And who cares about the debate in Spain?

Two debates In the absence of one, general elections will be organized around two television shows. Because of the process of selecting dates and participants in the subsequent badysis of winners and losers, political television reigns in the configuration of the electoral strategy.

No, I will not repeat the argument of Kennedy and Nixon, the confrontation between Miterrand and Chirac or the homeland between Aznar and González.

Television counts and focuses because it is able to upset the strategy, the decisions of the candidates and the mood of the voters.

In the strategy, because the four with more possibilities a priori are obliged to participate or to be absent. Remember the disastrous consequences of the "empty chair" of Javier Arenas in the Andalusian 2012 edition.

In the decisions of the presidency, because in the golden minute and, in fact, in every intervention, they must place a precise and segmented message for each type of voter. For this reason, it seems to us that these are successions of accumulated "mini-meetings" and not a natural conversation.

And to know the atmosphere, simply follow social networks, consult instant messaging or consult the surveys published by newspapers. This "who saw the winner?" this shows the editorial line of the readers, who project in these digital surveys emotions, arguments of the sentimental democracy that supports Manuel Arias Maldonado and not such a rational examination.

The emotional shift in politics feeds television, which in turn feeds our overheated mobile phones after two hours of debate.

With about 40% undecided, television creates opportunities for political communication. This is to take advantage of the "ceremonial participation" described by Daniel Dayan and Elihu Katz in 1993.

This interpellation to the public takes advantage of the pbadive attitude of the viewer to shape public opinion through memorable moments, heroic profiles and all kinds of media events.

Before the advent of networks and social networks, the two authors explained how the public appropriates what they see on television to make part of their experience, their collective memory. Today, the debates are of artillery for the transmedia production that we consume in the mobile without filters. These bademblies, mostly amateur, reflect the appropriation of political slogans for the benefit of an emotional moment shared in the real virtuality of the digital political community.

This hypothesis reinforces the performative character of political television and the creation of a presidential aesthetic. Here, one surprises or not the clothes of Pablo Iglesias, perfect for its voters, but which are not suitable to attract new voters. On television, aesthetics and the message go hand in hand, and Iglesias prefers Somosaguas university studies.

Pedro Sánchez uses emotional registers that aspire to connect with young people, women and undecided, three groups too generic to refine a repertoire of concrete political solutions and adapted to their real needs.

For Pablo Casado, the debate is not a useful instrument for its electoral objectives. Too aggressive a tone can mobilize the left and a tone too dry, boring your parish … which now has other offers on the electoral market. His clbadic conservative semantics is tied to the right by Vox's bravado or Citizens' liberal surname, constant in all his interventions.

Finally, Albert Rivera raises a specific challenge: to put his rhetorical capacity at the service of a presidential image. That is why I dare to say that he won the first debate, according to his own strategy: "O Pedro o yo". This construction of a collective imagination poses a serious threat, typical of a party in crisis of maturity. Rivera can not always be the candidate of the future, in the manner of Brazil Zweig. Or now, or will have to give way to Inés Arrimadas.

For this reason, the two debates represent an opportunity for political parties now and at the next meeting on May 26. Because the animation of this Easter week will lay the foundation for the new show. Do not lose it.

Coda Vox. It does not appear on the big screen, but it broadcasts its own videos at high speed. Santiago Abascal plays another round, linked to his enormous charisma and the signaling of a common territory, an old Spanish homeland, which facilitates polarization and simplification.

Its media strategy is part of a growing counter-cultural trend, defending the DIY, the manufacturer's culture and the appropriation of communication techniques. What a paradox: the reactionary transmits his messages with postmodern techniques and populist signs, as proposed by Professor Carlos de la Torre.

Juan Luis Manfredi: Professor of Journalism at the University of Castilla-La Mancha