Innocence in the Line of Fire

07/04/2016 - 09h57

Ítalo, 10, died after being hit by a bullet fired by a military policeman (MP) who was chasing him in a stolen car he was driving along with an 11-year-old friend. The tragedy was reported by Folha in a two-column, headline-story on the Front Page (04/06).

Together with two other adolescents aged 13 and 14, Waldik was in the backseat of a Chevette when he was hit in the neck and died. The bullet was shot from the revolver of a civil guard that was chasing a car with robbery suspects. The crime was a headline story on Monday, the 27th, rare for a newspaper that prefers to highlight political and economic news articles.

What they had in common is that they were children who met tragic ends in police operations that were, at the very least, technically questionable. And in both cases, the journalistic accounts were based on information supplied basically by the police themselves.

Robert, 15, also accused of stealing a car, had met a similar fate at the hands of MPs the day before. His story didn't get to the Front Page. It took three days for his death to be published in the newspaper at the bottom of a page in the Cotidiano (Daily) Section (29/06). According to the MP, he had failed to stop at a barricade check point. His death was reported in a short news brief on the Front Page.

A few days later, Júlio César, 24, a university student, died after being shot in the head while driving a car which was hit by at least 16 shots fired during a police chase in the eastern zone of São Paulo.

These are cases with a sadly similar dynamic. They received differential treatment in the newspaper. Certainly, they weren't the only young victims of violence in June. Studies have shown that 29 children and adolescents are killed in Brazil every day. When should they be reported by Folha and with how much emphasis?

To answer the first part of the question, the answer is always. The country can not allow for killing to become banalized, especially of children and adolescents. Regarding the emphasis, while each case is unique, a standard should be sought.

Coverage of any crime involving children, adolescents and young people involves special care and increased attention on the part of journalists. For two primary reasons: first, to deal with and protect children from disturbing information and second, to deal with information supplied by children regarding criminal activities they may have seen.

Police reports must be carried out with critical objectivity and distance with conduct compared to technical safety standards.

The paper must verify technical information that proves or refutes what is reported by children or by the police. Some basics for example: was the crime scene kept intact? Does testimony coincide with or is it contrary to information collected in the investigation? Reporters in these types of cases must get beyond the "he-said-she-said" and look for technical proof.

Folha's performance was lacking in the cases cited above.

For many readers, Folha always takes the side of the victims against the police. "The paper is always partial and only considers the side of the person who committed the crime" says a reader. "Are you trying to convince readers that an MP executed an innocent and defenseless child?" questions another.

It's true that Folha gave little space for security agents to defend themselves in the crimes above. On 30/06, the newspaper "O Estado de São Paulo" one-upped Folha by publishing an interview with the municipal guard accused in the shooting of Waldik.

The journal shouldn't stand in judgement for or against the police nor as an entity to protect the weak and oppressed. It's responsibility to its reader is to report the facts with as much detail as possible, revealing any incoherencies or inconsistencies in versions, performing its own investigations and not being limited to the partial reporting of the police.

Offender or in Conflict with the Law?

A story last week reported that "2 out of 3 minor offenders have no father at home". The use of the expression "minor offender" was questioned by researcher Thiago Oliveira, from the Violence Studies Nucleus at USP (University of SP). He suggested as an alternative "adolescents in conflict with the law". Not very journalistic.

The Editorial Manual suggests that the term "minor" should be avoided and instead substituted by more precise vocabulary like "children" or "adolescents". Vinicius Mota, the Editor in Chief, doesn't see any problem in using "offender" as an adjective to describe an adolescent, who has committed what is according to the law and based upon the judgement of the courts to be, an offense.

In my view, the problem is when the term is used, as it often is, without any proof of violation.

Translated by LLOYD HARDER

Read the article in the original language