Opinion and news
By Bernardo Ajzenberg
November 23, 2003
The newspapers stance expressed in editorials for this or that side in debates about controversial topics should not contaminate the news nor direct the choice of opinion pieces. These two elements, to the contrary, require pluralism and balance to allow readers to form their own opinions.
While rereading what was published about whether or not to lower the age of adulthood for prosecution after the killings of Liana Friedenbach and Felipe Caff, I arrived at the conclusion that in recent days Folha has made this mistake.
The recurring theme arose when police showed a 16-year-old identified as R as the main suspect accused in the deaths of the couple. This occurred on Monday, Nov. 10 and was reported in newspapers the next day.
On Thursday, Folha expressed its viewpoint in an editorial about the age of adulthood for prosecution: Reducing the age of adulthood for prosecution will not stop the involvement of youths in crimes. In the same edition, the local news section published interviews with Lianas father and Felipes mother in which both encouraged reducing the age of adulthood for prosecution.
On Friday, a story without notice on the front page or a headline on an inside page gave the position of the Archbishop of Aparecida (in So Paulo state), Alosio Lorscheider, also in favor of lowering the age. At the bottom, Justice Minister Mrcio Thomaz Bastoz opposed changing the age.
The next day, a Saturday, the front page of the daily news section highlighted: Crime reopens debate about age of adulthood for prosecution. There it summarized diverse opinions in a balanced way, for and against, besides telling about elements in legislation concerning the problem.
In the op/ed section, two columns responded in different ways to the question, Should the sentences imposed against minors who commit crimes be revisited? It is worth mentioning here that the same columnist who responded yes made a point of repudiating a lowering of the age of adulthood. Up to then, I believe that coverage of this topic went well.
Bias
Last Sunday, the controversy was limited to some columnists and letters from readers. On Monday, it was forgotten (that day, by the way, the newspaper reported that a mass was celebrated in the S Cathedral with families of the victims of violence, including Felipes parents).
But a bias against lowering the age of adulthood for prosecution began to manifest itself on Tuesday, Nov. 18, when the newspaper published on the lower part of the front page the following headline: Cristovam asserts that changing law only helps elites. Inside, the opinion of the education minister occupied the whole upper part of page C3.
No opinion favoring a reduction in the age of adulthood for prosecution, neither before nor after this day, got such play. Below it, a story expressed criticism by the Brazilian Lawyers Association to a proposal by So Paulo Gov. Geraldo Alckmin, which, without calling for an age reduction for prosecution as adults, rigorously favored tougher punishment of juvenile offenders.
On Wednesday, Nov. 19, the newspaper published a story about Alckmins proposal in which the governor made it clear that he was against a reduction in the age of adulthood for prosecution and advocated improvements in the Children and Adolescents Statute.
To the side, another story told about the refusal of TV host Hebe Camargo, sought by the newspaper, to comment on a statement she made on her program Monday night when she said that if she were allowed to interview R, she would kill him. Only at the bottom of the story was there any information that the families of Liana and Felipe organized a demonstration for Saturday (yesterday).
In material about candidates for the presidency of the So Paulo chapter of the Lawyers Association on another page, a story titled Majority support current age for prosecution.
On Thursday, at the top of page C5, prosecutors and a Lawyers Association leader attacked Alckmins proposal, but one of them, at the end, emphasized a positive point about it:
This initiative by the governor practically discards the possibility of reducing the age of adulthood for prosecuting minors. Finally, on Friday, it published the story, Commission formed to oppose the reduction of age of adulthood with a picture. Only at the bottom, again, as I noted in an internal critique, did it mention something about the demonstration planned by the couples families. It did not even say where it would begin on Paulista Avenue. Only in yesterdays edition, right before it happened, did the mobilization receive the attention it deserved.
Defending the attitude adopted by the newspaper, the editor of daily news, Nilson de Oliveira, argued to the ombudsman that among the most expressive sectors of civil society, the number of those favoring a reduction of the age for prosecution as adults is small, and all of their voices were expressed in Folha.
Besides this, the editor asserted, among the members of this group, there is no similar discourse, such as the one that occurred among opponents of lowering the age.
These are strong arguments, no doubt. I think, however, that they do not explain the reduced attention given to actions by victims families (the mass last Sunday and announcement of the demonstration) and the lesser emphasis in giving the (few) opinions of expression favorable to the reduction of the age of adulthood for prosecution compared with those who are against.
The debate continues. I believe that the newspaper will do better to provide more visibility to different viewpoints, including those that are different from its own.
By e-mail
It has been common in some letters from readers of the weekly supplements in Folha to list only the name of the sender and afterward something like by e-mail, sent by e-mail or via e-mail.
That occurs, for example, in Folhas sections for teens and children. A reader, who wrote to me about the topic, asked: Why is the term after the readers name? For readers, this means nothing. It does not matter if the message was sent by mail, fax, telegram, telex, carrier pigeon, by hand or e-mail. The name of the city is information. It makes sense for the newsroom to obtain it. If it is unable, it is better to use just the name.
I agree with these observations and add that Letters to the Editor, on page A3, where this does not occur, should, at least in this aspect, serve as a model.
Clarification
The editor of international news, Srgio Malbergier, sent a message through the managing editors office which asserted that the ombudsman erred in last Sundays column by saying that the newsroom did not inform the front-page staff about the terrorist attack on the night of Saturday, Nov. 8 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Malbergier insisted that The International staff communicated the first news about the explosion, even before confirming deaths or terrorist motives, to the staff on duty (linked to the managing editors office), with the proviso that news about the topic should be given to the editors to evaluate the news. But this was not done.
So, here it is officially.
