The documentary “Petro”, which covers the political and personal life of President Gustavo Petro, has put RTVC, the largest public media system in the country, at the center of the debate; after it became known that the Signal channel Colombia paid US$10,000 (about $40 million Colombian) for the rights to broadcast the production.
The contract, signed with the production company Parkway Pictures LLC, authorizes three broadcasts of the documentary, with a duration of 98 minutes, under a license valid for one year and according to the document, the agreement allows simultaneous broadcast (Simulcast) and access to various platforms during the same period.
Check here: Pulse between Ecopetrol and the GEB for regasification solutions for the country
The news was initially spread by Senator María Fernanda Cabal, who denounced the expense through her social networks, pointing out that each of the issues would cost around US$3,333; so the congresswoman He described the contract as “a sample of waste” and requested the intervention of the control entities.
“How long do we pay him for his vanities when there is no money for gasoline, nor for the police, nor for medicine?” Cabal questioned in a video published on X; while making it clear that “this is not how you make a country. In 2026 this will completely change. We must respect the people.”
The RTVC work environment index was rated 75.0 points, out of 100; 20.9 points above the average measurement of government service entities.
In another message, the senator insisted that the documentary was an expression of “megalomania,” comparing the president with Emperor Nero and wrote that “there is no right that they are spending Colombians’ money on the megalomania of Petro, who feels like a Nero while Colombia burns.”
A portrait of the president
The documentary, released on September 21, 2025, covers the political career of the head of state: his time in the M-19 movement, his period as mayor of Bogotá and his arrival to power in 2022. It was presented by RTVC as a biographical portrait “that seeks to show the political and human path of the current president.”
Also read: Bre-B: this is how you can receive and send money with this new payment system
Although no official statement has been made by the Government, the piece was highlighted by the media system as part of its institutional mission to “disseminate content of national interest.”
For its part, RTVC explained that the acquisition of external productions is a common practice within the public system, which regularly purchases licenses or broadcast rights for documentaries,
films and cultural series produced by third parties. In that sense, the entity defended the process as an editorial purchase and not as a production financed directly with additional public resources.
President Gustavo Petro
A controversy with precedents
Still, the controversy came at a sensitive time, considering that in 2024the Administrative Court of Cundinamarca admitted a popular action that seeks to establish whether RTVC has assumed functions unrelated to its missionary purpose, such as the contracting of logistical services or institutional events.
That investigation, still ongoing, opened the debate about the limits of the public media system and the use of state funds and that is why the purchase of the documentary “Petro” revived criticism about whether RTVC acts with sufficient independence from the Government.
You may be interested in: WhatsApp reinvents itself with usernames: what they are and how they will work in the app
María Fernanda Cabal herself asked that the Comptroller’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office and the Prosecutor’s Office review the details of the contract to determine if there were irregularities or improper use of resources, while other congressmen from the Democratic Center supported her call, describing the expense as “unnecessary and immoral” in a context of fiscal austerity and budget deficit.
For now, the debate remains open and what for the public system is an exercise in cultural dissemination, for the opposition is a symbol of excess and disconnection with the economic reality of the country.
DANIEL HERNÁNDEZ NARANJO
Portfolio Journalist
