RTVE airs '7291' on Madrid care homes; PP counters with 'gerontocaust'

RTVE airs '7291', reopening the care home controversy

Can a documentary about deaths in care homes become a double-edged electoral weapon? The broadcast of 7291 on two public television channels, focusing on pandemic management in Madrid, has reactivated a months-long stalemate: the issue of elderly deaths in care homes during the first wave. According to viewers, the film directly targets the president of the Community of Madrid and her management of geriatric facilities. The reaction was immediate: the People's Party (PP) is already using the term gerontocaust as a counter-narrative, while the president's circle reminds everyone that care home management depended on other administrations.

The striking part isn't the documentary itself. It's that, for the first time in a long while, much of the political spectrum seems to agree on an uncomfortable point: elderly people were left to die. The disagreement lies in who bears the responsibility.

What exactly does the documentary 7291 say?

The title refers to the number of deaths the documentary attributes to Madrid's management during the pandemic. The broadcast on two RTVE channels has been interpreted by parts of the political spectrum as partisan use of public television. The central accusation against the Madrid president is homicide by action or omission, an allegation formulated without nuance in the original material and lacking any judicial backing from a legal standpoint.

The defense articulated from the other side does not deny the deaths. It denies exclusivity. It argues that triage—prioritizing patients based on survival criteria—was applied throughout Spain, not just in Madrid, and that regions governed by different political parties faced comparable situations. In Asturias, for example, complaints have been filed against the regional government regarding care home deaths. Similar episodes occurred in La Rioja and Aragon.

The problem with this argument is that it turns a tragedy into a draw. And a draw in a tragedy offers no comfort to anyone.

The battle for the narrative: from March 8th to protocols

Some analyses suggest the documentary is part of a broader operation to wear down the Madrid president ahead of an electoral cycle. The broadcast on public TV is seen as an illegitimate use of a resource funded by all taxpayers. The response from the other side is that public television merely reflects what courts and archives have already documented.

The counterattack has involved retrieving statements and tweets from public officials who minimized the pandemic or mocked those wearing masks at the time. Management of care homes by other administrations has also been highlighted, naming specific individuals. The lingering question is uncomfortable: if the problem was widespread, why is the documentary called 7291 and not All of Spain?

Some go further, arguing that the true scandal isn't who managed worse, but that hospital access was denied to the elderly and they were given palliative sedation without individualized diagnosis. This thesis, defended vigorously in the original material, points to a structural problem in the healthcare system rather than a specific autonomous community.

The elderly no one came for

One of the most uncomfortable lines of inquiry points to families. It is argued that many seniors remained locked in their care homes while their children applauded from balconies, watched series, and baked cakes. The direct question raised is: Why didn't you take them out? If confinement was home-based, the family home was an option. It wasn't done.

Some argue that this omission generates today a sense of guilt that is being shifted onto a third party. It is a harsh hypothesis without supporting data, but it circulates strongly in public debate. What is documented is that hospitals did not admit many elderly patients coming from care homes, and that care homes lacked sufficient staff to attend to them.

The result was mortality rates that no official statistic has broken down with the precision the case deserves. Available data indicated that the first wave concentrated the highest number of deaths in socio-health centers, but the attribution of responsibility remains unresolved.

The PP and the 'gerontocaust' accusation

The People's Party has responded with a symmetrical accusation: gerontocaust, attributed to the central government's circle. The strategy consists of shifting the focus from Madrid to Moncloa (the seat of the Spanish Government) and to the administrations that, according to this version, made the deadliest decisions: closing primary care, suspending oncological and cardiovascular diagnostics, and confining children.

The president of the Community of Madrid has been the documentary's main target, but also its main political beneficiary: each attack reinforces her profile as a victim of a hostile media machine. This is the backfire effect some analysts anticipated.

The underlying question is whether the documentary seeks to inform or to position. The answer depends on whom you ask. What is fruta is that 7291 people did not die twice. They died once. And no one has resigned over it.

---

In the end, public television achieved what no parliamentary debate could: making care homes a topic of discussion for an entire week. Too bad they are discussed like a football match. With the same enthusiasm and the same memory.