Newspapers made a mistake when they focused only on the aspect of punishment and left behind public safety policies
Since the newspaper reported the death of Joo Hlio in Rio de Janeiro on Feb. 9, Folha’s “Letters to the Editor” received 598 messages through Friday night. It is a record. They are readers who are indignant about the barbarity and made an effort to participate in the debate about solutions to the violence and criminality in Brazil. In that same period, the ombudsman received 24 messages. Few contained criticism, which is unusual.
I see two valid points in the newspaper’s coverage, along with a serious problem. The good ones:
-Two readers complained about the description of the youth’s death (“a horror” and “sensationalistic”) and one reader found the front pages of the first days “cold” and “insensitive.” In my opinion, the newspaper had sober coverage without hysteria.
-The newspaper gave space to the debate. Journalistic coverage failed for various days by not explaining the intent of the projects I read which were resuscitated in Congress, but the omission was corrected. The main proposals were debated on the op-ed pages, in “Letters to the Editor” and through interviews. There was stimulation for a pluralistic debate about juvenile punishment.
And the states?
The newspaper erred, however, in focusing only on the aspect of punishment and left behind public safety policies. It was not a problem only at Folha. The discussion that followed the death of Joo Hlio left the suburbs of Rio and was moved to Congress. It is obvious that the confrontation with criminals requires action in Braslia by the three branches of government. But it is also true that the main responsibility for public safety lies with the state government.
By moving the discussion, relevant questions remained without answers: has the public safety policy in Rio changed (and the same question is valid for So Paulo, Minas Gerais and all states) with the new administration? Does the new administration have different concepts and practices in safety policy than its predecessors? Shouldn’t the newspaper take advantage of this to make an evaluation of the public safety policies of the new governors?
In the case of Rio, the situation of a civil war and barbarity in these first 50 days seems the same as eight years of administrations by former governors Anthony Garotinho/Benedita da Silva/Rosinha Matheus. It is probable that there were changes, but we don’t see any difference.
The region where young Joo Hlio was dragged and killed has been abandoned as a war zone for many years. It is a situation that legislative measures have not changed. Newspapers report the crimes but have difficulty analyzing the phenomenon.
For curiosity, I reread, with the help of Folha’s archives, coverage of the killing of Indian Galdino Jesus dos Santos in Braslia in April 1997. (As now, there were young people who lit the Indian on fire: three youths ages 19, 18 and 16; the difference is that they were middle- and upper-class youth and there was no word about lowering the age of juvenile punishment.) The front page on the second day of coverage is revealing about how the situation has been pessimistic for years. Below the headline (“Indian dies of burns in Braslia”), the headline is similar to those that came out in the newspaper this week – “Shootout on Rio hillside kills 3.”
The hillside refers to Alemo, where at least six people have been killed in recent days. There isn’t news about the war between traffickers (well armed since at least 1985) and military (heirs of those who equipped the death squads that made life in Rio’s suburbs a hell in the 70s and 80s).
OBSERVERS
Emotion and hysteria
Maskata Ota, father of Ives Ota, who was kidnaped and killed in 1997 in So Paulo, considered the work by the press in So Paulo in the case of Joo Hlio to be “good.” In his opinion, the newspapers have demanded more prevention by authorities. He doesn’t consider coverage sensationalistic or excessive. The opinions of two press observers are different, mainly concerning some newspapers in Rio.
——————————————————————————–
Incio Cao, sociologist at the Violence Analysis Laboratory at Rio de Janeiro State University:
“I believe the coverage has been terrible. First, from the excessive exposure. Some Rio newspapers gave half of the front page to the news as if World War III had broken out.
“Second, the coverage is very emotional. Some newspapers are on a campaign to lower the age for juvenile punishment. There is a mixture between an editorial position, for which newspapers have every right, and journalistic coverage that ends up influenced by the editorial position. Three: There are serious facts that some newspapers simply omit with this emotional coverage. If you see that photo of the accused, one of them is being strangled. And this, in most newspapers, did not even get any comment.
“As time passes, newspapers evolve into more reflective coverage, but initially coverage was extremely emotional.
“Obviously, it is not a just problem of the press, but the press ends up stimulating this emotional reaction by people and politicians. Various proposals are in progress, but that will stop until the next case. I believe it is important that the press do a bit of self-criticism of its coverage.
“It is clear that the newspaper must show the news; it is disturbing news and must be reported. But I find the level of exposure excessive. The Rio daily ‘O Jornal do Brasil’ used as its headline: ‘What do they deserve?’ It was an invitation to a lynching. It clearly shows the difference between emotional and more objective coverage.”
——————————————————————————–
Silvia Ramos, coordinator at the Center for Studies of Safety and Citizenship at Cndido Mendes University:
“Despite the problems, the press has changed for the better in the treatment given to topics associated with violence, criminality and public safety in recent years. The biggest change is the abandonment by most newspapers of sensationalistic resources and attention-grabbing notions, such as the publication of shocking photos and stimulating the use of violence by security forces, recommending that the police eliminate criminals or violate rights to fight crime. In some coverage, there are examples of how it is possible to do journalism at the same time investigative and capable of changing reality, such as the attacks by the First Capital Command in So Paulo in 2006. The press practically interrupted the escalation of deaths provoked by the police in reaction to the attacks.
“For this reason the response by most of the newspapers in Rio, as attention-grabbing headlines in the case of Joo Hlio, was surprising. The accumulation of experience in the coverage of big crises was abandoned. To identify with the indignation of its readers, various newspapers changed their approach and ended up reproducing a combination of perplexity and hysteria. Some headlines, even in the main newspapers, made history as being among big mistakes by the press.”
Translation by John Wright
