The days immediately following a catastrophe such as the last rail accident in Spain are delicate. The search for possible fatalities is still ongoing and it seems indelicate to start demanding responsibility. But just as there are media that are keen to delve into explanations to derive political consequences – the vultures – there may also be ostriches that voluntarily hide their heads underground in order not to see the evidence that some protocol has failed and let the event be framed in the paradigm of inevitable accidents, let’s say inherent in the randomness of life. I say this because, next to the surgical headlines and black backgrounds to express mourning, statements such as “Investigators are analyzing how the track was able to break at kilometer 318.7 when the renovation was completed in May and the train was checked four days earlier” (Abc), “The drivers warned of the deterioration of the rail and asked to reduce the speed in this corridor” (editorial of The reason) or “That the tragedy is politicious (well)”, article by David Jiménez Torres The World. Instead, a The Countrynone of the three subtitles point to anything that can be linked to neglect, poor maintenance, or the old practice of looking the other way when you’re told something isn’t right. It may be unintentional, but the suspicion is that they are already doing damage control.
Precisely out of respect for the victims – including those who have not yet been found – a rigorous and frontal investigation of the matter is necessary. And the press must lead the demand. There will be those who will derive selfish income from it – I, for the time being, have not detected in the printed press any clamorous departure of tone – but in this case it is better to sin vulture thanestrucitat.
