The newspaper has a commitment to unbiased coverage; vigilance by readers should serve as a brake to the temptation for alignment
Two topics shake the nerves and patience of Folha readers: the Middle East and the campaign between Brazil’s two leading political parties, the Workers Party (PT) and Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB). The electoral campaigns seem to divide the world into supporters for one party or the other. The war in Lebanon, which started July 12, seems to divide the world into Arabs and Jews.
There was a prodigious number of messages last week with criticism and comments about coverage of domestic elections and the Middle East. At times like this, in which positions are radicalizing, the newspaper’s pages are read as if under a magnifying glass.
I have already dealt with the electoral question in recent columns, and I should approach the topic several times in the coming months. The big issue today is the Middle East, which was followed closely last week. Readers who wrote were alert to two aspects: language and balance.
Coverage
Analysis of the coverage done by the newspaper starting July 13 through Friday shows an attempt for balance.
Stories about the attacks launched by both sides were published without attenuating circumstances, and the newspaper already published opinion pieces and interviews that tried to explain the motives of the war, the interests at stake and the possible consequences with distinctive, and sometimes antagonistic, views.
During the week, the Lebanese viewpoint arose on various occasions, including a teaser on the front page with an opinion piece by journalist Rami G. Khouri. The Israeli viewpoint also was exposed in those days, highlighted by an opinion piece by writer Amos Oz, with a passage on the front page Wednesday.
There is another positive aspect to coverage: on Friday, Folha had two journalists on the scene of the conflict, one in northern Israel and the other in Beirut, which guaranteed the newspaper more independence from stories by the international agencies.
The newspaper published two editorials which condemned the action by Hezbollah, which unleashed Israel’s disproportionate reaction in its response (“Lebanese front” on July 13 and “Exaggerated reaction” on July 18). Both had the same line of commentary by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan: “While Hezbollah’s actions are deplorable and, as I’ve said, Israel has a right to defend itself, the excessive use of force is to be condemned.
Through yesterday, Letters to the Editor published 22 messages: 12 defended the Lebanese or Arab viewpoints; eight justified Israeli actions, and two I considered neutral commentary. The disproportion could indicate incaution by the newspaper or greater activism by pro-Arab readers.
Language
Another aspect is language. Why is the capture of an Israeli soldier in the Gaza Strip considered kidnaping and the capture of Palestinian ministers inside their own territory considered imprisonment? Is there a legal reason that explains the difference in treatment?
And how should Lebanese and Palestinians who are part of organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas be treated? Terrorists, militants, resisters, militias? And attacks against civilians, shouldn’t they be treated as acts of terrorism – and for this reason condemned – independent of who is practicing it, whether a sovereign state or religious militia? When an army enters a country is it a territorial incursion or an invasion?
The language is not neutral. The story should make clear that the newspaper has a commitment to unbiased coverage. It is necessary to reflect and rethink the vocabulary that is utilized for coverage in the Middle East. It is not an easy discussion, but it is indispensable.
Readers are not always right in their complaints. Topics such as the Middle East and the political campaign at times tend to obscure reason somewhat. Many messages I receive came from militants, which does not automatically disqualify them. But some are so offensive that they don’t deserve a response. Others, equally hardline, provoke reflection.
In any event, vigilance by readers should serve as a brake to the temptations toward partiality and alignment by the press. It doesn’t always work.
Space and errors
The graphic makeover begun by Folha on May 21 stimulated two questions from readers, and I was not able to respond at the time. The first referred to mistakes in Portuguese. Many readers gave the impression that mistakes had increased with the makeover. The other question related to the space devoted to the news. Many feared it would shrink.
I waited for the end of May and June to obtain material for an evaluation.
Mistakes
There really was an increase in mistakes in Portuguese, spelling and style right after the graphic makeover, probably provoked by a change in routines when the newspaper is being finished. But in June the incidence of mistakes fell, while remaining high.
The newspaper in May committed an average of 0.76 mistakes in Portuguese per column of text. This is the equivalent of approximately 4.5 mistakes in a page of news without advertising. It was a 12 0ncrease compared with April and 13.5ompared with May of last year.
In June, the rate fell to 0.64 mistakes per column of text, or 3.8 mistakes per page, the second-best results of the year, exceeding only 0.58 in February. The June rate represented a 16 0ecline compared with May and 8.5ompared with June of last year.
Pages
The newspaper has acknowledged that the graphic makeover took about 10f news space and up to 200f the space in opinion columns. My worry was whether the newspaper would take advantage of the graphic makeover to reduce news pages, but this did not happen.
In May, the newspaper had 11.2% more news space than in April and 4.6% more than May of last year. In June, it had 1.3% more news pages than May (practically the same volume and 6.6% more than in June of last year).
It is worth pointing out that the newspaper had to guarantee space in May to coverage of the public safety crisis, in the form of criminal attacks by the First Capital Command (PCC). In June, news space was sacrificed to increase pages devoted to covering the soccer World Cup.
Conclusions: there was, in fact, an increase in mistakes in Portuguese right after the graphic makeover, but in June the rate fell; and up to now, the newspaper has not decreased the number of news pages.
Translation by John Wright
