates in exercising the Government's regulatory authority and has legislative initiative, since the Government can present bills before the Cortes Generales. Although the initiative belongs to the Government as a collegiate body, it is the president who drives, decides, and coordinates major legislative reforms and the presentation of certain initiatives. Additionally, the Government can issue royal decree-laws in cases of extraordinary and urgent need, and the president usually assumes a central role in deciding to resort to this instrument.

Regarding foreign policy and defense, the President of the Government is the highest responsible for directing international policy and coordinating the external action of all ministerial departments. Likewise, he assumes the political direction of national defense, within the framework established by the Constitution and laws, and in coordination with the Armed Forces, whose supreme command corresponds to the King, but whose political orientation comes from the Government.

From the point of view of political and legal responsibility, the president answers to the Congress for the Government's direction and can be subject to a constructive motion of censure, which only succeeds if a new president is simultaneously elected. At the criminal level, the Constitution provides a specific liability regime for the president and other Government members for treason or crimes against State security in the exercise of their functions, with a reinforced procedure involving the Congress and the Supreme Court.

In summary, the President of the Government concentrates functions of political leadership, internal coordination of the Executive, institutional representation before the King, the Cortes, other State powers, and abroad, as well as decisive competencies in cabinet configuration, relations with Parliament, and the use of normative instruments. All this makes the figure of the president the true political center of the parliamentary system designed by the Spanish Constitution.

The last general elections held in Spain were on July 23, 2023. In the Congress of Deputies, the PP came first, with 137 seats, followed by the PSOE with 121; Vox obtained 33 and Sumar 31. No candidacy reached the 176 deputies needed for an absolute majority on its own. (Official results of 23J).

The four main results

The following summary refers to the Congress, not the Senate. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place to facilitate reading and avoid minor differences between result publications.

• People's Party: 137 deputies and around 33.1% of the votes. It was the most voted candidacy and the one with the most representation. Its advantage over the PSOE was 16 seats, although it was 39 short of an absolute majority. (Official results of 23J).
• PSOE: 121 deputies and approximately 31.7%. It occupied second place both in votes and seats. The percentage difference with the PP was about 1.4 points, while its distance to the absolute majority was 55 deputies. (Official results of 23J).
• Vox: 33 deputies and approximately 12.4%. It was the third candidacy in votes and parliamentary representation. It obtained two more deputies than Sumar, despite both candidacies registering very close vote percentages. (Official results of 23J).
• Sumar: 31 deputies and approximately 12.3%. It came in fourth place. Podemos ran integrated within this candidacy, so it is not appropriate to attribute a separate electoral result to it in those elections. (Demócrata reference).

Other candidacies with representation

Besides the four above, seven other candidacies obtained deputies. Their representation completed the 350 seats of the Congress:

• ERC: 7 deputies, with around 1.9% of the national votes. (Official results).
• Junts per Catalunya: 7 deputies and approximately 1.6%. (Official results).
• EH Bildu: 6 deputies and close to 1.4%. (Official results).
• PNV: 5 deputies and approximately 1.1%. (Official results).
• BNG: 1 deputy and around 0.6%. (Official results).
• Canary Coalition: 1 deputy and close to 0.5%. (Official results).
• UPN: 1 deputy and approximately 0.2%. (Official results).

What the seat distribution meant

The main numerical conclusion is that winning the elections did not mean obtaining a sufficient majority alone. The PP was first, but its 137 deputies did not reach 176. Neither did the sum of PP and Vox: together they gathered 170 seats, six less than that threshold. (23J balance at Demócrata).

On the other hand, PSOE and Sumar added 152 deputies, 24 below the absolute majority. The other seven candidacies jointly gathered 28 seats. Thus, the result left a Congress in which neither of those two sums reached 176 representatives on their own. These figures describe the original electoral distribution, not subsequent changes in the composition of parliamentary groups. (Official results of 23J).