Wyoming hits back at Broncano: 'A man reading the prompter'

Wyoming hits back at Broncano: 'A man reading the prompter'

The El Intermedio host responded to Jorge Ponce with a jab about 'people beating drums' and 'guys around forty calling each other bro all the time'. Wyoming's response to La Revuelta is not an isolated joke: for some participants in the debate, it is the visible sign of a ratings war pitting two shows from the same ideological spectrum against each other. The trigger was a comment by Ponce on La Revuelta about Wyoming reading the prompter while thinking about other things. Wyoming replied at the start of his show with another zinger: 'An elderly gentleman, who must be somewhere out there, reading the prompter while deciding whether to put an X or a two for next weekend's Espanyol-Osasuna match.'

What peine between Wyoming and Broncano

The exchange of statements has a specific origin. Jorge Ponce, a contributor to La Revuelta, said on Broncano's show that if someone changes channels they might find Wyoming 'reading the prompter while thinking about other things', a capability he attributed with sarcasm. Broncano laughed at the joke. Days later, Wyoming peine El Intermedio with a similar response: 'On another channel you might find more avant-garde content, like people beating drums and not being called Manolo, or guys around forty calling each other bro all the time.' The final blow was aimed at Broncano himself: an elderly man reading the prompter while deciding his football predictions for Espanyol-Osasuna.

The exchange is interpreted as direct competition. Both formats share the same time slot and target audience, and the transfer of viewers between one and the other is the variable that weighs most heavily in executive offices. The irony about the prompter is not a technical detail: it is the accusation that the rival does not improvise, but reads.

The audience contested by Broncano and Wyoming

The most repeated analysis in the sector points out that La Revuelta has taken viewers away from El Intermedio, not from El Hormiguero. That nuance completely changes the reading of the conflict: it is not a war against the media right wing, it is friendly fire. Some argue that Broncano's show has occupied the niche that Wyoming had exploited for years, and that the veteran presenter has seen his market share erode without his discourse changing a bit.

The comparison with El Hormiguero appears in almost all readings. Pablo Motos's show maintains its established audience, with ups and downs, but without the bleeding that some attribute to El Intermedio. The conclusion drawn from this contrast is uncomfortable for the official narrative: the enemy was not the rival across the street, but the comrade in the trenches.

The wear and tear of the veteran presenter

Wyoming has been in the same trench for decades. That is his main asset and, at the same time, his biggest burden. According to some critics, the formula of 'he's a fascist, haha' and kindergarten jokes have aged poorly compared to a competitor bringing a new register to the same audience. The wear and tear is not just in ratings: it is in the narrative.

In economic terms, the underlying issue is who pays. Public television and subsidies to the sector enter the equation when discussing the sustainability of a format that depends on money outside the market. Some calculate that the annual cost of these programs is measured in millions of euros, and that this money comes from taxes paid by taxpayers who do not necessarily consume the product. The complete breakdown of those accounts, item by item, is what turns the matter into something more than a TV brawl.

Who pays for the cultural war party?

The fight between Wyoming and Broncano is part of a broader discussion about the public radio and television model and the role of external production companies. When two shows from the same spectrum compete for the same pie, the question is not who wins, but who finances it. The most circulated argument is that the taxpayer supports a structure that has become redundant: two almost identical products competing for the same niche.

The outcome of this fight remains open. If Wyoming accepts his TV retirement without complaint, the conflict will end superficially. If his ego as a betrayed diva surfaces, the scenario changes. The only certainty is that the bill continues to be paid by the usual suspects.

---

How long can a TV duopoly competing for the same viewer with the same money last?