It came as a surprise to me that the credibility of Brazilian newspapers would be so high. A national survey taken by the Ibope polling organization shows the confidence that the population has in newspapers rose from 65 0n September 2003 to 74% last month.
In a list of 17 institutions and professions evaluated, newspapers are behind only doctors (85%) and the military (75%) and are well positioned against two of their direct competitors, radio (64%) and television (61%).
Why would I find it strange? For me, as ombudsman, it is visible that the financial crisis that battered the biggest newsrooms has affected the final quality of their products. There is an obvious effort to maintain quality, but the lack of resources and personnel stands out in the daily editions.
My perception might be affected by my job – the ombudsman is the depository for complaints and frustrations of readers – and other factors:
- The credibility of the press in the United States has become a national crisis;
- The permanence of the financial crisis;
- The decline in circulation of newspapers continues since 2001;
- And the unknown about the future of newspapers, harassed by new types of dissemination of information, principally through the Internet.
It is possible to confuse the various crises that coincide at this moment (finances, circulation and identity) with a crisis of credibility. The Ibope survey shows, however, that the accumulated problems seem to not have affected the confidence in newspapers.
I don’t know, however, if readers are satisfied. I honestly hope not, because daily reading of our main newspapers shows that they need to greatly improve the quality of information that they publish.
I just finished participating in a meeting of ombudsmen from newspapers, radio and television in 13 countries from different continents and cultures. They all seemed to agree, at least, on one point: readers, listeners and viewers want balanced news and increasingly demand pluralism and transparency.
They want transparency in the editorial position and public exposure of their own business interests. And transparency, mainly, in the willingness to correct mistakes. Brazilian newspapers have improved in few of these aspects: they rarely inform about their business and economic interests and have a great deal of difficulty recognizing mistakes and correcting them.
What the survey said
The chart reproduced above with the evolution of the opinion survey evaluating newspapers, done by Ibope starting in March 1989, shows quite consistent numbers. Throughout the 90s, the rate of confidence stayed about 60%. It was an extensive period in which the press had an important role in the development of democracy and oversight of government and politicians.
Not even historic errors, such as in the instance in which school directors were falsely accused of molesting students (March 1994 and the following months), knocked down the credibility accumulated from episodes such as the resignation of President Fernando Collor de Mello amid congressional investigations of corruption.
In 1999, meanwhile, there was an accentuated decline in the credibility of newspapers: the lack of confidence rate rose from 36 0n May1997 to 47 0n 1999. This phenomenon affected television most strongly: those who had confidence fell from 56% to 42% and those who had no confidence rose from 40% to 54%.
The Ibope survey did not go into details about what motivated the opinions. In 1999 the second term of then-President Fernando Henrique Cardoso started. Shortly after the beginning of the year, there was a major devaluation of the real and the start of an economic crisis that questioned, for the first time, the economic stabilization plan. Throughout the year, scandals broke, such as the rescue of banks in the exchange crisis, wiretaps at the BNDES national development bank and overbilling for a new courthouse in So Paulo.
How this environment of generalized frustration could be affecting opinions about the press is unknown. The response to this question requires a survey that I have not done.
But in 2003, newspapers – and also television stations – recovered the confidence of the population. This last survey from May shows the best time for newspapers in these 16 years.
According to the head of Ibope, Mrcia Cavallari, the numbers do not confirm the perception of a crisis in confidence. “Newspapers have lost sales, but haven’t lost credibility.”
According to the director of Datafolha, Mauro Paulino, newspapers maintain an image of “legitimizers” in news as the main reference when the topic is information.
Ibope’s national survey, based on 2,000 interviews, has a margin of error of 2.2 percentage points.
Details in the survey show some data that merit reflection. Youths 16 to 24 years old and adults between 25 and 34 years old believe in newspapers more (79% and 80%, respectively) than those above age 50 (65%), as is this ombudsman.
Those who live in the South (80%) show greater trust than do those in the Southeast (72%). Those who live outside major metropolitan areas trust more (75%) than those in state capitals (72%).
Ibope considered 17 institutions and professions. At the bottom of the list, with the worst ratings, are politicians (870f those interviewed do not trust them compared with only 11% who do trust them), political parties (85% against 12%), the Chamber of Deputies (74% against 21%) and Senate (71% against 24%).
It seems that these institutions, which were never well regarded, have dropped to the bottom of the well. This is another topic that merits reflection. There is no doubt that the only ones responsible for the terrible image of politicians are politicians themselves. But there is a relationship between the press and politics that needs to be better analyzed. Are we demanding enough, with acuity, from the political world? This is a question for another opportunity.
FROM READERS
The gay parade
The biggest number of messages I received this week with criticism of Folha referred to coverage of the Gay Parade, which took place last Sunday. In my internal critique on Monday, I question the newspaper’s use, without questioning the criteria, of the calculations of participants provided by police (1.8 million) and the organizers (2.5 million). I believe that these numbers are guesses.
What discomforted readers was not this detail, but the focus of the coverage. Various readers wrote to say they were disappointed. I am not using their names because I was unable to get authorization. But I will reproduce excerpts of messages.
A reader saw “laziness, carelessness, and prejudice” in the coverage. Another, “disrespect”: “They preferred to focus the reports on only the negative side of the Gay Parade and not focus on the social side.”
One message was more analytical: “…the concrete fact is that the parade is still mostly seen as a story about behavior, and not political or general interest. … The so-called major media still lack journalistic explanation about the motives for such events involving lesbians, gays and trans-gender people.” This same message suggested that the media need more respectful coverage, “At least Folha and ‘Estado,’ once again, lacked reasonable coverage.”
The editor for daily news, Rogrio Gentile, does not agree with the opinion that coverage was prejudiced: “What happened on Paulista Avenue was a party, without detracting from the political aspect. The festive nature predominated and it was this that Folha reported, without prejudice.”
I believe that the newspaper was very concerned with the party and ended up giving little space to the demands of those at the event.
Translated by John Wright
