Talk:El Mundo (Spain)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Spain Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Weasel Words 2 Last paragraph and NPOV 3 Neutrality of article 4 Is "El Mundo" a "conservative" or "right-wing" newspapr? 5 El Mundo Center Left? 6 Source needed 7 El Mundo del Siglo XX

[edit] Weasel Words

I think that there is a weasel word problem in the last paragraph, the criticisms of El Mundo's editorial position are not attributed beyond "the rest of the spanish media". I could believe that there is signicant level of criticism of El Mundo from the editorial positions of pro socialist "PRISA group" and "Vocento Group" as well as the govenment run RTVE. There is a long list of media publications with left wing sympathies, but it is certainly not "almost all the rest of the Spanish media".

Yep, you are right. I will try to fix it Randroide 09:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Well who else is left in the Spanish media? La Vanguardia (Catalan), ABC (conservative), El Pais (PRISA)... In the radio, all major radiostations critizice this position except for la COPE... I think the original statement was correct.--Burgas00 12:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I only know about criticism against the "black holes" in "El País", "ABC" and the "SER". AFAIK all the other media remains silent about the issue. If you know better than me, please provide links to criticisms.Randroide 12:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last paragraph and NPOV

Seems unproductive to redelete that last paragraph, so we might as well talk about it, and maybe others can join their voice here.

When it says that ElMundo supports "largely baseless conspiracy theories", it seems to me as though someone would be emitting an opinion. Also, it says largely, so some are true then? Also, they have not emitted theories but have contented themselves with investigating things which they deemed to be of more value disclosed than undisclosed. They have merely done their job of investigating the "sumario" and the particular happenings of the attack and they do find things like this: [1]http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2006/05/05/espana/1146854822.html

Also, "These theories consider that the Socialist Party (PSOE) ... were implicated in the bombings". Now that is a big claim to make. As far as I remember, they had found out that a member of the CNI, who is also a member of the PSOE went to visit one of the al qaeda terrorists some days after the attacks. They have never accused the party of being personaly involved in the attacks, just asked why this happened.

Also, the last phrase finishes like this: "It was later discovered that what was discovered was a CD of the popular music group "Orquesta Mondragon" in a pile of various CDs." Now, according to the newspaper on which this article is based, it does not seem to be so clear cut:

[2]http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2006/05/08/espana/1147083245.html

And since this encyclopedia is supposed to remain NPOV, the other side of the story should also be mentioned. I think the spanish version has made a good job to remain neutral.

--Haw81 00:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC) (re-edited)

Ok...You convinced me. My animosity against this trashy newspaper has defeated my neutrality. I cant help feeling hostile towards the extreme right. The "other side of the story" is a misinformation campaign and outright lies as is proved by the independent judicial enquiry. But then according to some people in the media, the judiciary in Spain is not independent... But Im not going to get into an argument over it.

As for the article of el mundo regarding the orquestra mondragon. I thought it was only necessary to prove a source for the lie itself, since the facts are not in dispute and were later revealed causing embarassement (or maybe not) to the director of El Mundo Newspaper Pedro J. Ramírez. Erase the NPOV parts, no problem from me.

--Burgas00 20:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I think El Mundo is a very good newspaper, in fact, I have to admit, it's my favourite spanish newspaper and that it's center right. But what you think or what I think doesn't really matter, and you agree with me that what matters is that wikipedia's article are neutral. I have to thank you for your honesty.

I don't think the answer is to erase the paragraph, just changing it will do and maybe you can help me do that. For the moment I'll just translate what they say on the spanish one. --Haw81 00:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I agree. We are so civilised.:-) Politicians in Spain should learn from us Wikipedians...--Burgas00 09:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

) Agreed, there's 2 things we agree on already ;)

--Haw81 16:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Burgas00 wrote:

I cant help feeling hostile towards the extreme right.

El Mundo is NOT "extreme right", as anyone simply taking a look at the online version can attest.

according to some people in the media, the judiciary in Spain is not independent

The judiciary in Spain is not independent according to former vice-president Alfonso Guerra (PSOE), who, in the late 1980´s, said Montesquieu ha muerto (Montesquieu is dead) [3]

As for the article of el mundo regarding the orquestra mondragon. I thought it was only necessary to prove a source for the lie itself, since the facts are not in dispute and were later revealed causing embarassement (or maybe not) to the director of El Mundo Newspaper Pedro J. Ramírez

Pedro J. Ramírez said that there were two different objects with the word "Mondragón" in the infamous Renault Kangoo:

• The "w:es:Orquesta Mondragón" compact audio cassette.
• The "Mondragón Corporación Cooperativa" (MCC) card. The MCC group has strong links with basque nationalism.

The alleged confussion of the "Orquesta Mondragón" tape with the "Mondragón Corporación Cooperativa" card is only a smoke screen created by the supporters of the Official Version.

The judiciary is not independent in the sense that some of the judges are left leaning and some are right leaning (as in every country in the world). Some of them, such as Judge Grande Marlaska who was only a temporary substitute in the basque country, have caused a lot of trouble to the government in recent times. Another "star" judge who we all know, Baltasar Garzón has caused trouble both to the PSOE and to the PP. I dont know what you mean with your "Montesquieu ha muerto" but any normal human being can tell that the judiciary in Spain is as independent (or even more so) than in the UK or any other Western European country.

As for what further slander and speculation from Pedro J Ramirez has offered to save face for his unproffessional behaviour regarding the Kangoo van, I dont really think that his explanation for everything (the institutions of Spain -police and judiciary are lying) is to be taken seriously.

Another untrue statement you have taken from your extreme right weblogs... Mondragon has links with ETA or Herri Batasuna? . And if they are linked to the PNV in some way (as are all companies in the basque country), so what?

--Burgas00 14:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

---

What I said: The MCC group has strong links with basque nationalism.

What Burgas00 said: Another untrue statement you have taken from your extreme right weblogs... Mondragon has links with ETA or Herri Batasuna? . And if they are linked to the PNV in some way (as are all companies in the basque country), so what?

Can you process in your brain that information, Burgas00?. I did not speak about MCC links to ETA ot Herri Batasuna, just to basque nationalism, i.e., the PNV.

so what?

Do you know about el árbol y las nueces?. Spanish policemen know, so they fell in the trap, and they said to their chiefs "It´s ETA".Randroide 14:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

In your imaginary world shouldnt Baltasar Garzón have been assasinated by now, Randroide?--Burgas00 18:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Read this, Burgas00. Randroide 19:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality of article

I'm wondering why the "neutrality put in question" label was put on this article. Every issues seem to have been solved. Haw81 12:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed, for now. See my edit summary (19:58, 11 October 2006) for details. Thanks. El_C 23:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is "El Mundo" a "conservative" or "right-wing" newspapr?

The answer is a thunderous NO!.

I hope that this recidivant unfounded assertion will be exorcized with this "El Mundo" article supporting gay marriage: [4] Randroide 11:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC).

Or see (if you are not prudish) this picture [5] CAUTION: Could be regarded as "shock link" by prudish individuals. I am not prudish and I see a beautiful woman with almost no clothes. Randroide 20:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'd say it usually is against the government that is currently in power. I remember they were pretty much against many Aznar policies, and now it's Zapatero's turn, and before them it was Gonzalez. So instead of conservative, I'd say anti-government, and leave it at that. Heh. :) I'd like to point out, though, that prominent Popular Party members do support same-sex marriage. Conservative doesn't necessarily equal Catholic. Besides, the article you provided does not support gay marriage, it is merely an interview with the first same-sex couple that got legally married. Cheers Raystorm 14:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] El Mundo Center Left?

You must be joking. El mundo is considered here in Spain as a conservative newspaper, close to the Partido Popular.

Vincent shooter 15:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Be bold, then, and change it to "Center-right."
_{``` W} i k i _W i s t a h _W a s s a p 19:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

It is considered "conservative" by the left wing in spain, but i agree, it def is not center left. It hovers around the center to the right wing, but not as right wing as Abc or Razon. Center-Center right? Haw81 12:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

HAW, EL Mundo is arguably more moderate than La Razon, and clearly less extreme and more respectable than ABC which is viewed by many observers as a Far-Right publication. However it's still a conservative newspaper, not a centrist one. El Mundo can be compared to Washington Times, El Pais to New York Times, and ABC to Pat Buchanan's works.

~Vincent Shooter 17:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Can't say that I agree vince, in Spain if you're left wing, you'll call the right wing person a conservatist, but many in those 'conservatists' feel they are centrists. Gallardon is one of them. Of course it depends on anyone's personal political position. But if ElMundo isnt centrist, then elpais is? Also, i'm not sure it's good to use a non spanish source to qualify a the political position of a spanish newspaper. Further, elmundo is in partnership with "liberation" from france which definitely is a left wing newspaper, much more leftwing than the french "lemonde" to which elpais is in partnership... Haw81 13:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I added the non-Spanish source regarding El Mundo's leanings, after Randroide edited the category out with the comment, "no source, no political." (Incidentally, I seem to have touched off this row by inserting the "center-left" definition in the first place. It was by accident -- I had copied the infobox from the El Pais article and forgot to overwrite that portion of it) I disagree that we should avoid foreign sources; this is, after all, a non-Spanish Wikipedia, and the U.S./U.K./Canadian/Australian/Etc. readers of this Wiki are probably more in tune with the International Herald Tribune's definition of "conservative" than an internal Spanish source's definition. Also, I don't think Vincent shooter was trying to suggest that El Pais is centrist -- the comparison with The New York Times would seem to rule that out (or maybe that's just my bias ...). _{``` W} i k i _W i s t a h _W a s s a p 22:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: Our article on Pedro J. Ramirez points to this biography, which, in describing his newspaper's politics, says:

"In spite of the fact that his newspaper has been a great media support for the politics of the government during the conservative period, But J. Ramirez opposed to the war of Iraq and to the support of Aznar to Bush's administration, in one of the editorials. Nevertheless this has not supposed at all a deterioration of the relation between El Mundo and the Conservative Party."

... which by my reading means the paper's a muckraker, doesn't march in lockstep with Aznar/PP, but is generally conservative and recognized as such by Spain's conservative politicians. _{``` W} i k i _W i s t a h _W a s s a p 22:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source needed

...for this line:

...relating to the investigations, alleging, for example, that the PSOE party, in league with ETA, was behind the attacks

No source, no line. Simple.

Your edit removing the "newspaper of record" line was A GOOD edit just for the same reason. Thank you.

Randroide (talk) 09:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Disagree with the "newspaper of record" removal. Circulation alone suffices for this newspaper to be included in this category, in a similar fashion as in the El País article, which is another deservedly newspaper record in Spain. Obviously, both are newspaper of record in Spain and asking for references to prove that would be kinda evil, given their circulation numbers and prominent position suffices; besides, any reference brought would be labelled as POVish, opening yet another futile debate. Mountolive _{all over Battersea, some hope and some dispair} 12:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] El Mundo del Siglo XX

07:10, 10 January 2008 Mountolive (Talk | contribs) m (4,477 bytes) (restoring wikilink removed: it is a newspaper of record by a number of criteria, circulation alone suffices; removing some, IMHO, not notable remarks about full name)

Not the most important thing to know about El Mundo, but it's both true and verifiable, and it's not like Wikipedia is running out of space. Point is: the newspaper was formerly known by a different name, and no matter how subtle the change has been, I -- IMHO -- think it's worth noting. And if someone knows, it would be nice to note on exactly what date the name changed. I'll bow to consensus, though. _{``` W</sub> i k i <sub>W</sub> i s t a h <sub>```} 01:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)