Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva had a bad week, perhaps the worst so far in this third term. He postponed the launch of the new fiscal rule and had verbal clashes with old opponents, he also watched ministers get into conflict and provisional measures get stuck in the middle of a power struggle in Congress. He got sick. He did other things too, he launched programs, but much of it was overshadowed by his own "chatter" or "wordiness", as described by this newspaper and its main competitor.

Lula had the bad luck, Folha wrote in an editorial, of spilling words of anger against his tormentor in Lava Jato, Sergio Moro, just before the Federal Police operation that dismantled a PCC ( criminal organization in SP) conspiracy against the senator and other authorities. Right after classifying what happened as a "framing" by the former judge, the president's tongue stung again with the decision of the magistrate in the case to lift the secrecy of the investigation and dump details to the press. There is no such thing as bad luck, but who knows, journalistic investigations may rule out or confirm coincidences in the future.

Narratives aside, it was known since before the election that the media's behavior towards the president would return to the unfriendly level of the first terms and completely degenerated during the Car wash operation (Lava Jato), lavish in offering information to the press with designed timing and effect. The operation later showed, on several occasions, that the luminaries of Curitiba extolled the use of the media as a form of pressure on courts, politicians, and informers.

It also seemed obvious that economic decisions would separate Lula, the newspapers, and Faria Lima, given the different agendas and visions each has of the country. It's already the natural course of the news: the stock market plummeted last week just because of the president, it was read almost everywhere as if he were alone in the ring. Few reported the Brazilian Central Bank's decision to issue a tough statement to justify maintaining the Selic at an intolerable level as policy.

All of this, to a greater or lesser extent, was expected. What was not in the plans is a certain perception that is beginning to materialize of a president who at times resembles the previous one. Lula, light years away from Jair Bolsonaro, acquires contours that refer to his predecessor not because of the content, which is different, but because of the manner.

The process began with the already current diagnosis that the Brazilian president would often be speaking to his own group of supporters. As if what he was preaching was not valid for those who are not part of his group, one of the many legacies of Bolsonaro's fallacious direct democracy. The missing ingredient in the recipe, the rudeness emerged last week, when Lula resorted to swearing when referring to Moro in an interview. The PT member can have many resentments, but not the President of the Republic. Confusing roles were also notorious in Bolsonaro, even after leaving office, as the episode of the Arabian jewels demonstrates.

Analysts then asked what is going on, and some ventured explanations. If ugliness is revealed, it is perhaps worth reviewing one's own slip-ups: do without a communication strategy and a spokesperson; misunderstand that the fringe who voted by choice, not by conviction, also gave him the victory and deserves attention. The democratic bonus is short-lived.

GLASS HALF FULL

The same story can be told in many different ways. "There is time to curb the climate crisis and the technology already exists, says the UN climate panel", wrote Folha on Monday (20), with wild optimism in the face of the latest warning from the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. According to the article, the report's own executive summary "adopts an encouraging tone".

International newspapers skipped this part and were much darker in their statements. The Guardian: "Scientists deliver 'final warning' on climate crisis: act now or it will be too late"; The New York Times: "Earth will reach critical warming threshold in the early 2030s, says climate panel"; The Washington Post: "World on brink of catastrophic warming, says UN climate change report."

The difference is explained by the way the climate crisis is faced here and abroad. Although the subject has been gaining strength in Brazil, it has already been a concern abroad for some time, inserted in daily life, in the political debate, and, consequently, in the priorities of communication vehicles. But the difference is not explained after reading, also in Folha, the text "Ruralist section of the congress tries to revert Lula's measures and empty Marina Silva's ministry".

Congressmen linked to agribusiness or who present themselves as such seem to literally live on another planet. It would have been more prudent for Folha to adjust its optimistic tone to the sound around it.

_{Translated by Cassy Dias}