14/12/2008

A lot more water is going to fall

CARLOS EDUARDO LINS DA SILVA
ombudsman@uol.com.br

Photo caption: People driven from their homes in Joinville (Santa Catarina state), in the Alto Vale do Itajaí region, one of the areas most affected by the rains.

If the story had come out earlier about the lack of maps of at-risk areas in Santa Catarina state, it could have helped to avoid fatalities.

Journalism is an activity that always existed to tell the public about events of the recent past. The big dilemma for printed versions is how to remain necessary if nothing is new by the time it reaches readers.

The most secure and obvious solution for printed media is to make an effort to explain the reasons why things happen and show what will be the possible consequences.

It is with interpretation that printed newspapers and magazines should concentrate. But many among them do not manage to go beyond the status of harbinger of the news.

It must do this, or try to find exclusive stories, or it will be limited to repeating information that the audience already knows (and run the risk of dying).

One great alternative, when everybody already knows that something happened yesterday, would be to anticipate what will, or at least could, happen tomorrow.

The problem is that this is terrain in which fortune tellers and astrologers have more expertise and resources to perform well. Even more so in a country in which someone said that predicting the past is already almost impossible.

This very week several readers complained about Folha's preview of how the Supreme Court would rule in the case involving the Raposa/Serra do Sol Indian reserve.

"Everything led to believing that the result would be very different than what occurred," complained Sérgio Alexandre Atunes de Carvalho, for example.

But there is another possibility with great potential. It is "preventive journalism" which tries to identify the causes of crises before, and not after, they arise.

There are two outpourings of this type. In Europe, the emphasis is on stories which try to avoid ethnic and religious wars and conflicts. In the United States, analysis focuses on responses of governments to the great challenges following the reaction by the state over time to prevent repeating catastrophes resulting from natural disasters, public health problems or any social crisis.

For example, if the story that Folha published Nov. 28 showing that municipalities destroyed by rains in Santa Catarina did not have maps of the area at risk had been published three months or longer before, it could have helped prevent some (or many) deaths.

Preventive journalism anticipates events, through their action, in which some tragedies could be averted. Everybody knows that it rains a lot in Brazil during the summer and that cities have many areas exposed to landslides and flooding.

Why not actively warn what the government does or does not do to minimize the effects of these rains? The same applies to questions about health, and public policies of any type.

Why wait for Congress to decide about limiting discounts for students and retirees or increase tax deductions, and then only report it? Why not encourage among those interested in these topics so they can influence the results and be prepared for what is coming?

What do readers want?

Reader Wilson Marques asked me why the previous column with opinions by readers did not include opinions about the 50th anniversary of the arts and entertainment section. I responded that in these seven months as ombudsman I hardly received any letters about Folha's cultural section.

Wilson asked if the silence was due to satisfaction with the product or apathy toward it. There is no way to respond with certainty, but I suspect that it is more apathy than satisfaction.

A debate about the arts and entertainment section, published the day before yesterday, was dominated by memories of its role in the 1980s but is no longer.

The official book commemorating 50 years became obviously nostalgic. In the second paragraph, it quotes theater director Gerald Thomas: "The arts and entertainment section was the Internet of the 1980s."

Last Sunday I asked former editors, who responded to what should be done to improve it. The comment by the current editor could be an indication of one of the causes of the problem.

Marcos Augusto Gonçalves said that having a relevant role in this country's cultural debate seems to be "a nostalgic discussion." I disagree. To me, it is always a current necessity.

My impression is that the section has been turning into a consumer guide and looks at culture as simply a market. For this reason, it does not arouse controversy, does not animate controversy, does not help to think.

In the debate, Marcos suggests the citizen readers have turned into reader consumers. It could be. But is the newspaper's role to give the reader only what he thinks he wants? I don't think so. Obviously, it needs to satisfy, but it also must challenge. Maybe that's what it is missing.

To read

"Preventive Journalism and Coverage of Risky Situations," by Andi, 2007 (http:/www.redandi.org/-pdf/gripe-aviaria.pdf) - While it focuses on the topic of avian flu, the study has important reflections for any coverage of catastrophes, public health crises and situations of social risk

To see

"The China Syndrome," by James Bridges, with Jane Fonda and Jack Lemmon, 1979 (starting at 19.90 reals, US $8.45) - TV reporter doing routine coverage witnesses a near-accident at a nuclear power plant, investigates and, with the help of a scientist, prevents a tragedy