Blocus creator arrested and police blur his entire body

Rubén Pulido criticises the police for blurring the entire body of a detainee, while, according to him, other names would have been shown down to the last detail. The issue mixes data protection, media narrative and selective reporting.

The image of a detainee with his whole body pixelated is not new, but it is new that someone turns it into a headline. Journalist **Rubén Pulido** posted a message on X denouncing the contrast between completely blurring an arrestee and the thoroughness with which, he claims, other detainees would be treated if they were named **Manuel** or **Antonio**. The tweet, brief and with an attached screenshot, has become the centre of a debate about how the identity of someone taken to a police station is protected and how that protection is rationed depending on the case.

## What gets blurred and why

The blurring of faces and bodies in police images stems from **Organic Law 4/2015** on the protection of public safety and from data protection rules. It is not an arbitrary practice: it is applied to prevent detainees from being identified before a court ruling exists. The debate arises when that rule is applied in a way that, to the observer, seems selective. Pulido is not denouncing the blurring itself, but the criteria used to decide how much is covered.

## The selectivity argument

The tweet compares two scenarios: a detainee whose body appears completely pixelated versus other cases in which, according to the journalist, everything down to the **colour of the underwear** would have been shown. It is hyperbole, but it points to a legitimate question: is the same standard applied to all arrestees, or does it depend on who the protagonist is? The criticism does not question the existence of the rule, but its uneven application.

## Transparency and narrative

The label of "transparency" that Pulido attaches to the Government introduces a second layer: institutional communication. Blurring is not hiding, but it can be perceived as such when the rest of the information is doled out drop by drop. The tweet offers no figures or files; it is an opinion backed by an image. It should be read for what it is: a political criticism expressed on social media, not a journalistic investigation.