"60 Minutes" is an institution of American journalism, on the air for over half a century. Last weekend, however, the CBS program was immolated on social media before it even started. A callout from the network on Twitter featured the episode's attraction, Marjorie Taylor Greene, a far-right Republican congresswoman from the state of Georgia, a supporter of former President Donald Trump and who promotes absurd QAnon conspiracy theories.

The tweet lacked exactly that description. The show would make room for someone who generalizes Democratic politicians as pedophiles and explains the California fires as the work of Jewish space lasers. The CBS ad portrayed the congresswoman in a neutral light, as someone "who is not afraid to share her opinions, no matter how intense they are". Intense, in this case, is a euphemism for racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic opinions, among other adjectives. According to critics, such a divisive figure should not be given space in the press and, if unavoidable, should be treated as what she is, an extremist.

Something similar happened with Folha the previous week. In the continuation of its series on Bolsonarism, the newspaper interviewed Steve Bannon, the "strategist of the global ultra-right", as he is classified in the article. Bannon lies vehemently throughout the interview, saying that Trump was robbed in 2020, as was Jair Bolsonaro in 2022, and that the January 8 invaders were "freedom fighters". Those who broke the law, he says, must be punished, but only if it is not proven that "they were instigated by federal agents." The only truth in extremist discourse is its sense of convenience.

As in the case of CBS, Folha readers complained about the press space given to someone who adds little to the public debate. Bannon, Greene, and others don't hold points of view, they don't want to explain anything; on the contrary, they strive to maintain an aura that ranges from blind certainty to conspiracy, whatever fits the phrase, no matter what was said before or will be defended later.

"Steve Bannon sees Bolsonaro strengthened with accusations in court and bets on Eduardo", reads Folha's headline, which does not reflect the random and opportunistic nature of the interviewee. It's a bad game: the newspaper follows the manual, and the extremist is portrayed as serious, legitimized by the seriousness he takes from the interviewer. The result is never balanced, but journalism is not able to get around it.

Listening to and exposing the contradictions is an obligation of the professional press. Daylight, said the publisher of this paper, is the best disinfectant. The question that arises now is what to do when germs and other creatures of the night, instead of being eliminated, as has always been the case, start to feed on the light as well.

Perhaps the first step is to understand that, faced with extremism, the sensitivity of readers has also changed. The line of the intolerable is now much closer.

THEORY AND PRACTICE

A new attack at a school has renewed much-needed discussion about the media's treatment of bullies. It is necessary to set limits to the exposure of crimes and criminals and avoid encouraging new events, as recommended by several studies.

In light of the news in Blumenau (SC), vehicles went public to explain that they would omit information and images of the man who invaded the daycare center to inhibit his glorification and the contagion effect. The newspaper Estado de S.Paulo attached a note to its coverage; the Grupo Globo positioned itself through its article; CNN Brasil explained that they were following the guidelines from the Prosecution Service. In the opposite direction, among others, Folha published the name and photo of the attacker, and the Metrópoles website even published a video.

By coincidence, on the same day of the attack, Guilherme Derrite, São Paulo's Secretary of Public Safety, in an article in Tendências / Debates (Trends / Debates), called for "responsibility when reporting". Hours later, Thiago Amparo, mentioning the newspaper Estadão as an example, wrote that "we won't understand the horror if we naturalize it". When disparate opinions converge, you need to pay more attention.

In an article on the subject, Folha explained that it published the information about the killer "because it understands that there is journalistic relevance." Unlike competitors, the newspaper believes that the debate needs to be done on a case-by-case basis.

The issue of emergency is missing from Folha's rational equation. São Paulo recorded 279 threats to schools shortly after the murder of teacher Elisabeth, in Vila Sônia. The time for debating is over.

_{Translated by Cassy Dias}