The Cruelty of Great Moments

08/07/2017 - 10h24

The definition is from journalist Cláudio Abramo (1923-87), a symbolic figure in Brazilian journalism and especially for Folha: "A great newspaper is known during great moments".

Abramo had simple rules for good journalism: write comprehensibly, meet deadlines, renew continuously, because a newspaper is the result of intellectual and artistic creativity.

His definition of a great newspaper may seem arcane to readers, but the members of an editorial team understand the dimensions of the challenge that it embodies.

Abramo's reflection came up during conversation about the coverage of the press during the historic moment the country passed through last week.

For the first time, a President was charged with the crime of corruption while holding office, but the investigation of his actions was halted by a vote of 51% of the congressmen.

For the country, it was a sad episode, practically shameful. For journalists, it was a great moment

The comparison of the digital and print editions of the three main newspapers in the country - Folha, "O Globo" and "Estado de S. Paulo" - regarding their coverage of the session of the Lower House of Congress dealing with the charge of corruption against President Michel Temer on the 2nd of August, is striking considering the lack of differentiation.

Of course, there may be one detail or another that could be identified as a "difference", but nothing that really stands out.

The editorial pasteurization revealed itself on the day when the papers presented the voting at the House. They swarmed to publish practically identical accounts of the final offensive by the Planalto Presidential Palace, infographics with details of the voting, speculation regarding the opposition's strategy, and all of them conducted surveys of parliamentarians regarding their positions related to the charges.

On the next day, the pages repeated themselves: scoreboards with results of the voting, stories of actions taken by ministers slamming votes in the plenary session, fierce arguments, pushing-and-shoving, and disconcerting scenes.

As it has been during recent moments, Folha was graphically more discreet - underplaying the unprecedented nature of the vote - while "O Globo" was more exaggerated. Conservative by tradition, the "Estado de S. Paulo" kept to the middle ground.

The issue at the bottom of it all is the difficulty for newspapers to diversify their agendas and approaches during a period of heated political events, transmitted live over the internet and television for hours on end, with an over-saturation of analysis and commentary.

The coverage in real time, even by TV Globo, makes the printed paper and even the digital editions irrelevant, unless they manage to offer something that television is unable to. Many articles concentrated on the past and the immediate present, ineffectively trying to explain the future.

The newspapers tried hard to show how much Temer's victory cost the country financially. They weren't effective in showing, however, exactly who gained what and how much. If their investigative reporting had been more successful in this regard, it could have been an enormous differential from the TV broadcasters.

Another absent theme was any analysis of how the country prostrated over the result. Since June 2013, the beginning of street protests, the demands and dimensions of the manifestations have been uninvestigated and unknown to the press. The near non-existence of protests on the day of the voting was ignored by Folha.

The issue of scoreboards merits a more detailed scrutiny. These surveys have been more important and informative on previous occasions. Theoretically, they are supposed to provide a service, a means for the the reader to monitor (and pressure) his/her congressman.

In the case of the voting on the charges against Temer, the scoreboards had small differences from each other, but ended up showing overall similar results among themselves, which ended up being unreal, and tending towards results that were different from what the newspapers themselves were finding and reporting. All of them registered a larger number of congressman in favor of accepting the charges, which as it turned out, was far from what actually took place.

Folha in the past has been seen as unsurpassed in coverage of major issues and events. For various reasons, such supremacy is no longer being demonstrated. Perhaps those were other times, other challenges.

If the newspaper today is read more online in its digital version than in the print edition, online coverage needs to be given more attention to effectively compete with television and innumerous digital competitors. Definitions regarding priorities and investments are urgent and immediate necessities.

After all, we are living in an age of instantaneous journalism. The results so far haven't been favorable. Great moments are cruel ones. It is critical to not be small and to prepare to face them.

Translated by LLOYD HARDER

Read the article in the original language