Karmele Marchante hasn’t minced words about the goodbye of a familiar afternoon space on Telecinco. After learning that the program was cancelled, she spoke candidly about what the moment meant for her and for the newsroom culture she has known for years. In a fairly direct assessment, she shared her mixed feelings about the decision and the people behind the curtain, noting that her connection to colleagues and the daily rhythms of the set mattered more than any single outcome.
She explained that she does not feel elated or despondent. Her perspective centers on the genuine relationships built with newsroom colleagues and the shared experience of producing content day after day. While she acknowledged the stability of the production, the quality of the set, and the leadership involved, her verdict about the end carried a restrained tone, underscoring that personal and professional ties carry weight long after a show signs off.
This moment isn’t the first time Marchante has spoken frankly about the program that has been a fixture in many living rooms. In a prior interview, she addressed the shift in the program’s direction, reflecting on seven years of collaboration and the memories that linger from that period. Her comments highlighted a sense that the space meant more than screen time; it represented a chapter in the careers of those who helped shape it.
She recalled feeling hurt by the way the dynamic on the show unfolded, describing a sense of mistreatment that lingered after experiences on set. Her words underscored the emotional toll that public work can take on contributors who have invested a great deal of time and energy into a daily format.
The wave of strong opinions regarding the show did not end with Marchante. Another prominent figure associated with the program reacted to the cancellation with a measured, if pointed, response. The reaction reflected a broader conversation about how media projects come to an end and what that means for staff, audiences, and the production ecosystem.
The remarks drew attention to the social media conversations that followed, with viewers and supporters weighing in as the chapter closed. The discourse touched on the ethics of ending a long-running program and the responsibilities of the network to those who contributed to its success. One notable observation emphasized that public perception can quickly shift when a familiar piece of daytime television is no longer part of the lineup.
The public dialogue around the decision then extended to questions about accountability and transparency in media decisions. Critics argued for clarity about why the show ended, while supporters urged a respectful closure that honors the daily routines of fans and the hard work behind the scenes. The discussion captured the tension between creative leadership, audience expectations, and the practical realities of running a daily production.