Facts Are Facts

01/30/2017 - 16h42

Donald Trump became the President of the United States on the 20th of January. The next day, he declared: "I have a running war with the media. They are among the most dishonest human beings on Earth."

His reaction was in response to information that his inauguration had attracted fewer people than Barack Obama's: "That was the largest audience to [ever] witness an inauguration, period", declared Sean Spicer, the White House Press Secretary.

Presidential aide Kellyanne Conway referred to "alternative facts" when describing the distorted data divulged by Spicer when he tried to defend his version. Facts are simply facts. There are no relative adjectives.

On Wednesday, the 25th, Stephen Bannon, Trump's chief strategist, heightened the attacks: "The media should be ashamed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut for a while. The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard work".

How should the media react to a government that starts out with a such a high level of belligerence? How should it react to provocation and lies? What kind of threats does the society that elected a such a temperamental ruler who has no connection to the factual truth face?.

Ross Douthat, a columnist for the New York Times, summarized the framework that is emerging with the new administration:
1) on the one hand, this will be a time of maximum risk for the freedom of expression, with lots of manipulation to marginalize the independent press at presidential press conferences (at the first, only one journalist from a conservative blog was allowed to ask questions); using legal procedures to restrain journalists (at least six journalists were arrested during coverage of protests against the president on the day of his inauguration); financially damaging communication companies. Trump isn't alone in insisting on punishing leaks of secret information, even when it is in the public interest (Barack Obama prosecuted nine journalists using hardline espionage laws who were eventually exonerated);

2) on the other hand, it will be a purifying challenge for the media, offering journalists the chance to free themselves from dependence on official sources and really practice investigative, serious and independent journalism that many believe has disappeared with the internet. Relevant information is far from the comfortable press rooms. Reporters will have to wear out their soles to tell attractive, unbiased and relevant stories.

Exposed to the dangers and opportunities of the new times, newspapers and journalists must take care to not fall into the temptations and traps that appear along the way.
The first was already laid out by Trump's chief strategist: "The media here is the opposition party. They don't understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States".

The second part of the phrase is accurate: the first is an angry imprecation. Journalists must not confuse their position as critics with that of political opposition. Distrust is a technical value of journalism, not an ideology.

The reaction of journalists who have threatened to not participate in official interviews and press conferences or cover governmental activities borders on childishness. Readers have the right to be informed. Adopting trumpism themselves - even for the opposite reason - is just as stupid as the original item.

Media critic Ryan Chittum dared to offer a mea cupla: [Trump] is vindictive and can seem allergic to facts. But it's hard to kick the suspicion that part of the reaction at times is because we journalists, as a class, are alienated from half the country.

Too many of us don't understand Trump voters, much less identify with them or agree with them on many issues. We still haven't come to terms with the fact that Trump's election is a rejection of us as much as it is the other elites he railed against".

What does this mean for Brazil and the Brazilian Press? Trump's actions interfere in the Brazilian economy, threaten thousands of Brazilians who have emigrated and create an environment of radical politics that is spreading virally throughout the world.

Understanding things from the perspective of our own reality is critical in striving for relevant coverage with our own identity.

Brazil is already dealing with the challenge of practicing journalism that is more technical and unbiased under abnormal conditions and pressure that has been provoked since 2013, first with the June manifestations, and afterwards with the impeachment.

Brazilian social and political spinning will tend to get worse until the presidential election in 2018. Being critically informed isn't taking political sides.

Translated by LLOYD HARDER

Read the article in the original language