Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general elections Debates en las ondas. Comparativa de los espacios electorales de coloquio en la radio entre las elecciones generales de 1982 y 2019 en España doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 87 July-December of 2023ISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978How to cite this article: García-Gil, S. and Zamora-Martínez, P. (2023). Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general elections. Doxa Comunicación, 37, pp. 87-111.https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n37a1872Samuel García-Gil. Postdoctorate researcher at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU). PhD with cum laude mentions and International Doctorate from the University of Valladolid (2022). Accredited lecturer by ANECA, he currently forms a part of the research group “Nacionalismos y culturas políticas en el País Vasco en perspectiva comparada” from the UPV/EHU (GIU 20/02). He is also a member of the project (R&D&i) “Politainment ante la fragmentación mediática: desintermediación, engagement y polarización” (PID2020-114193RB-I00), funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spain). His publications centre on the History of the media and in particular Spanish radio. He has also been a journalist in media such as El Norte de Castilla.University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Spain[email protected]ORCID: 0000-0001-9003-3874Patricia Zamora-Martínez. P.h.D in Journalism with cum laude mentions and International Doctorate from the University of Valladolid (Accredited lecturer, ANECA, 2022). She is currently a Margarita Salas postdoctorate researcher at the University of Valladolid and a guest researcher at the Complutense University of Madrid in the group History and Structure of Communication and Entertainment. She is also a part of the research team of the project (R&D&i): Politainment in the Face of Media Fragmentation: Disintermediation, Engagement and Polarization (PID2020-114193RB-I00), funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spain), and is a member of the recognised research group New Trends in Communication (NUTECO). Her lines of research are framed in the history of television in Spain, non-verbal communication applied to the political sphere and the analysis of infotainment in television programming.University of Valladolid, Spain[email protected]ORCID: 0000-0002-5730-7295Abstract:Since the freedom of information in 1977, Spanish radio broadcasting has served as a space for opinion and public discussion. In 1980, Cadena Catalana broadcast an electoral debate, “the rst of its kind Resumen:Desde la libertad informativa de 1977, la radio en España ha servido como espacio de opinión y discusión pública. En 1980, Cadena Catalana emitió un debate electoral, “el primero en su género (…) después de la Received: 30/11/2022 - Accepted: 08/03/2023 - Early access: 28/04/2023 - Published: 01/07/2023Recibido: 30/11/2022 - Aceptado: 08/03/2023 - En edición: 28/04/2023 - Publicado: 01/07/2023is content is published under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License. International License

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


88 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicación1. Introductione media have been linked to politics since its inception, not only by regulating its activity but also as a “real instrument (organ) of public opinion” (Tönnies, 1979: 264; cit. in Bouza, 1998), capable of having “a considerable inuence on citizens’ perception, opinions and behaviour” (Vladisavljević, 2015: 2). Just as the press and the television had been used as a tool for propaganda and mass mobilisation, the radio was too, to the extent that they transformed the lives of governors and the governed. e radio was created in a historical context that accounts for its use as a political instrument; totalitarian ideologies, Nazism and Communism, “made intensive use of radio broadcasting, both to indoctrinate populations and to spread worldwide” (Cotarelo, 2013: 229).In Spain, the rst broadcasting licenses were granted in 1923 by Primo de Rivera’s dictatorship, which “established systems of control” to prevent “the broadcasting of news, messages or ideas contrary to ocial interests” (Ezcurra, 1974: 295). During the Second Republic (1931-1936), the radio enjoyed greater freedom at the expense of becoming an element that “demanded specic dedication” due to the creation of a Ministry of Communications (Balsebre, 2001: 268). After the Civil War, the dictatorship of General Francisco Franco took over the information monopoly for almost four decades through the ocial Radio Nacional de España (RNE). He exercised tight political control over the radio system (Bustamante, 2013). Spanish radio changed immensely from 1977 onwards amid the democratic Transition. Private radio stations’ freedom of information and the granting of new FM licenses (Balsebre, 2002: 473-481) increased plurality and modied the relationship between radio and politics. During its heyday, “radio was discovered as a political weapon” (Talaya, 2017: 89) and became a point of reference for information due to its role in the coup d’etat on 23 February 1981 (Díaz, 1992). Furthermore, radio (…) after the Civil War” (Munsó, 2006: 204). However, radio electoral debates have hardly been studied at the state level. is research aims to identify and examine the political debates produced by Spanish radios for the 1982 general elections –the rst one after the Catalan debate– and November 2019 –the last to date– establishing a comparison as the rst approach towards its technical and formal evolution. An analysis sheet was applied based on the data collected in daily newspaper archives ABC, El País, Diario 16 and La Vanguardia websites and social media proles from radio networks (Cadena SER, Cadena COPE, Onda Cero and RNE). Two national debate programmes were found, Tertulias electorales (1982) and Debates COPE: El voto útil (2019), whose moderators participated in semi-structured interviews. e results reveal a contrast in aspects such as the broadcast channel –from analogue to streaming– and audience participation –from the telephone to social networks– although, none of them brought together any candidates for the presidency.Keywords:Broadcasting; electoral debates; electoral campaigns; interviews; Spain.Guerra Civil” (Munsó, 2006: 204). Sin embargo, apenas se han estudiado los debates electorales radiofónicos a escala estatal. Esta investigación plantea identicar y examinar los debates políticos producidos por radios españolas para las elecciones generales de 1982 –las primeras tras el debate catalán– y noviembre de 2019 –últimas hasta la fecha–, estableciendo una comparativa como primera aproximación hacia su evolución técnica y formal. Se aplicó una cha de análisis, partiendo de los datos recabados en hemerotecas de ABC, El País, Diario 16 y La Vanguardia, webs y redes sociales de radios (Cadena SER, Cadena COPE, Onda Cero y RNE). Se localizaron dos programas nacionales de debate, Tertulias electorales (1982) y Debates COPE: El voto útil (2019), a cuyos moderadores se realizaron entrevistas semiestructuradas. Los resultados revelan un contraste en aspectos como el canal de emisión –del analógico al streaming– y la participación de la audiencia –del teléfono a redes sociales–, aunque ninguno de ellos juntó a los candidatos a la Presidencia.Palabras clave:Radio; debates electorales; campañas electorales; entrevistas; España.
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 89July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 participation programmes such as Directo… Directo (RNE, 1981-1985) incorporated telephone conversations with current aairs personalities (García-Gil, 2021: 396) and used the airwaves to exchange opinions freely. In this sense, election campaigns enabled ideas to be confronted and exposed and also included advertising spaces regulated by law1, interviews with the candidates2 or even debates.e radio’s role as a space for political debate has been the subject of few studies compared to television. Several authors have analysed the nature of televised electoral debates from a political communication perspective (Dader, 1998-1999; Berrocal, 2004; Cantavella et al., 2008; Gallego and Martínez, 2013; García-Marín, 2015) or their evolution from 1993 (Marín, 2019) to 2015 (López-García et al., 2018), through comparisons to the European environment (Rúas-Araujo et al., 2020) or its “symbiosis” with social networks such as Twitter (Ruiz and Bustos, 2017; González-Neira et al., 2020).On the other hand, the limited biography on political opinion programmes on radio focuses on talk shows. ey have been the subject of monographs (Toral, 1998; Sánchez, 1994), analyses of linguistic uses (González, 2014; Martínez-Costa and Herrera, 2007), the plurality (Abejón, 2013; León and Gómez, 2011), ethics and deontology, among many other approaches (Santamaría, 1992; López, 1996; Moreno, 2002; Angulo, 2006; Colmenarejo, 2019).Several authors agree that the inception of radio talk shows took place in the programme La Trastienda on Cadena SER in 1984 (Sánchez, 1994: 13). However, there are few references to the rst radio debate programme, especially an electoral one. Among them, Munsó (2006: 187) highlights the special Quatre candidates per a una presidencia (Four candidates for the Presidency), broadcast by Cadena Catalana3 on 17 March 1980, which brought together four of the main parties’ leaders in Catalonia4 for the regional elections. Munsó (2006: 204) describes this debate as “the rst of its kind (…) after the Civil War”.is article takes that broadcast as the rst milestone to propose a new line of analysis, encompassing electoral radio debates from 1980 to the present. However, this approach should not ignore the evolution of the medium, from analogue radio to “cyberradio” (Cebrián, 2008), “post radio” (Ortiz, 2012) or the “radio that can be seen” (Cavia, 2016). e introduction of multimedia logic in conventional radio has given rise to “radiovision” (Palazio, 1999; Gallego Pérez, 2010; López-Vidales, 2011), a radio model that uses podcasting and Internet streaming technologies to oer listeners the chance to watch –and not only listen to– multimedia information, live chats, chat rooms or on-demand radio. is has been inuenced by factors such as the impact of television (Pacheco, 2009), the growing use of mobile technology or the Internet, and the search for young audiences (Gutiérrez et al., 2011).Listeners’ participation in today’s radio is managed through social networks, giving rise to “personal radio”, “recorded-reproduced”, or “created-recreated” by users themselves (Cebrián, 2008: 31-32). Moreover, the multiplicity of listening channels also gives rise to the concept of “extended radio” (Kischinhevsky, 2017), which presents multiple listening channels; 21st-century radio has the option to extend listening options, as “the web and the app oer alternative signals to the listener”, which are also live (Legorburu et al., 2019: 73). All these elements help to determine how this evolutionary leap has also changed the conception of radio debate since its origins.1.1. eoretical approach to the radio debate genre Although this article aims not to investigate the denition of the radio debate, an approach to the theory of radio genres is presented, which is necessary to clarify the object of study. e particularity of the radio medium forced us to adapt to the traditional theory of
90 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónjournalistic genres to better contemplate “the properties of oral communication, the transience of the message and the presence of non-linguistic elements” (Martínez-Costa and Herrera, 2004: 116). us, the radio genre is understood as “each of the ways of harmonising the dierent elements of the radio message- especially the word- in such a way that the resulting structure can be recognised as belonging to a characteristic modality of radio creation and broadcasting” (Merayo, 1992: 173).e same authors who recognise debates as a radio or audiovisual genre5 locate it within the dialogic or appellative genres, “models of representation of reality constructed through the contributions of current aairs’ personalities who seek to enrich the journalistic account” (Martínez-Costa and Díez, 2005: 130). e round table, debate and talk show are grouped under the same umbrella, genres that share the discursive dynamics and the role of the moderator-presenter, framed in modalities such as “the organisation of the polemic” (Prado, 1980; Martí, 1990), “polemic and dialectic attitude” (Martínez-Costa and Díez, 2005: 150; Marta-Lazo and Ortiz (eds.), 2016: 101-102) or “debate” (Merayo, 1992: 176; Rodero, 2005: 229-235; Cebrián, 2007: 128).e round table brings together “experts or qualied people on a topic of public interest” who contribute “complementary or opposing” points of view (Marta-Lazo and Ortiz (eds.), 2016: 107), while the debate and the talk show aim to confront ideas, each with its distinctive features. e literature attributes qualities such as periodisation, regular participants at the debates- panellists–, a relaxed nature, the possible participation of listeners and the alternation of topics inuenced by current aairs (Merayo, 1992; Marta-Lazo and Ortiz (eds.), 2016; Santos, 2003). However, taking the aforementioned authors as a reference, the most common characterisation of radio debate includes: –several participants, limited in number –who can go individually or in two opposing groups– who represent opposing stances; –the impartial presenter-moderator, in charge of maintaining the rules of the debate, respectfully but encouraging controversy; –the basic structure composed of the presentation of the topic and the participants, the presentation of arguments and each speaker’s conclusion; –the times set in advance for each debater may be strict or exible; –live broadcasting; –and the expertise on a previously agreed upon topic of interest and controversy. e expansion of radio talk shows contrasts the scarce treatment of debates to the extent that it is considered a genre that is only “for television” (García de Castro, 2014: 43). Cadena SER (2017: 110) highlights in its stylebook, “unlike the talk show or round table, debates do not usually have a regular space in the programming […]”. is shows the exceptional nature of debate programmes, which explains why special broadcasts are reserved for signicant events such as elections. Although debates are not only reserved for politicians, this genre is shown as an ideal vehicle in an electoral context due to contrasting ideas intrinsically, which allows for “developing new proposals to all kinds of problems posed by society” (Martínez-Costa and Díez, 2005: 144).5 Even, the Cadena SER stylebook recognises debate as both a radio subgenre –“dialogue between two or more people who hold opposing stances”– and as a programme format, including the particular case of “face-to-face” between two people (Cadena SER, 2017: 82; 110-111).
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 91July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 1.2. Televised electoral debates in Spaine lack of study on the radio debate contrasts with televised debates, which have become a popular event in electoral campaigns, despite their brief history in Spain (Hernández-Herrarte and Zamora-Martínez, 2020). Regarding the debates between the leaders of electoral lists6, the rst face-to-face debate was broadcast on Antena 3 on 24 May 1993 between Felipe González (Partido Socialista Obrero Español, PSOE) and José María Aznar (Partido Popular, PP). A week later, both participated in a second debate on Telecinco. After 15 years without electoral debates7, in the 2008 elections, two debates were broadcast between the candidates Mariano Rajoy (PP) and José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (PSOE), which brought together 13 and 11.9 million viewers, respectively (Barlovento, 2019a) and sparked a new interest to date in the study of television debates (García-Marín et al., 2018). In 2011, the same format was repeated with two PP-PSOE debates, although this time, only one event was held, pitting Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba and Mariano Rajoy against each other. e renouncement of the two-party system, consolidated in 2015 with the rise of Podemos and Ciudadanos (Martín Jiménez et al., 2017: 63), altered the usual dynamic of these debates by opening up space for more candidates. In the 2015 general elections, two types of debates were combined: a four-way debate between Pedro Sánchez (PSOE), Pablo Iglesias (Podemos), Albert Rivera (Ciudadanos, C’s) and the vicepresident of the government, Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría (PP); and a week later, the usual face-to-face debate, this time between Pedro Sánchez and Mariano Rajoy.e 2016 elections featured a single televised political debate where, for the rst time, the four candidates with the most signicant representation in the Congress: Mariano Rajoy (PP), Pedro Sánchez (PSOE), Albert Rivera (C’s) and Pablo Iglesias (Unidos Podemos, UP) took part. Its broadcast meant breaking away from the classic two-way debate. Since then, in the last electoral campaigns in April and November 2019, the televised debates have been organised with all the candidates in mind. us, two four-way debates were planned for the April elections in which Pedro Sánchez, Pablo Casado, Pablo Iglesias and Albert Rivera took part. In the 2019 repeat election, a single television debate was held on 4 November, with the ve most important leaders of the electoral lists in terms of voting intentions: Casado, Sánchez, Iglesias, Rivera, and Santiago Abascal as a newcomer (VOX).Since 1993 11 electoral debates have been televised in Spain featuring the presidential candidates. e evolution of these debates (Image 1) shows the usual presence of the journalist moderators, the multiplicity of channels interested in broadcasting them and the high level of interest they generate. Image 1. Electoral debates between candidates for the Presidency of the Government televised in Spain6 Although they have been studied less, Spanish television has also broadcast electoral debates with more than two candidates –in two editions of La clave (TVE) in 1982, but without Felipe González or Adolfo Suárez (Berdón-Prieto and García-Gil, 2020: 348-349)–, with no leaders of the electoral lists –such as Narcís Serra (PSOE)-Miquel Roca (CiU) in the 1989 general elections– or others in municipal and regional elections (Luengo, 2011: 84).7 e 1996, 2000 and 2004 general elections did not have any election debates with presidential candidates.
92 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónSource: created by the authors based on González-Neira et al. (2020), and Barlovento Comunicación (2019a, 2019b, 2019c) e IPMark (2019)1.3. Objectives and hypothesesis research aims to identify and examine the electoral debates that Spanish radio produced prior to the general campaigns of 1982 and November 2019. Both correspond to dierent political contexts: –e 28 October 1982 elections, called for by the president of the government at the time, Leopoldo Calvo-Sotelo, gave the absolute majority to Felipe González’s PSOE. ese elections are “considered (…) as the denitive sign of the end of the Transition” (Tranche, 2016: 113).
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 93July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 –In contrast, the 2019 10 November elections were a repeat election. e PSOE won the previous elections on 28 April. Still, the incumbent governnment presided by Pedro Sánchez called the polls again, given its inability to obtain sucient su-pport for the investiture. For this extraordinary situation, the electoral campaign was reduced to eight days. ese two events have been chosen as a way of approaching this eld, which provides guidance on how the evolution of the radio medium may have aected the performance of radio debate. Considering the rst electoral debate (1980) as the antecedent of Cadena Catalana (Munsó, 2006), we start from this to establish two extremes of time to compare the rst and the last general elections since then. We include debates between presidential candidates and between representatives of political parties to broaden the eld of study. e general objective is specied in three specic objectives. –SO1. To nd out the format of the electoral debates broadcasted on radio, particularly their duration, topics, guests and participation. –SO2. To explore how the debates broadcast throughout Spain developed through the role of moderators and the audience. –SO3. To compare the possible similarities and dierences between the 1982 and 2019 state broadcast debates with an im-pact on the inuence of digital radio.Based on these objectives, the following research hypotheses are proposed: –H1. In the 1982 and 2019 elections, the radio brought together the heads of electoral lists or candidates for the Presidency to debate, given their obvious public interest. –H2. e debates produced in 1982 led to more active and direct audience participation than those of 2019. –H3. Broadcasting localised debates in 2019 mimicked more television features than in 1982, in line with today’s “radio that can be seen”.2. MethodA quantitative analysis (content analysis) and a qualitative analysis (semi-structured interview) were carried out to address the objectives and respond to the hypotheses. By combining these methods, the results could be compared more easily, guaranteeing the reliability of the research as a whole (Martínez, 2005; Varela, 2014).Firstly, the content analysis method was used because of its ability to examine communicative messages systematically, objectively and quantitatively (Berelson, 1952; Wimmer and Dominick, 2010; Rie et al., 1998). As the two periods are so far apart, the search for information to form the research corpus has been adapted to each study period. For the compilation of data on the 1982 debates, the primary sources used were the newspaper archives of three general newspapers in Madrid (ABC, El País and Diario 16) and one in Barcelona (La Vanguardia), which were selected because of the wide circulation and proven relevance as opinion shapers (Reguero, 2018: 16-17). In addition, the search was completed with the weekly magazine Tele-Radio, RTVE’s ocial medium. e press search covers news or opinions of the radio coverage of the general elections and the advertising spaces broadcasters hired to promote their special programming.
94 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónFor the 2019 elections, searches were carried out in the digital newspaper libraries of ABC and El País and on radio station’s websites, using key words and tags such as “radio”, the name of the broadcasters and “general elections”. In particular, the four most listened-to general radio stations at the time, according to the Estudio General de Medios (EGM), were consulted: Cadena SER, Cadena COPE, Onda Cero and RNE8; in addition, the publications related to electoral debates on the Twitter proles of the four radio stations within the time frame analysed were also examined.e study period includes the campaign, reection and voting days of each election call, plus the three working days before and after. erefore, in the rst case, they run from 1 to 31 October 1982; in the second, they cover 29 October to 13 November 2019 (Image 2). e 2019 electoral rerun reduced the number of campaign days, so the second period is shorter than the rst.Image 2. Research study periodsSource: created by the authorsAll the data have been used to complete an original analysis comprising three categories and fourteen variables (Table 1). e rst block focuses on the broadcast’s recording data, considered a fundamental dimension when coding: the second refers to the periodicity of the broadcast –“regular content”– is understood as that which is broadcast regularly and has several broadcasts. At the same time, “specials” are aired on a one-o basis without any expected continuity. Finally, the third section 8 According to the second wave of the 2019 EGM, Cadena SER had 3,966,000 daily listeners; Cadena COPE, 2,926,000 listeners; Onda Cero, 1,807,000; and RNE, 1,174,000 (AIMC, 2019).
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 95July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 deals with formal and descriptive aspects. e book of variables was developed using the ve characteristics that Sánchez Aranda (2005) considers essential to correctly dene the categories of any code: “mutual exclusion” allows us to dierentiate the variables formulated: “homogeneity”, to establish standard criteria when selecting each sample unit: “relevance”, to identify the best variables for analysis; “clarity”, to eliminate doubts about the term used among dierent people, and “productivity”, to think about what the most enriching aspects for establishing conclusions are. Table 1. Analysis sheetBROADCAST-Broadcaster or radio station-Starting day-Start time-Duration-Programme titlePERIODICITY-Regular or special content-One or more broadcasts/transmissionsFORMAT-eme(s)-Guests-Moderator-Place-Public presence at the debate-Listener participation-OthersSource: created by the authorsOn the other hand, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the moderators of the debates found –and, therefore, limited to the radio station’s professionals that produced this genre–. is technique makes it possible to collect data on the object of study in real-time and to introduce new questions that had not been contemplated in the script to clarify terms, ambiguities and formalisms with the interlocutor (Denzin and Lincoln, 2005; Hesse and Leavy, 2011; Díaz-Bravo et al., 2013). Its exible nature has contributed to it being the most common method in social research, guaranteeing a desired level of depth. Once the hemerographic search had been completed and the electoral debate programmes broadcasted at the national level had been identied –in line with the second specic objective and the verication of the second hypothesis– their moderators were interviewed: the journalists Miguel Ángel Nieto González9 (Tertulias electorales in Antena 3 de Radio, 1982) and Antonio Herráiz Ayuso10 (Debates COPE: El voto útil, 2019). e interviews were conducted via telephone on 2 and 9 November 2022, 9 In 1982, Miguel Ángel Nieto directed the news programme El Primero de la mañana on Antena 3 Radio.10 In 2019, Antonio Herráiz directed the news programme Mediodía COPE on Cadena COPE.
96 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónand the questionnaire script was organised into three sections. e rst focused on the management and previous production of the broadcast; the second dealt with the technical questions of the format, and the third addressed the development and result, highlighting the role of the moderator and the listeners.e Debates COPE… of 2019 were available on YouTube and viewed beforehand; however, it was impossible to locate recordings of the 1982 Tertulias electorales. e absence of sound recordings is a limitation of radio research, as until the end of the 20th century, “broadcasters (…) used to get rid of most of their sound archives after the legal period” of preservation (Marcos et al., 2018: 665-666).3. Results In this section, the results obtained from the content analysis are presented rst, followed by the results of the interviews.3.1. Results of the content analysis3.1.1. October 1982 electionse 1982 October election campaign gave rise to numerous special programmes. Among them, a prominent presence of debates and colloquiums on local or regional radio stations has been identied. One example was Especial elecciones 82 (Election Special 82), on Radio España de Madrid, from 4 October to 26 October, Monday to Friday, from 6 to 7pm. is “informative news programme”, with 17 “colloquiums”, invited the political parties represented in Madrid and occasionally, other parties “to be designated for each programme, enriching its content” (ABC, 1982a: 72). Each day, it dealt with an in-depth topic, from health and education to culture and the environment11. Daniel Vindel moderated these debates, which were prepared by eight people headed by its director Fulgencio Sánchez12. e advertising for the special (Image 3) appealed to the listeners as they could participate by asking candidates questions on the telephone.11 e “discussion” dealt with the following themes: presentation (days 4 and 5): culture (day 6), interior and public order (day 7), international relations (8), territorial administration-autonomy (11), environment and quality of life-ecology (12), health and social security (13), education and university (14), transport, tourism, and communications (15), Armed Forces (18), public works and housing (19), work (20), economy and the Treasury (21), agriculture, shing and food (22), justice, abortion and divorce (25) and summary and closure (day 26) (Diario 16, 1982: 8).12 Information provided to this research by Francisco Vela Teruel, editor of the radio station in 1982 (F. Vela, personal communication, 9 November 2022).
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 97July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 Image 3. Advertising for the Election Special 82 (Radio España de Madrid)Source: Diario 16 (21/10/1982)Cadena Catalana scheduled several debates during the campaign. Its nightly news programme La Nit (e Night) included a high prole face-to-face between the leading candidates in Barcelona for CiU, Miquel Roca, and the PSC-PSOE, Ramón Obiols, co-organised with the newspaper La Vanguardia to close the campaign on the 26th. Txema Alegre and Enric Sopena moderated this hour-and-a-half debate in front of an audience at the Ritz Hotel in Barcelona. However, the audience’s interventions were “dismissed” (La Vanguardia, 1982b: 3-4). ere were four sections (alliances and post-electoral agreements, economic proposals, Catalonia and cultural policy), followed by a round of conclusions. e chronicle of the co-organising newspaper praised the “high level, civilised” and “free-owing” debate (La Vanguardia, 1982b: 3-4).Amid the campaign, an ABC journalist even referred to the “syndrome of calling for public debates”, whose “largest scenario” seemed to occur in the Basque country (Martín Nogales, 1982: 35). Cadena SER’s circuit of Basque radio stations broadcast a debate organised by the news agency Agencia EFE, between the candidates of the basque nationalist Partido Nacionalista Vasco (PNV), Xavier Arzallus, and the socialist Partido Socialista de Euskadi (PSE-PSOE), Enrique Múgica, on 23 October. is debate lasted an hour and was covered by the national press (Unzueta, 1982: 25; Pagola, 1982: 33; Diario 16, 1982: 48).e leading national networks did not match this density of debates. e only notable example was on Antena 3 de Radio. Shortly after its rst broadcasts in the Spring of 1982 (Barrera and Dobón, 2015: 184), the station launched its Tertulias electorales (Electoral Talks) on 9 September, a month before the campaign, hosted by the journalist Miguel Ángel Nieto. e aim of the almost two-hour programme was “to clarify the political panorama and provide information to the listener-voter (…) to go to the polls knowing what each political party has to oer” (El País, 1982a: 51), which is why, despite its title “tertulias” (talk shows), the participation of dierent electoral options could make it more of a debate. Its press advertising used the faces of the ve primary candidates for the Presidency of the Government: Adolfo Suárez, Santiago Carrillo, Manuel Fraga, Felipe González and Landelino Lavilla under the slogan “Listen, compare and then vote” (Image 4).
98 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónImage 4. Tertulias electorales Advertising (Antena 3 de Radio)Source: ABC (13/10/1982)e two channels with the most signicant coverage and audience, Radio Nacional and Cadena SER, provided special coverage of the elections, interviewing candidates and through listeners’ participation (El País, 1982b: 55; ABC, 1982b: 115; La Vanguardia, 1982a: 10). However, this research did not locate any national debates on RNE’s or SER’s schedules. Even so, the absence of a televised debate prompted a public proposal to transfer it to the radio: the press picked up rumours of a possible live debate on Cadena SER with an audience present. Diario 16 even reported that the socialist leader’s proposal, Felipe González was to hold it “in a stadium, in front of 20 000 people” (García Rivas, 1982: 13), but in the end, it did not take place.3.1.2 November 2019 electionse programming schedules of national radio stations oered slight variation during the 2019 November election campaign, with hardly any alterations compared to a regular week. e contents of SER, COPE, Onda Cero and RNE related to the elections focused on their usual programmes, except for the special programmes during the election. Apart from the day of the vote, the only relevant dierence was the entire broadcast of one of the two nationally televised debates: the ve-way debate organised by the Television Academy (Academia de la Televisión) on 4 November. e four radio stations broadcast the debate during their nightly news programme Hora 25 (SER), La Linterna (COPE), La Brújula (Onda Cero) and 24 Horas (RNE). However, they extended their usual duration with a subsequent analysis table, reducing or eliminating their midnight programmes (Image 5)13. is was not the case with the seven-way debate organised by Radiotelevisión Española (RTVE) on 1 November, which was only broadcast by RNE’s news channel, Radio 5 (RTVE.es, 2019).Image 5. Hora 25, Cadena COPE, La Brújula and RNE Tweets, during the rebroadcasting of the debate on 4/11/2019

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 99July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 Source: @hora25, @cope, @BrujulaOndaCero and @rne (www.twitter.com). Created by the authorsHowever, there was one exception during the pre-campaign. Cadena COPE organised Debates COPE: El voto útil (COPE Debates: e Useful Vote), a series of four meetings moderated by journalist Antonio Herráiz. Each edition centred on a specic theme, reected in its titles “Territorial Crisis” (10 October), “Pensions” (17 October), “Education” (24 October) and “Spain facing the economic challenge” (31 October). ey were produced live weekly, on the four ursdays before the start of the campaign. ey lasted between 1:14 and 1:21 hours and were attended by PSOE, PP, C’s, UP and Vox representatives. However, none of the parties presented their candidates for the Presidency of the Government (Table 2).

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


100 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónTable 2. Candidates present in the Debates COPE: El voto útilTerritorial Crisis (10/10/2019)Pensions (17/10/2019)Education (24/10/2019)Economy* (31/10/2019)PSOEPatxi LópezMercè PereaMariluz M. SeijoDaniel FuentesPPEdurne UriarteJaime de OlanoSandra MoneoMario GarcésC’sEdmundo ValSergio del CampoMarta MartínMarcos de QuintoUPRoberto UriarteYolanda DíazSofía CastañónNacho ÁlvarezVoxJorge BuxadéMacarena OlonaJoaquín RoblesJorge Buxadé* e full name of the fourth debate was “Spain, facing the economic challenge”Source: COPE (2019a; 2019b; 2019c). Created by the authorse four debates were broadcast in their entirety via streaming video on the website www.cope.es and its YouTube channel, reducing its presence on radio and the group’s television, TRECE, to a follow-up “in dierent connections” (COPE.es, 2019).3.2. Comparison between Tertulias electorales (1982) and Debates COPE: El voto útil (2019)e results described above show the broadcasting of two debate programmes organised by radio stations for a national audience: Antena 3 de Radio’s Tertulias electorales (1982) and Debates COPE: El voto útil (2019). e interviews with their moderators provide greater detail on the approach, format and nal result, allowing for comparison. However, both productions’ dierent political media and technical contexts must be considered. 3.2.1. Broadcasting channele most apparent dierence between the two debates is the broadcasting channel. While Tertulias… were broadcast on Antena 3 de Radio’s FM signal, incorporating video in Debates COPE… transformed their output to suit their multi-track broadcast, even though the radio station, COPE, was used as the reference. According to the experience of its moderator:You were playing with the languages of each medium. e proposals [of each candidate] are common; it does not matter if you tell them on the radio or TV, but the approach you have to take as a medium is to open up so that the language reaches the three channels through which you are sending the message (A. Herráiz, personal communication, 9 November 2022). In addition, the moderator highlights that it was “the rst time in the history of Cadena COPE” that a debate of this type was held on radio, television and the Internet. e COPE broadcast included numerous television resources, such as graphics, signs,

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 101July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 on-screen timers and introductory videos. e position of the debaters was drawn from a lottery, as is the case in television debates. e order of the interventions at the beginning and end of each broadcast was also decided at random.3.2.2. Venue and guestse location of the debate poses another notorious dierence. e Debates COPE… took place on the set of TRECE television in Madrid. In the case of Antena 3, the Tertulias electorales had several venues: from Monday to ursday, they took place in a restaurant in Madrid. In contrast, on Fridays, they took place in other cities. In these editions, space was also given to nationalist or regional parties. e moderator, Miguel Ángel Nieto, even recalls a speech given in Catalan for Spain:When we arrived in Barcelona, some parties demanded to speak in Catalan (…). en, on the air, I told them, “Gentlemen, (…) you have every right to do so. But this is a national radio station. So the people of Catalonia are going to understand you perfectly well. But the people in Cádiz might not. And neither will those in Soria (…). You will gure out where you want to send the message”. And one of them started speaking in Catalan, and he realised it did not make sense on a national programme and went on to speak in Spanish (M.Á. Nieto, personal communication, 2 November 2022).In the case of the Debates COPE: el voto útil from 2019, the choice of guests was subject to the prior electoral representation of the ve most voted parties at a national level. e Tertulias electorales on Antena 3 and Debates COPE… proposed the same thematic logic: to dedicate each day to a central issue, with specialists chosen by each party. In both cases, the moderators of the two shows claim that the logic of the format ruled out bringing together the candidates for the Presidency of the Government, which would have required another special approach. Even so, in the case of Antena 3, Nieto recalls that production eorts were made to bring together all the leaders in a special talk show. Still, incompatibilities in their agendas made it “impossible”.3.2.3. Format and the moderator’s role e rigidity of the debate also varied between the two cases. e Antena 3 debate had an electoral talk show organised by the ABC newspaper in 1977 as its precedent, in which Miguel Ángel Nieto had already acted as a moderator14. Five years later, Nieto repeated his role, this time for radio, as an intermediary between the audience’s questions and the politicians’ turns to speak:e talk show was separated into three phases: questions from the listeners, on the telephone, [and] questions from the live audience; answers from the candidates; and counter-answers from the candidates themselves. en they had two minutes per answer and one minute per counter-answer. And I, who was the moderator, had a bell [to mark the end of the turn] (…) At the beginning, this was very shocking, but there came a time when the bell was no longer needed (M.Á. Nieto, personal communication, 2 November 2022).us, the audience’s questions were an essential part of the programme, leaving the role of the moderator as a referee to give the oor and control the time. Nieto rearms that “the moderator does not have to give an opinion, (…) they have to 14 e debates on ABC en 1977 included the participation of the politicians Manuel Fraga (Alianza Popular) and Alfonso Guerra (PSOE) (ABC, 1977: 24).
102 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónmoderate”. ese qualities –agreed times, impartial moderator, non-regular participants, specic topics– thus conrm that, despite its name, the programme Tertulias electorales formally included the characteristics of the radio debate genre. In 2019, Debates COPE… followed a more exible formula: the rst and last interventions were the only ones with a time limit, and both had one minute. e rest of the debate did not follow a xed time, so the candidates had no time limit. A stopwatch installed on the set allowed the guests to see the sum of minutes and seconds that each had spoken to compare who had participated more or less. ese rules gave the moderator the function of distributing the speakers’ turns to compensate for the interventions, as Herráiz himself explains: I was playing with that balance according to the times that I was looking at. (…) We obviously do not have set times, such as a debate on [public broadcaster] Radio Nacional. We do not have to play according to the representativeness of each group, we are a private radio station, and we do not have that obligation. So the time was set equally for everyone (A. Herráiz, personal communication, 9 November 2022).e moderator’s objective is to “confront ideas” and raise problems “so that each guest could put their party’s solutions on the table”. Moreover, the debate format included pre-recorded questions from COPE and TRECE presenters, such as Carlos Herrera, Ángel Expósito, Ana Samboal and Antonio Jiménez (COPE, 2019a; 2019b; 2019c).3.2.4. Audience participatione live debates allowed audience participation, although the interaction channels also changed in line with the times. In the 1982 Tertulias electorales, both the audience present and the telephone listeners could ask their questions, and there was a specic time within the format to ask them. In contrast, the audience of the Debates COPE… in 2019 could send their questions via the hashtag #DebatesCOPE or WhatsApp. In this case, the moderator read out a selection of questions at the end of the debate. ere was no specic time to answer them, but candidates were invited to do so during the nal turn or “golden minute”. On the other hand, while the Antena 3 programmes allowed the public to enter with an invitation in the debate room itself, those produced by COPE set up a second space, isolated from the set, so that an invited audience could watch the programme. e audience of the Debates COPE… included the presence of “sympathisers” of the ve political parties, who intervened on two occasions during the programme. e organisers intended to create an alternative scenario that would break away from the monotony of the format, according to the moderator:It was chosen as a dynamising element (…). Another dierent image, one that was not so corseted, with ve men and women sitting at a table. Another perspective (…) and, in principle, another language (…). e result was that these supporters were part of the party teams (A. Herráiz, personal communication, 9 November 2022).During the debates, the “sympathisers” answered questions related to the day’s topic, although they reproduced the ideology of their related parties. Only in one case was there an interaction with the candidates, which led to a round of allusions for the Ciudadanos representative Marcos de Quinto (COPE, 2019d).e similarities and dierences between the two programmes analysed are summarised in the following comparison (Table 3).
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 103July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 Table 3. Comparison of the Tertulias electorales (1982) and the Debates COPE: El voto útil (2019)Tertulias electorales (1982)Debates COPE… (2019)Radio stationAntena 3 de RadioCOPE (online broadcast)Start date9 September10 OctoberTime20:15 18:00 PeriodicityDaily (from Monday to Friday)Weekly (ursday)No. of editionsNo data found*FourContentSpecial programmeSpecial programmeDuration1:45 hoursBetween 1:14 y 1:21 hourseme(s)SpecialisedSpecialisedGuestsSpecialists selected by each partySpecialists selected by each partyModeratorMiguel Ángel NietoAntonio HerráizPlaceRestaurant Mayte Commodore, Madrid (Monday to ursday); other Antena 3 stations (Friday)TRECE set, MadridPublic presentYesNoParticipationYes (telephone and face-to-face)Yes (social networks and WhatsApp)*Antenna 3’s programming, as reported by ABC, includes Tertulias electorales until the week after the vote; assuming it maintains its regular broadcasting until then, the total would be around 35 broadcasts.Source: created by the authorsBoth moderators remember this experience as satisfactory and pioneering at certain times: the Antena 3’s Tertulias electorales because of their unfolding and format, which were dierent for radio, and the Debates COPE…, due to their integrating nature within the channels of their media group.
104 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicación4. ConclusionsSince Spanish radio rst broadcast its rst electoral debates, this research has shown how general elections’ radio coverage has been aected by the emergence and resizing of televised debates as central elements of the campaigns. us, those relative to October 1982 and November 2019 reveal substantial dierences.e 1982 general election campaign did not feature a face-to-face debate between the main presidential candidates in front of the television cameras. Instead, the radio stations gave space to debates –without the leaders of the national party lists– and thematic programmes, which were usually broadcast during the ocial campaign period but sometimes even began a month earlier, as was the case with Antena 3’s Tertulias electorales. e special programming was broadcast outside the regular radio schedule; the public was invited to be present during the broadcast and was even allowed to ask the candidates questions directly, although they had to follow rigid rules regarding speaking time. Citizen participation on the radio was presented as a possibility of broadening public debate, visibility and recognition of dierent groups’ and individuals’ needs, connecting with the phenomenon of the radio-participation characteristic of the Transition.In contrast, the role of the radio as a place for debate was rather more secondary in 2019. Except for the day of the vote, the four general radio stations with the largest audiences (SER, COPE, Onda Cero and RNE) did not provide special programmes that were out of their usual schedules; perhaps they were conditioned by the brevity of the campaign or the electoral rerun. e prominence of the televised electoral debates was noticeable, as the four radio stations did alter their schedules during the campaign and the debate organised by the Television Academy. In the pre-campaign period, Cadena COPE organised its own Debates COPE: El voto útil with full online broadcasting, on video and limiting its presence on air to connections or summaries, with hardly any alteration to its Hertzian programming. e format of Debates COPE…sought greater dynamism, with exible time for interventions by each candidate and the interventions of “sympathisers”, although apart from this, audience participation had a minor impact on the broadcast.e two primary case studies reveal several dierences and some striking similarities. e choice of specialised topics in both examples allowed the audience to learn about the main parties’ proposals with representatives specialising in the day’s issue. On the other hand, the moderators adopted an impartial role. However, Antonio Herráiz (COPE) had a broader scope of action than Miguel Ángel Nieto (Antena 3) due to the exibility of times agreed between candidates. e main contrast is between the broadcasting channel. While in 1982, only analogue radio broadcasting was possible, the debates organised by COPE were broadcast entirely by streaming, taking advantage of visual elements from television (hypothesis 3 veried). Even so, the audience’s participation during the Tertulias electorales was much more direct and unltered, allowing for telephone and audience questions on the live set (H2 veried). Nevertheless, none of the debates managed to bring together the candidates for the Presidency of the Government (H1 not corroborated).Both the delimitation of the eld of study –which left out the debates on other national or regional radio channels during the 2019 elections– and the absence of sources –sound archives of the 1982 broadcasts– are the limits of this research. However, this article is a starting point to address the evolution of radio coverage in other general elections and to reect, in particular, on its present and future coexistence with televised debates, for example, by exploiting its digital presence or claiming participation as a dierentiating element. As a future line of research, we propose to analyse how Spanish radio
doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 105July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 has transformed its programmatic approach to the upcoming campaigns and the degree to which television has modied or limited the relevance of political debate on the radio. 5. Acknowledgementsis article has been funded by the Research project “Politainment ante la fragmentación mediática: desintermediación, engagement y polarización” (POLDESPOL), reference PID2020-114193RB-I00, funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spain). Samuel García-Gil is a beneciary of the Call for the recruitment for the specialisation of doctoral research personnel (2021) of the Vice-Rectorate for Research of the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), within the framework of the GIU 20/02 Research Group.Patricia Zamora-Martínez is a beneciary of the Grants for the requalication of the Spanish university system for 2021-2023 from the University of Valladolid. Margarita Salas modality. A programme funded by the European Union “NextGeneration EU/PRTR”.e authors would like to thank Sophie Phillips for the translation of this article into English.e authors would also like to thank Miguel Ángel Nieto, Antonio Herráiz, Francisco Vela, Rafael Cerro, Juan de Dios Rodríguez and Ramón Gabilondo for their help with this research.6. Contributions from each autorName and surnamesConception and design of the work Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezMethodologyPatricia Zamora-Martínez and Samuel García-GilData collection and analysisSamuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezDiscussion and conclusionsSamuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezDrafting, formatting, revision and approval versionsSamuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-Martínez
106 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicación7. Bibliographical referenceABC (1977, 9 de junio). Tertulia electoral en ABC. 24.ABC (1982a, 4 de octubre). Las elecciones desde Radio España. 72.ABC (1982b, 8 de octubre). Especial elecciones. 115.Abejón Mendoza, P. (2013). Estado del periodismo de opinión en España: polarización, género y emolumentos. Zer: Revista de estudios de comunicación, 18(34), 93-109. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3xKbH45AIMC (2019). AIMC EGM. AIMC.es. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3KsMVgqAngulo Egea, M. (2006). El periodismo de representación de las tertulias radiofónicas españolas. En VV.AA., XIII Jornadas Internacionales de Jóvenes Investigadores en Comunicación (pp. 113-128). Universidad San Jorge/AIJIC/Asociación de la Prensa de Aragón.Balsebre, A. (2001). Historia de la Radio en España. Volumen 1 (1874-1939). Cátedra.Balsebre, A. (2002). Historia de la Radio en España. Volumen 2 (1939-1985). Cátedra.Barlovento (2019a). Análisis mensual del comportamiento de la audiencia TV. Abril, 2019. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3Zfu4d9 Barlovento (2019b). Informe de audiencia: debate electoral. Abril, 2019. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3YTUpxlBarlovento (2019c). Informe de audiencia TV: debate electoral 4N. Noviembre, 2019. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3pMayZ8Barrera, C. y Dobón Roux, P. (2015). Antena 3 Radio: nacimiento y primer desarrollo de una empresa periodística singular. Revista internacional de Historia de la Comunicación, 1(4), 175-197. https://doi.org/10.12795/RiHC.2015.i04.08Berdón-Prieto. P. y García-Gil, S. (2020). La clave desde el centro: UCD y CDS en el programa de Balbín (1976-1985). Revista Internacional de Historia de la Comunicación, 14, 336-357. https://doi.org/10.12795/RiHC.2020.i14.15Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communications research. Free Press.Berrocal Gonzalo, S. (2004). Una aproximación a la nueva retórica del líder político televisivo: acciones, cualidades y discurso. Doxa Comunicación. Revista Interdisciplinar De Estudios De Comunicación Y Ciencias Sociales, 2, 53-67. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3XSb4QE Bouza, F. (1998). La inuencia política de los medios de comunicación: mitos y certezas del nuevo mundo. En J. Benavides (ed.), El debate de la Comunicación (pp. 237-252). Universidad Complutense de Madrid/Ayuntamiento de Madrid.Bustamante, E. (2013). Historia de la radio y la televisión en España: Una asignatura pendiente de la democracia. Gedisa.Cadena SER (2017). En antena. Libro de estilo del periodismo oral. Taurus.Cantavella, J., Bullough, R., Curiel, L.A., Morales, B., Mejía, C. y Pittaro, E. (2008). Algunos aspectos lingüísticos de los debates electorales Zapatero-Rajoy 2008. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 14, 79-98. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3KpPaBj Cavia, S. (2016). Nuevo modelo de radio a través de la cuarta pantalla: radiovisión, la radio que se ve. Fonseca, Journal of Communication, 13(2), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.14201/fjc2016136584

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 107July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 Cebrián Herreros, M. (2007). Modelos de radio, desarrollos e innovaciones. Fragua. Cebrián Herreros, M. (2008). La radio en Internet. La Crujía.Colmenarejo Pérez, J.P. (2019). Las imágenes sonoras de la crisis del euro. Estudio del caso: El equipo económico de La Linterna, Cadena COPE (mayo 2010-julio 2012) [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Navarra].COPE (2019a, 10 de octubre). Debates COPE: El voto útil. Crisis territorial [vídeo]. YouTube.com. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3IhxO7M COPE (2019b, 17 de octubre). Debates COPE: El voto útil. Pensiones [vídeo]. Youtube.com. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3Iq7AiLCOPE (2019c, 24 de octubre). Debates COPE: El voto útil. Educación [vídeo]. Youtube.com. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3Escx9m COPE (2019d, 31 de octubre). #DebatesCOPE: España, ante el desafío económico [vídeo]. Youtube.com. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3IqebJM COPE.es (2019, 9 de octubre). Vuelve a ver el primer debate electoral del 10-N en COPE sobre la crisis territorial. COPE.es. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/2AYpA19Cotarelo, R. (2013). De la política de partidos a la política de multitudes. En R. Cotarelo (ed.), Ciberpolítica: las nuevas formas de acción y comunicación políticas (pp. 217-255). Tirant Humanidades.Dader, J.L. (1998-1999). Entre la retórica mediática y la cultura política autóctona: La comunicación política electoral española como encrucijada de la ‘americanización’ del pluralismo democrático tradicional. Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación, 4, 63-87. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3IlUUt1 Denzin, N. y Lincoln, Y. (2005). Manual de Investigación Cualitativa: Campo de la Investigación Cualitativa. Gedisa.Diario 16 (1982, 24 de octubre). Múgica (PSOE) y Arzalluz (PNV), enfrentados por el 23-F. 48.Díaz, L. (1992). La radio en España: 1923-1993. Alianza.Díaz-Bravo, L., Torruco-García, U., Martínez-Hernández, M. y Varela-Ruiz, M. (2013). La entrevista, recurso exible y dinámico. Investigación en medicina médica, 2(7), 162-167. https://bit.ly/3jJbJTrEl País (1982a, 9 de septiembre). Antena 3 emite un programa diario sobre las elecciones. 51.El País (1982b, 24 de septiembre). Radio. 55.Ezcurra, L. (1974). Historia de la radiodifusión española. Los primeros años. Editora Nacional.Fernández Asís, V. (dir.) (1978). RTVE Informe 1978. RTVE.Gallego Pérez, I. (2010). Podcasting. Nuevos modelos de distribución para los contenidos sonoros. UOC Press.Gallego Reguera, M. y Martínez Martínez, I. (2013). Comunicación institucional en los debates electorales entre candidatos a la presidencia del Gobierno en España en las elecciones generales (2008 y 2011). Orbis. Revista Cientíca Electrónica de Ciencias Humanas, 9(26), 143-160. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3IdVytxGarcía de Castro, M. (2014). Información audiovisual en el entorno digital. La televisión y la radio informativa. Tecnos.

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


108 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónGarcía Rivas, A. (1982, 14 de octubre). Tirar la piedra y esconder la mano. Diario 16, 13.García-Gil, S. (2021). Una radio total para la radiodifusión pública: el modelo de Eduardo Sotillos en Radio Nacional de España (1981). Historia y Comunicación Social, 26(2), 387-402. https://doi.org/10.5209/hics.79150García-Marín, J., Calatrava, A. y Luengo, Ó.G. (2018). Debates electorales y conicto. Un análisis con máquinas de soporte virtual (SVM) de la cobertura mediática de los debates en España desde 2008. El Profesional de la Información, 27(3), 624-632. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.may.15González-Neira, A., Berrocal Gonzalo, S. y Zamora-Martínez, P. (2020). Fórmulas de emisión y consumo de los debates televisivos en España en las elecciones legislativas de 2019. El Profesional de la Información, 29(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.21González Sanz, M. (2014). Tertulia política y (des)cortesía verbal. Universidad de Sevilla.Gutiérrez Lozano, J.F. (2005). La presencia del debate en televisión y su utilidad en la calidad de las programaciones. Comunicar, 25. https://doi.org/10.3916/C25-2005-143Gutiérrez, M., Ribes, X. y Monclús, B. (2011). La audiencia juvenil y el acceso a la radio musical de antena convencional a través de internet. Revista Comunicación y Sociedad, 24(2), 305-311. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.24.36208 Hernández-Herrarte, M. y Zamora-Martínez, P. (2020). La comunicación no verbal en las elecciones andaluzas 2018. Comparativa de Susana Díaz y Teresa Rodríguez en el debate de RTVE. Ámbitos. Revista Internacional de Comunicación, 49, 158-176. https://doi.org/10.12795/Ambitos.2020.i49.10Herrero, J.C. y Connolly Ahern, C. (2004). Origen y evolución de la propaganda política en la España democrática (1975-2000): Análisis de las técnicas y de los mensajes en las elecciones generales del año 2000. Doxa Comunicación. Revista Interdisciplinar De Estudios De Comunicación Y Ciencias Sociales, 2, 151–172. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3XTcN8jHesse Biber, S.N. y Leavy, P. (2011). e Practice of Qualitative Research. Sage.IPMark: Casi 9 millones de espectadores siguieron el debate electoral en TV. Disponible en: https://n9.cl/0boa6Kischinhevsky, M. (2017). Radio y medios sociales: mediaciones e interacciones radiofónicas digitales. UOC.La Vanguardia (1982a, 12 de octubre). Los debates públicos, ejes de la campaña. 7.La Vanguardia (1982b, 27 de octubre). Roca-Obiols, debate de altura. 3-4.Legorburu Hortelano, J.M., García González, A. y Dorado Colmenar, J.V. (2019). Condicionantes de la programación radiofónica digital. En L.M. Pedrero y J.M. García-Lastra (eds.), La transformación digital de la radio. Diez claves para su comprensión profesional y académica (pp. 59-82). Tirant.León Gross, T. y Gómez Calderón, B.J. (2011). La tertulia en España: Medios públicos, última frontera de la pluralidad. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 17(1), 67-80. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_ESMP.2011.v17.n1.4López Hidalgo, A. (1996). La tertulia, un género de moda. En J.M. Gómez y Méndez (ed.), Espacio y tiempo informativos (pp. 45-56). Pliegos de Información.

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 109July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 López-García, G., Llorca-Abad, G., Valera-Ordaz, L. y Peris-Blances, A. (2018). Los debates electorales, ¿el último reducto frente la mediatización? Un estudio de caso de las elecciones generales españolas de 2015. Palabra Clave, 21(3), 772-797. http://doi.org/10.5294/pacla.2018.21.3.6López-Vidales, N. (2011). La radio se transforma: nuevas tecnologías, nuevos hábitos de consumo y nuevos perles para el medio más cercano. En N. López y M.Á. Ortiz (eds.), Radio 3.0: una nueva radio para una nueva era (pp. 15-40). Fragua.Luengo, Ó.G. (2011, abril). Debates electorales en televisión: una aproximación preliminar a sus efectos inmediatos. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, 25, 81-96. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/2JBa5mW Marcos Recio, J.C., De la Cuadra de Colmenares, E. y Fernández Sande, M. (2018). Evolución histórica y perspectivas de futuro en la gestión del patrimonio radiofónico, cinematográco, televisivo y publicitario. Revista General de Información y Documentación, 28(2), 659-683. https://doi.org/10.5209/RGID.62843Marín Pérez, B. (2019). El debate electoral cara a cara (1993-2019): nacimiento, desarrollo y retos de un formato de televisión consolidado en España con audiencias millonarias. Razón y Palabra, 23(105), 152-189. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3SlLYsk Marta-Lazo, C. y Ortiz Sobrino, M.Á. (eds.) (2016). La información en radio. Contexto, géneros, formatos y realización. Fragua.Martí Martí, J.M. (1990). Modelos de programación radiofónica. Feed-Back.Martín Jiménez, V., Vázquez, T. y Cebrián, E. (2017). Los formatos del politainment televisivo. En Berrocal-Gonzalo, S. (coord.), Politainment. La política espectáculo en los medios de comunicación (pp. 53-76). Tirant Humanidades.Martín Nogales, V. (1982, 12 de octubre). El síndrome del debate marca la campaña electoral en el País Vasco. ABC, 35.Martínez, M. (2005). El paradigma emergente: Hacia una nueva teoría de la racionalidad cientíca. Trillas.Martínez-Costa, M.P. y Díez Unzueta, J.R. (2005). Lenguaje, géneros y programas de radio. Introducción a la Narrativa Radiofónica. EUNSA.Martínez-Costa, M.P. y Herrera Damas, S. (2004). Los géneros radiofónicos en la teoría de la redacción periodística en España. Luces y sombras de los estudios realizados hasta la actualidad. Comunicación y Sociedad, 17(1), 115-143. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.17.36334Martínez-Costa, P. y Herrera Damas, S. (2007). La tertulia radiofónica como un tipo de conversación coloquial. Doxa Comunicación. Revista Interdisciplinar De Estudios De Comunicación Y Ciencias Sociales, 5, 189-211. https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n5a9Merayo Pérez, A. (1992). Para entender la radio. Estructura del proceso informativo radiofónico. Publicaciones Universidad Ponticia de Salamanca.Moreno Espinosa, P. (2008). La tertulia radiofónica, foro para el siglo XXI. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 8, 275-291. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3xKwJje Munsó Cabús, J. (2006). Tiempo de radio. Memorias de Cadena Catalana 1978/1990. La Esfera de los Libros.Ortiz Sobrino, M.Á. (2012). Radio y post-radio en España: una cohabitación necesaria y posible. Área Abierta, 12(2), 1-16. https://n9.cl/w5pak

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


110 | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | July-December of 2023Debates on the airwaves. Electoral talk shows on the radio: comparison between Spain’s 1982 and 2019 general electionsISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978doxa.comunicaciónPagola, J. (1982, 24 de octubre). Durísimo ataque de Arzallus a Múgica a propósito del 23-F. ABC, 33.Pacheco, M. A. (2009). La estructura actual de las retransmisiones futbolísticas en los programas de radio en España. Revista Ámbitos, 18, 99-114. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/41jeU8n Palazio, G.J. (1999). La radiovisión, el nuevo medio multiservicio. Zer: Revista de estudios de comunicación, 6, 179-197. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3BCT8kcPrado, E. (1980). Estructura de la información radiofónica. Mitre.Reguero Sanz, I. (2018). La otra Transición: la prensa de Madrid ante el Estado de las Autonomías (1977-1983) [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Valladolid].Rie, D., Lacy, S. y Fico, F.G. (1998). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Rodero Antón, E. (2005). Producción radiofónica. Cátedra.RTVE.es (2019, 1 de noviembre). Cómo seguir el debate electoral a siete de RTVE. RTVE.es. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3YSz8Eq Rúas-Araujo, J., Campos-Freire, F. y López-López, P.C. (2020). Historia, evolución, audiencia y agenda temática de los debates electorales televisados en España dentro del contexto europeo. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 26(2), 787-806. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/esmp.67806Ruiz del Olmo, F.J. y Bustos Díaz, J. (2017). La evolución del debate televisivo como herramienta de comunicación política. Análisis del caso español: de la televisión a Twitter. Información y Sociedad, 27(2), 235-252. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3ILyKSE Sánchez Aranda, J.J. (2005). Análisis de contenido cuantitativo de medios. En M.R. Berganza y J.A. Ruíz San Román (Eds.), Investigar en comunicación. Guía práctica de métodos y técnicas de investigación social en comunicación (pp. 207-228). McGraw Hill.Sánchez Serrano, C. (1994). Las tertulias de la radio. La plaza pública de los 90; Publicaciones Universidad Ponticia de Salamanca.Santamaría Suárez, L. (1992). Las Tertulias radiofónicas y televisivas, manifestaciones atípicas del periodismo de opinión. Periodística: revista acadèmica, 5, 129-134. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/3XMADmg Santos Díez, M.T. (2003). Periodismo radiofónico. Servicio Editorial Universidad del País Vasco.Talaya, S. (2017). Los ecos del boom de la radio. A 25 años de la noche de los transistores. Los Papeles del Sitio.Tönnies, F. (1979). Comunidad y asociación. Península.Toral, G. (1998). Tertulias, mentideros y programas de radio. lberdania.Tranche, R.R. (2016). 28 de octubre de 1982, una noche para un líder. Radiografía de una imagen para la Historia. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 22(1), 101-123. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_ESMP.2016.v22.n1.52584

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]


doxa.comunicación | nº 37, pp. 87-111 | 111July-December of 2023Samuel García-Gil and Patricia Zamora-MartínezISSN: 1696-019X / e-ISSN: 2386-3978 Unzueta, P. (1982, 24 de octubre). Debate público entre Arzallus y Múgica en torno al Gobierno de gestión de 1980. El País, 25.Varela, L. (2014). Agenda building y frame promotion en la campaña electoral de 2011: la circulación del discurso entre partidos, medios y ciudadanos [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Valencia]. https://bit.ly/42VjJFaVladisavljević, N. (2015). Media framing of political conict: A review of the literature. Media, Conict and Democratisation [working paper]. University of Leeds. Disponible en: https://bit.ly/41fhOLjWimmer, R.D. y Dominick, J.R. (2010). Mass Media Research: An Introduction (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]

[Enlace de URL / hc (has AS)]