What is quality on television today?

Segun: politicians will refer to the national, linguistic or community construction; programmers to the influence of successes or hearings; professionals will talk about the formal characteristics of television language; analysts about discourses... Quality, for me, has to do with the autonomy of speech and expression, with the diversity and depth of contents.

Is television and quality increasingly incompatible?

Today's television is finding it increasingly difficult to get out of the norm and work from the exception. Political corruption is the protagonist. This means that television, both in its form and in its discourse, is neutral and it is becoming increasingly difficult for a distinction to be made between programmes and channels. This supposed kindness is not synonymous with quality. More quality for television would be to bet on risk, on the formal and conceptual multiplicities, on the questions than on the answers. It would be part of people’s education, influencing discourse, mentality and difference.

Like anywhere on television, commercial success is sought.

Success is the Holy Grail, not just television, but a false myth that affects most human actions. A company depends on its buyers: always orders the customer. Demand and freedom to produce content are often sacrificed in order to achieve a wider audience. But if with that strategy we would make a kind of balance of what is lost and won, many times we would see that it is not worth it. Furthermore, only the quantitative and non-qualitative impact is taken into account.

Of course television will have some responsibilities.

As a means of communication and information, it has a deontological responsibility to distinguish facts from opinions, to disseminate informed information, to respect the right to privacy of people. And don't discriminate against anyone for reasons of gender, race or culture. It must also follow the principle of freedom of expression, information and independence, avoiding the covert advertising attempts that companies, individuals and institutions want to disseminate as information. But I think if the list of television broadcasts were a society, where every program represents a social class, it would be the most unequal model in history.

The network is also there, the main transmitter of audiovisual content.

YouTube, for example, has over 1 billion users and millions of videos are played every day. But we are still at a very early stage in the development of the Internet. It is not uncommon for this reason to make viral kitsch contents related to frivolity, animal tenderness and nonsense. It is true that, according to the statistics, a very small percentage of own audiovisual content comes from the network, but there are tools that are changing the statistics, such as Snapchat or Instagram. Another thing is whether the content that is created is of general interest or if it is narcissistic traces linked to more banal aspects of one's own life.

The possibility of creating own programming on the network is becoming more and more common. Is the boundary between issuer and receiver blurring?

Not necessarily. I would say that we all need to have a voice or feel represented in the media. But there is also a need for a certain exemplarity and professionalism in the construction of public discourse. A balance must be struck between access to and the opening-up of culture or television and demanding, grounded and rooted production.

The network is there, but television has not disappeared.

And I don't think it goes away. Television was originally seen in public places in Europe, as films were seen in film. Many of the initial broadcasts were sports competitions or major shows. This idea of television, of operating as a means of national celebration, is still in force. The Internet has not supplanted the idea of live celebrations, which makes them feel the power and fascination of sharing the same ritual.

Although television symbolizes passivity, we are obsessed with participation.

We still like to sit on the couch, put a chain without expecting anything and watch a movie you like all of a sudden or know why you're getting attention. The idea of finding some value of what television is offering you at any given time is also attractive. And, of course, for all those who want to disconnect, television still has enormous effectiveness in its constant and renewed normality.