Buenos Aires, February 5, 2026 - Total News Agency (TNA) - The national government announced the launch of the Official Response Office, a new body designed to publicly confront what the Executive Branch defines as 'press operations,' 'fake news,' and media maneuvers driven by opposing political sectors. The new office was unveiled with a high-voltage political message on social networks, making it clear that its mission will be to 'actively refute lies, point out specific falsehoods, and expose the operations of the media and the political caste.' From the government, they emphasized that this is not censorship, but rather adding an 'official voice' to differentiate 'data from narratives,' defending freedom of expression as a central value of the Javier Milei administration. According to the official explanation, the elimination of state advertising would have caused criticism of the government to become 'noisier,' forcing the Executive to respond more forcefully. However, behind that argument emerges a more complex reality: state advertising did not disappear, but mutated, channeling through indirect and selective routes. Public advertising continues to flow through state-controlled companies and agencies, though presented under the guise of 'commercial spending' or 'institutional communication.' The main channels for this indirect advertising include YPF, Banco Nación, Aerolíneas Argentinas, ANSES, ARCA (ex-AFIP), the Central Bank of the Argentine Republic, state or mixed energy companies, as well as provincial lotteries, casinos, and banks. Meanwhile, critical journalists and media, or those who do not align with the government, are excluded from these benefits. They are not only marginalized from the advertising distribution but are also often left out of the interview circuit and privileged access to officials, reinforcing a system of rewards and punishments that contradicts the discourse of neutrality. In this context, the creation of the Official Response Office takes on a particular nuance. The office was born in a climate of strong polarization and distrust, with the challenge of demonstrating that its function will not be to discipline critical voices, but to provide verifiable information. This is added to institutional campaigns linked to credits, fuels, financial services, social benefits, taxes, asset whitewashing, or official programs, formally justified as information for the user, but which in practice fulfill the same role as traditional advertising. This advertising is not distributed homogeneously or transparently. The initiative was presented as a direct consequence of the cut in traditional official advertising and as a tool to 'combat disinformation by providing more information.' In this framework, the Official Response Office appears as a communicational defense instrument against a media ecosystem that the ruling party perceives as hostile. However, the 'zero advertising' narrative has evident cracks. While the classic official advertising, historically managed from the Chief of Cabinet or the Secretariat of Communication, was drastically reduced or frozen, this did not imply the end of state funding to media and journalists. Sources in the sector agree that the scheme remains discretionary: not all media have access to these resources, and in general, the beneficiaries are those considered 'non-hostile' or openly compliant with the official discourse. The interaction is limited to public rebuttal, generally in a confrontational tone, without clear instances of dialogue or joint verification. The paradox is evident. In some vernacular circles close to domestic espionage, they claim that the 'chain of happiness' through secret funds is very much alive, albeit selectively.
