One hundred days
By Bernardo Ajzenberg
April 13, 2003
The occupation of Iraq pushed numerous other topics in the media down to second place, among them an assessment of the first 100 days of the Lula era.
Nevertheless, the topic did not go unnoticed, and the nearly unanimous tone in news stories and editorials was that the new administration was surprising in its conduct of economic policy, positively exceeding market expectations (within and outside the country), easily reducing the lack of confidence by the business sector, and, at the same time, generating discomfort among unions, political allies and even factions of Lulas left-leaning Workers Party (PT).
Another assessment that is common in the media is that the government was average in its articulation of policy, good in foreign relations (diplomacy) and inoperative in social programs. But, if there is a consensus in the first generic judgment, the same cant be said for the behavior of the press concerning the administration since Luiz Incio Lula da Silva took office Jan. 1.
Tactical alliance
Amid a general anxiety to capture the new style in the Planalto presidential palace, new routines in government ministries and especially the PT agenda leading newspapers to report numerous trial balloons of possible government measures in a debate to see what they would manage to project most accurately Folha clearly set itself apart in the first weeks by adopting an open and constantly critical bias.
This was something positive and coherent in the editorial position adopted shortly after the PT victory last year, facilitated by the initial disagreements and discord within the government itself.
This stance, its worth pointing out, had a curious component. In the shift from orthodox economic measures and official speeches intended to calm worries in the market, the newspaper ended up establishing a type of tacit alliance with the so-called radicals in the PT.
This coverage, which pointed out contradictions from electoral rhetoric, PTs history and the first steps of the party in its command of the country, was colored by the left. In this explicit alliance, for example, the newspaper gave disproportional exposure to radical members of Congress and to the demands made by union members and the landless peasant movement with the new authorities.
Added to these are (necessary) questions about the priority program Zero Hunger, its inconsistencies and fluctuations.
Many readers, even some who did not vote for Lula, began to question the ombudsman, sometimes with reason, whether Folha was not too rushed. As a whole, I think that despite some excesses and gratuitous poking, the newspaper got right far more than it got wrong in not adopting a honeymoon agenda.
End of exclusivity
This distinction, however, decreased quite a bit starting in March when stories such as Bahiagate, the transfer of convicted drug trafficker Fernandinho Beira-Mar to a different prison, activities of organized crime (murders of judges), as well as the war in Iraq gained importance.
Criticism of the slow progress by the Zero Hunger program became generalized (the exception is on TV, in a special on the Globo broadcasting network), along with other news organizations such as Folha in certain instances before this point.
To mention other matters, nothing crucial but very symbolic, it was not the first news organization to report that the presidents chief of staff, Jos Dirceu, had received a Rolex watch as a gift from a member of Congress, nor on another occasion, the initiative of the same minister to accelerate his request for a pension before the probable reform of the retirement system.
Folha also fumbled and gave less emphasis than competitors to the questionable use of an official vehicle to drive the presidents dog, Michele, from the presidential palace to the residence on March 19.
The newspaper was also timid in reporting, at the beginning of that month, disconcerting statements by ministers Antnio Palocci (Finance) and Guido Mantega (Planning) in the Senate admitting to taking the side of PT Sen. Aloizio Mercadante in saying that the PT was mistaken in the past by not supporting reforms proposed to Congress by former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso.
Where crushing nuances matter, it seems clear that Folha does not have exclusivity in the regular coverage of the government, which is considered a good sign for journalism.
Difficulties
Today the main challenge for the media in relation to the new government is another level and I believe it is here that the distinction could and should be demonstrated:
1) Capturing the occasional differences, the disputes, the real level of homogeneity within the government in terms of questions on the agenda (Central Bank autonomy, alliances with other political parties, administration of social programs, for example) in a way to provide debate about its real viability. Im not referring to the differences between the ministers and the radicals in the PT or the opposition thats so easy that it has already become folklore but within the nucleus of the executive branch itself;
2) Clearly explaining in detail, showing depth and pluralism in the content of the complex reforms being considered up to now with some priorities (taxes and pensions) and the probable concrete consequences. This involves the newspaper itself to deepen its knowledge with respect to the topics about which they are structured.
Before a government that has primacy in facilitating access to information, these duties have been complicated for the press.
An example of the difficulties appeared on Friday, when some newspapers reported the contents of a document nearly 100 pages long by the Finance Ministry containing an evaluation and directions for the economy in the coming years.
In the national edition, Folhas story started with the assertion that this material represented the first version of the PT governments program after the electoral campaign.
Its no small thing, especially considering that the assumptions of the study, according to the news, are the same as the controversial orthodox ones in effect, apparently with no sign for real changes in the future.
Such an evaluation involves editing according to the relevance of the story, translating in detail its principal points, consequences, contradictions, etc. Thats what they did, for example, although in different ways, in Estado de So Paulo and Valor Econmico, but Folha did not.
What was worse was that in the later edition, circulated in So Paulo and Braslia, that assertion was removed near the end of the story and attenuated (it could be considered a first version…), further proving underestimation on the part of the newspaper of the political and economic impact of this document, within and outside the government, inside and outside the nation, and especially, in its base of support.
There can be changes from one edition to the other; it would not be the first time. But, in this case, Folha goofed in both.
Reflection
Maybe Estado de So Paulo and Valor Econmico had obtained the document before, thus allowing more time to reflect and edit it.
Or the mistake could have been only a symptom of the size of the obstacles that Folha sometimes faces, in unpredictable concrete situations in the daily routine, to internally put an end to doubts and disagreements about the evaluation of the current situation and the possible directions of the government.
In two hypotheses, the positive fact of returning to the topic with more depth in yesterdays edition reveals the newspapers attention to readers, but it does not erase the necessity to reflect about the motives of the disarray the previous day.
This surely was not the happiest event that Folha should preserve in the memory about the first moments in coverage of the Lula era.
