Marta Nebot denounces in 'Malas Lenguas' the climate of tension in Ceuta caused by hate speech: "Spain was not this"

“Spain was not this. Ceuta was not this”. With these words, Marta Nebot summarized in Malas Lenguas her concern about the climate that, according to her analysis, has settled in Ceuta around the migratory situation. The journalist intervened in the RTVE talk show to denounce that the episodes of violence known in recent days would be, in her opinion, “the most visible face of something much broader”.

Nebot gave several examples to explain her position. “It's not that certain peaks of violence are escaping at certain moments, no; it's that people who go to help are being attacked,” she stated. In this sense, she recounted situations that, as she explained live, would be affecting people linked to humanitarian organizations, from Red Cross coupon sellers to volunteers who go to the beaches to distribute food.

The journalist also directed her criticism towards certain political messages related to immigration. In her opinion, “frustration is being sown in people who have been told that everyone is going to leave here,” despite the fact that, as she argued, those who hold that discourse know the existing legal limitations. Nebot gave as an example the reception of migrant minors and mentioned the figure of 33 minors transferred from Ceuta to communities governed by PP and Vox since August 1.

Her intervention was especially forceful when referring to the discourse of some parties. “What is that about saying that these people don't come to look for work, that they come to confront the police?” she asked, before also questioning Vox's statements in which, according to her words, the term “hunt them” would have been used. For Nebot, this type of message contributes to fueling “the frustration of the people of Ceuta, the bad temper and the violence”.

The exchange with David Álvaro

The conversation changed perspective when David Álvaro brought up the economic impact of the situation. The talk show participant pointed out that Ceuta's businessmen would be suffering significant losses and argued that the conflict has more components than hate speech or disinformation.

Nebot responded by raising a question: “And does that not have to do with the fact that there are people really having a bad time who are on those streets?” The intervention of Esther Palomera also raised the tension of the exchange by asking Álvaro if one should think first “about business profits than about human rights”.

The panelist rejected that interpretation and clarified that he was not posing that dilemma. Álvaro defended that there is a broader social problem and that, in addition to hate speech and disinformation, there are other elements that must be taken into account. At that point, he mentioned the aggressions registered in recent weeks and maintained that there is a “social powder keg” in which, according to his assessment, the victims are both immigrants and citizens of Ceuta.

The debate ended up putting two different approaches to the situation on the table: that of Nebot, focused on the effect she attributes to certain discourses on coexistence and the migrant population, and that of Álvaro, who called for broadening the view towards the economic, social and political consequences of a crisis that continues to generate tension in Ceuta.