The director of the 'FAQS' justifies that Dalmases was not reported for harassing a journalist: "There was fear"

The inappropriate behavior of Junts deputy Francesc de Dalmases with a TV3 journalist at the end of the broadcast of an interview with Laura Borràs on July 9 on the FAQS program was an isolated event, according to the channel's management.

Thomas Osborne
Thomas Osborne
19 September 2022 Monday 12:03
14 Reads
The director of the 'FAQS' justifies that Dalmases was not reported for harassing a journalist: "There was fear"

The inappropriate behavior of Junts deputy Francesc de Dalmases with a TV3 journalist at the end of the broadcast of an interview with Laura Borràs on July 9 on the FAQS program was an isolated event, according to the channel's management. An unpleasant episode that was not reported at the time until the news was released in the press because "there was fear" of repercussions, according to the program's director.

This has been pointed out in the Control Commission of the Corporació de Mitjans Audiovisuals by the director of the channel, Sifrid Gras, and of the defunct program, Pere Mas, just before the post-convergent parliamentarian gave his testimony in the first person to admit that he should not the argument may have occurred but justify it by his impulsive personality.

It was the director of the program who put the focus on the seriousness of the events, collected in a report prepared by the regional network that was made public at the end of July. In that report the facts are recounted, among which it is described how Dalmases took the deputy director of the program by the arm, closing the door of a dressing room, and yelled at her to reproach the tone of the interview with Borràs with vituperations such as “you have betrayed me ”, “you have broken your word”, “shitty program”, “you cannot do this”, “pathetic presenter”, “bad journalist” all combined with knocks on the door of the room.

Pere Mas has described how the deputy director explained to him what had happened right after in a state of nerves, "trembling" and very affected, and that it was the journalist who refused to publicly denounce the facts given the situation in which she and others members of the program were, on the verge of the FAQS being removed from the grid and without a clear future.

“There was fear. We were not talking about just any person”, Mas pointed out in reference to the president of the Parliament. And to this was added the "situation of labor vulnerability" that was behind it. "For this reason, at first it is not reported", but what happened is known by several journalists from the house, as well as by several who attended to participate in the program.

Mas has justified his initial silence and that he initially threw balls away about an interview that was tense due to the express request of the affected person not to report it”, but once it is published in the Naciodigital media and Dalmases tries to hide behind his words, the director of the program breaks his silence. Now, Mas is clear that what happened has nothing to do with the breach of agreements with Borràs' entourage regarding the format of the interview, "but rather with unacceptable intimidation that could have been resolved the next day by asking for forgiveness for the facts".

For his part, the director of TV3 highlighted the report presented in July and the measures that have been carried out to try to ensure that these episodes are not produced again. Sifrid Gras has pointed out that as a result of what happened, the CCMA decided to increase the mechanisms so that they do not happen again, despite the fact that they are “isolated events that do not happen regularly”. Among the measures, Gras pointed out that now the production companies are forced to follow the chain's style book, they have limited the entrance of the companions to the chain and reinforcing the protocols against harassment: concrete measures that will be studied with committees of companies and professional committees.

For his part, Dalmases has admitted that this situation "should not have occurred at the time or place" in which it occurred, after which he reiterated his apologies to those who attended that discussion and to the entire team of the Program. But the leader has come to say that his impetuous personality sometimes plays tricks on him: "I've always been up front saying what I think without subterfuge or hesitation." "Anyone with more political experience would have kept quiet, but I'm not like that, and I said so."

In any case, for Dalmases, what happened was "nothing that cannot be remade within frameworks of trust." But the matter still has to pass the filter of the commission of the Statute of the Deputy, where what happened will be analyzed according to the code of ethics of the deputies. If a violation of any of its precepts is found, the Junts deputy could be fined financially or even suspended as a parliamentarian.