“O Globo” published the first story, last Sunday, and Folha followed it in subsequent days. According to the Rio daily, companies connected to the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB) as donors to the campaign of former Rio Gov. Anthony Garotinho for president don’t exist at the address provided.
That was the point of the matter that was being untangled during the week. On Tuesday, Folha reported that one of the donor companies had as its founding partner an assailant who is in jail. The next day, the newspaper carried more important information: the financiers presented by the PMDB are linked to an institute – contracted without bidding – that provides services to the Rio state government. The two newspapers continue to investigate the companies and discover new links between donors and the contracting of services without bidding.
On Thursday, Garotinho defended himself this way: “All that has been happening is persecution against me since I moved up in the polls. My adversaries, who are powerful, such as banks and the Globo (media) Organization, have carried out an unrelenting persecution to see if I fall.” He added: “Why is nobody asking who paid for the airplane that flew Alckmin to Braslia yesterday?” He was referring to former So Paulo Gov. Geraldo Alckmin, the presidential nominee of the Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB).
I used this coverage and the statement by the PMDB candidate as examples because they contain serious and common questions about the Brazilian media.
The newspapers are correct, in my opinion, when they expend effort to reveal the black boxes of hidden electoral financing, the most frequent source of corruption in politics.
The lack of willingness in Congress to create rules and punishment for illegal financing, for the use of slush funds to divert public resources into electoral campaign require continuous and specialized work by the Brazilian press. It has been proved that this is one of the focal points that is most resistant to corruption. Garotinho is right, however, when he asks for more investigation.
But is he right to complain about persecution?
Garotinho is not the only politician to complain about the press in recent weeks. I already cited in another column more complaints by Geraldo Alckmin of the PSDB concerning negative news about his administration as So Paulo governor: “What is interesting is that all this appeared after I became a candidate for president. It is something totally opportunistic.”
This week, Ana Jlia Carepa, a senator from the governing Workers Party (PT), used similar arguments to respond to the congressional investigations into the theft of natural resources. In this case, prosecutors have sought the indictment of five PT members who are accused of participating in a scheme to collect money for municipal electoral campaigns in 2004 in the Amazon state of Par by allowing the illegal cutting of timber. “When Lula (President Luiz Incio Lula da Silva) rises in the polls, unfortunately, the accusations come.”
The most violent attack during the week came from another PT member, former Cabinet member and Congressman Jos Dirceu. He also complained that he is suffering “persecution,” saying: “Only in the period of repression under the military dictatorship, did the Brazilian press stoop so low as it is doing at this moment of the national political life.”
The fact that politicians from opposing parties with antagonistic electoral interests attack the press is not by itself evidence of balance in the distribution of complaints, nor does it signify that they are complying with their oversight role well.
As we have already seen on other occasions, the necessary dispute between news organizations often results in the publication of information that is incomplete or mistaken. But it is also true that many politicians and parties use the argument of persecution to try to neutralize activities by the press.
The electoral campaign has only begun, but it is already obvious that the press will remain in the eye of the hurricane. It is good that it is being questioned. This will require that more people be prepared for journalistic investigations and that newsrooms give more attention. It is a combination of caution and efficiency, without being intimidated.
The press and the congressional investigation
Is the Brazilian press fulfilling, in the case of the congressional investigation of the postal service scandal and the political crisis that has been dragging on since last May, the role that we expect of it in a democracy? Today I am running evaluations by a reader and two newspaper editors.
An agenda
Adjtor Alvim, reader
“1. The press was efficient in showing diversion (of public resources) by Lula’s administration. Levity was an exception concentrated in some organizations and journalists. Most of the complaints were corroborated.
“2. The press was not able to show why the diversions (of public resources) during the administration of former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso did not have such repercussions as those during Lula’s administration. Was there incompetence in not revealing them? Was it interest by the elites represented in Congress to wear down the administration? Was it a conspiracy of elites? Was it class warfare, as Marilena Chaui has suggested?
“3. The press is being inefficient in discussing why Lula’s popularity remains high despite the revelations. Are we tolerant of corruption? Does the opposition lack credibility when it comes to the revelations? Does his popularity remain high in classes C, D, and E (the lower economic levels) because they don’t have access to information or because they are satisfied with Lula’s administration?
“4. Has the press been inefficient in analyzing if we have political options that they don’t follow the same practices as the PT-PSDB-PFL-PMDB? (The PFL is the conservative Liberal Front Party). Were members of Congress who belong to the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) not beneficiaries of the PT slush fund? Is the practice really systematic? Will we vote in October knowing that we are electing corrupt people?
“5. The press has been timid in pointing out solutions to the crisis. Is a solution possible through electoral means? Is it necessary to change legislation? What are the political reforms and electoral possibilities?
“6. Is there a parallel to the crisis that we experience today with other crises in the past? Is there a risk of institutional crisis if impeachment comes to the forefront? Is today’s scenario similar to that of 1954 or 1964?
“I believe that all these topics, while they have been mentioned in the press, should be more profound in the year of a presidential election.”
One or another exception
Joo Bosco Rabello, Braslia bureau chief for “O Estado de So Paulo,” and Claudio Augusto, national editor
“Maybe the best example of agreement about the seriousness of the work by the press in coverage of the corruption crisis in the Lula administration has been the complaint by the chief federal prosecutor, Antonio Fernando de Souza. He takes into account nearly all the complaints published and confirms the origin of crimes practiced by the leadership of the PT in the government. The base allied with the presidential palace pushed for time to completely discredit the investigations. Everything was ‘an invention by the opposition’ with support by the ‘coup-mongering press.’ In the end, findings by the prosecutor were more damaging than the congressional investigation into the postal service scandal, produced under pressure from the PT. “It is true that the press sometimes has been dragged behind the congressional investigations. But is it impractical to imagine that coverage of compromising documents handled by few parliamentarians produced revelations resulting exclusively from the investigation of reporters. It is worth observing that, in comparison with previous scandals, the press was much more proactive. The crisis was born from an eyewitness account that was not spontaneous: the celebrated recording revealed by the weekly news magazine ‘Veja’ in which postal employee Maurcio Marinho appears to be receiving a bribe. After that was the interview with former Congressman Roberto Jefferson to Folha, and finally, the account given by household employee Francenildo dos Santos Costa in ‘Estado.’ “The process of verification was complex. Before publishing the account by the household employee, ‘Estado’ obtained his pay stubs, sought witnesses who worked in the mansion used for lobbying by collaborators of former Finance Minister Antnio Palocci, as well as confirming that along with a driver, he gave money to Palocci’s chief of staff. During this period of investigations and hard journalistic work, the PT leadership and so-called hard nucleus of the government fell. Jefferson and Jos Dirceu were removed from office. The press, with one or another exception, fulfilled its role.”
Translated by John Wright
