The Marquis de Pontevedra, after learning of these complaining "journalists," immediately demands this illegal collective be disbanded; he further begins censoring their papers far more harshly than before, even outright banning certain, particularly liberal papers in general. However, he begins offering certain papers routes out of this cycle of increased censorship, by having them direct their ire at the various opposition parties; so long as they turned their focus away from the Royalists and the Government, their papers would, generally, return to only the previous levels of censorship.
The Marquis, growing further distrusting of the media, begins a more thorough infiltration of it by the secret police, whilst taking more openly legal action where the shreds of evidence of impropriety justify such actions. He similarly takes on other intimidation tactics to discourage some of the more belligerent amongst them.
As the third avenue by which he takes his revenge, he begins setting aside some of the surplus his most recent budgets have created in preparation to more or less seize financial control of some the weakened papers, with further plans of using them as new conservative mouth-pieces, without informing their readers of the changes. He further intends on directing the new editors to gradually shift the paper's leaning from the left or centre to the right, to further muddy the waters.
-
It is the estimable opinion of the First Secretary that these allegations of bias are, for want of better words, wholly unjustified. These papers have, so long as they do not contain prose of any sort contrary to the nature and ethics of the Kingdom of Spain, been allowed a great deal of liberty - compare, for instance, the situation of France, where the press is owned or otherwise regulated to an extreme degree, quite unlike the frankly lax laws across the whole of Iberia in general and Spain in particular. That these writers have penned pieces opposed to the Crown, the Government, and to peaceful, lawful society - decency and morality - is not some matter of grave concern. Indeed, it can be quite easily determined that, again to speak liberally, their own biases and pettiness comes to the fore, and their desire to create headlines and controversy, rather than accurately depict the situation, is indicative of their general policy in regards to the news - that is to say, they are nothing more than hapless, reaching demagogues, often within the sly wit necessary to construct worthwhile prose, and without the integrity to be truly effective journalists. That they choose to be attack dogs, villains, and indecent people, whose sole purpose is to deride the natural order, to libel the government, and to forsake honesty, the government cannot be faulted for taking a proactive, meaningful stance to oppose such blatant deceit. That they further choose to assail the government in taking these wholly lawful, and indeed necessary actions - after all, who is there to regulate the newsman? Who is there to keep them honest? - is again unsurprising. They have aligned themselves to parties disposed to opposition, almost as equally as they are disposed towards indolence and disloyalty.
To make succint the thoughts of the First Secretary; these claims are without merit, and are little more than the latest attempt by those so opposed to the Crown and its Government as to conjure up imagined incidences of bias and the like. That they choose to delude themselves is nothing more than a disappointment; that they now wish to lie before the King is simply unacceptable, and this should be condemned in the firmest ways possible.
The outlandish demands that the "Censorship Bureau," as they deign to call it, be run by "non-partisans" is ultimately a vacuous statement, indeed about as vacuous as any of their papers - if the personal opinion of the First Secretary can be freely expressed. This seems to be little more than a move to open the floodgates of radical speech and outright dishonesty in the press, whilst curbing the Crown's right of appointment, and its ability to effectively follow the laws that govern this Kingdom. Indeed, this motion would merely undermine the 1873 Agreements, rather than bolster them.
Furthermore, the claims that any move by the Crown to "silence" the press in matters pertaining to the Royal Audience is, frankly, laughable, for such powers being in the hands of the Crown's government were supported by the Audience, and indeed by the Liberal members of that body. Need the First Secretary remind those complaining so thoroughly and viciously (though certainly not factually) that is was the People's Party and its leader, Sr de Valle, who fought so fervently for the Crown to have these powers affirmed by that body? Or, dare I suggest it, do these press-men have no desire to objectively make their case, and rather are attempting to facilitate radicalism and the lessening of Royal Power through these lies and withheld truths? I would, judging by their actions thus far, and the years that the Crown has in dealing with such individuals, very much assume that this is, unfortunately, the case.
~ Pontevedra