29/04/2007

Banks came out looking good on paper

By MÁRIO MAGALHÃES
ombudsman@uol.com.br

The story omitted elementary data about cultural operations at the companies: there is little risk in these operations

The story "Banks lead list of investment in culture," published in the business section on Wednesday, had some problems.

One of them was listing Banco do Brasil, Petrobras and Eletrobrás as private institutions. The false "privatization," which was corrected, was one of the smaller mistakes.

Giving up on the critical spirit that should guide it, Folha reported the results of a survey in which banks seemed to be generous patrons of the arts when they are far from this.

The study by the Group of Institutes, Foundations and Companies (GIFE) showed that, among the 10 biggest "investors in cultural projects" in 2005, five were banks (Bradesco, Banco do Brasil, Banco do Estado do Paraná, Itaú and Unibanco).

The story said: "Investments in culture (by the companies listed by GIFE) appear in third place, behind education and community development." These words are repeated: "investors," "investments," "invested." There was nothing about "tax exemptions," "tax deductions" or the euphemism "financial incentives."

The story left out elementary information about the cultural operations of the big companies: the "investments" are few and there is little risk. There are sponsorships, frequently with government funds.

I am not coming out for or against this, but rather to inform readers so they can draw their own conclusions.

As the newspaper is accustomed to doing, there are financial incentive laws through which companies can deduct part of the taxes they spend on culture. They don't pay some taxes and devote sponsorship to promotion of their brand.

If it is within the law, it is all legal. But the newspaper needs to say that. To the contrary, banks come out looking better on paper than they should. Readers don't know that many companies finance projects such as the Rouanet Law, which provides incentives for cultural sponsorship.

A good antidote for Folha to avoid blunders like this is inspired in its stylebook, which has an entry on "Critical journalism" saying: "The newspaper does not exist to sweeten reality, but to show it from a critical point of view."

Sometimes weak news can topple strong topic

The most important topic does not always deserve the newspaper's headline. What merits attention is the news, and it will be more valuable when it deals with important topics. Last Sunday, the main headline on Folha 's front page was "Wiretaps indicate sale of acquittals."

It was a reference to the recordings obtained by the federal police included in the investigation into "Operation Têmis" which probed suspicious judicial decisions. In the internal pages, there was not even one transcription about the impact.

A common procedure occurred - but not recommended - in journalism: it gave visibility to a topic for its relevance, even without value in the news (which was lacking in anything new).

It is a risk that is run in extensive coverage, such as Operation Têmis and its predecessor - in one week - Hurricane, also by the federal police. The challenge is to recognize when the weak news topples a strong agenda.

Photograph of dead monkey "revives pain"

Sometimes, if information can provoke unnecessary suffering in readers, it is better to not publish it. It is hard to know what the limit is.

On Sunday, Folha highlighted a story about the location where the Gol Boeing fell in September. Reporters showed the wreckage and narrated the adventure in the forest. A photograph came out of a monkey killed, and then eaten, by Indians. The material looked very good to me.

Reader Wilson Cavalcanti disagreed: "(The photo) is in extremely poor taste, showing the animal's cadaver which closely resembles a human and in a place that is marked by the death of 154 humans."

"The images revive the pain, and the story is a playful look at an adventure in the jungle," said reader Maria Alice Gravina.

Reader gives opinion about two stories

In my last column I wrote that I would like to know more opinions about two questions: if Folha is correct in pointing out the status of Englishman Lewis Hamilton as the first black driver in Formula One racing; and if it got it right in reconstituting the massacre in Virginia.

A reader identified a black in the illustration of the killer, but the news said that he was Asian.

I am grateful to the 54 people who shared their observations. Seeking their opinions was not an opinion poll. It helps the listener to better understand what readers think.

"Reverse foreign exchange swap?" Do you know what it is?

The business section cited the expression "foreign exchange swap reversal" five times on Saturday, April 21. It did not explain what it is. In my critique on Monday, I pointed out that readers are not obligated to know such expressions. On Thursday, the incognito expression returned. Again, the newspaper did not translate it for those who are not well versed in 'economese.'"

I asked for, and the business section sent, the definition for "foreign exchange swap reversal": "It is a contract that the Central Bank sells to banks. For its part, the Central Bank pays an interest rate to banks to hold the title. And the banks pay the monetary authority the variation in the exchange rate during that particular time."

Did you understand?

==

12-MONTH PREGNANCY: In a small portion of the copies of Wednesday's paper, a caption on the front page of Folha spoke of "a law that allows abortion up to the 12th month of gestation"; the mistake was corrected to "12th week."

Translation by John Wright