Two Hamburgers, Lettuce, Cheese and.......

04/14/2015 - 10h52

In the sea of unknowns and uncertainties that surrounds the future of newspapers, there is at least one belief close to consensus, that the possibility of survival of printed newspapers lies in the production of contents different from fast food journalism served on the Internet. The menu will be more selective, with less routine content and more depth and reflection. There certainly is no logic in depending on the high cost of paper and the distribution network to deliver into the hands of readers what they have already read online.

At the same time, this logic can't ignore the fact that every transition follows what has happened and what is yet to come: it's necessary to discover the future with our feet in the present, even more when it is today that pays the bills than what will be announced tomorrow.

The first part of the equation is already in practice; reducing the role of the printed version, even more with the necessary of cutting costs than for the action planned in the direction of a new model. The search for depth in content, to the contrary, seems to be moving backward.

I will cite examples from this week. The edition on Wednesday (April 8) carried two big topics, the political blunder which made Vice President Michel Temer become the political spokesman for President Dilma Rousseff and the controversial project for outsourcing labor, which was shelved for 10 years. The first was an unprecedented quid pro quo, with delicious inside information which make anyone who enjoys politics salivate; the second one was a journalistic work of prime importance because it could change professional relationships and alter the dynamic of the labor market and the economy. Coverage of both was so poor it qualified as Franciscan poverty: lacking analysis, inside information or difference from the previous day's news. It was still fast food, and served cold.

The next day, approval of the proposal was in all the headlines, but the poor coverage was repeated - and not only in Folha. With slight differences, the reports were limited to focusing on some of the more controversial aspects and lacked fleshing out the proposal or discussing its advantages and disadvantages. The coverage was dual, big business on one side and unions on the other, the majority of which are in-between between the two points that were marginalized in the debate.

If this is the way the press expects to keep readers, we're in trouble.

*

I am leaving for a conference this week, and after that will be going on vacation. The column will return in the second half of May, but the ombudsman's department will remain active, dealing with cases sent by readers. Thanks, and see you when I return.

Translated by JOHN WRIGHT

Read the article in the original language