Arrows in the Bamboo Patch of the News

09/18/2017 - 15h41

The final arrows promised by Brazil's Federal Prosecutor General against the President were shot last Thursday (14th). Rodrigo Janot charged Michel Temer for the second time.

The charge sent on its way to the Federal Supreme Court accuses the President of heading up a criminal organization which was composed of government ministers and politicians who were close to the PMDB party.

"Where there is bamboo, there will be arrows", Janot said in July, when he signaled that he would be presenting a new charge against the President before leaving his position as Prosecutor General. On Monday (18th), Raquel Dodge will take over the bamboo patch.

The new Brazilian Prosecutor General has already made it clear that she plans to impose her own style on the so-called Car Wash operation's direction.

The operation got underway in March of 2014 and the official numbers accumulated through August are impressive: 156 condemnations with 107 prison sentences (collectively adding up to 1,637 years, 7 months and 25 days), 158 plea-bargain agreements, restitution orders for R$38 billion (US$ 12.2 billion), R$6.4 billion (US$ 2.06 billion) in bribes.

The Brazilian Prosecutor General's Office sustains that Temer (PMDB party) as well as former president Luiz Inácio da Silva (PT party) are leaders of two different party groups that carried out criminal activities.

Both of them, therefore, became the preferred targets of the Prosecutor's Office. This similarity in roles, from the point-of-view of the prosecutors, exists, but hasn't always been reflected in Folha's coverage. The charges against Lula and Temer have been dealt differently by the newspaper.

On the 15th of September 2016, Folha published the headline: "Lula was the maximum leader of the 'bribeocracy', says Car Wash": just below, it continued: "Former President is charged with corruption and money laundering; PT party leader denies having committed crimes".

One year later, on last Friday, the 15th of Setember 2017, the headline was: "Janot accuses Temer of obstruction of Justice; President attacks charge". In small print, it declared: "Prosecutor says that Temer paid for the silence of defendants and was part of a criminal gang; for the President, the allegations are absurd".

It isn't simply a matter of demanding that different facts be given equal treatment. There are circumstances that can change interpretations, demand different approaches to happenings that seem to be similar. However, the newspaper should be careful to adhere to non-partisan and balanced practices

One of the characteristics that differentiates editorial material in journalism is the ability of the editors to select a primary subject and decide what focus to give to it.

The Car Wash period has been profuse in situations which allow a media critic to make comparative analyses. In internal critiques, on many occasions I provided examples of unequal treatment given by Folha to situations that could have been viewed and interpreted as being very similar.

In the first charge presented against Temer in June, I pointed out that Folha had been the only major newspaper to not use the verb "denounce" - preferring to use "accuse" - in its headline. For the first time in history, a sitting president had been denounced, and charged, with committing a crime while in office.

With the second charge, the Folha's frontpage once again dealt with it differently than other newspapers, and not positively. It was the only one to highlight the obstruction of justice on its frontpage, and not the leadership of a criminal organization.

The attempt by the newspaper's headline is undone by the main report itself, which highlighted both charges ("Temer obstructed the investigation and headed up a criminal gang, says Janot").

An analysis by a specialist reporter considered that the "charge basically refers to another alleged crime: a gang of congressmen headed by the President of the Republic who used political alliances 'as a tool for collecting bribes'".

The managing editor Vinicius Mota defended the choice. "Regarding the attribution of obstruction of justice, there is no doubt that it refers to acts that were carried out while the President was in office, a necessary condition, according to the Constitution, for a President of the Republic to be tried. And that's why the choice was made as to what to highlight in the headline.

Regarding the attribution of the criminal organization, which speaks to events that took place before Michel Temer had become acting president, the verb "integrate" effectively summarizes the content of nearly 200 pages dedicated to this part of the charge, which detail alleged practices of criminal collusion between all of the seven who were charged."

In a rare decision, Folha used part of a headline to defend the President, in the very same statement in which he is accused. I consider it essential for the newspaper to strive to provide room for the defense of those accused, even more so when dealing with the President of the Republic.

Readers asked the Ombudsman whether Folha was in fact defending Temer. I was unable to find similar treatment in headlines related to Lula, Eduardo Cunha or Renan Calheiros, to cite a former president and two presidents of both legislative houses.

Mota said that "showing the other side is a journalistic cornerstone practiced by Folha and, in the headline statement, it carried out the function of providing a forum for the defense against an accusation, which, although serious, did not present new relevant facts."

The questions dealt with here could seem to represent mere watermarks to the reader, but they are essential to the construction of balanced, critical and non-partisan practices. This is a window into the newspaper.

Excellence in an investigative and editorial line of conduct will reveal how essential it is for the reader. It is the sharp and accurate arrows that will make a difference in the bamboo patch of the news.

Translated by LLOYD HARDER

Read the article in the original language