Not even George W. Bush can guarantee that there will be war, but the probability that it wont happen is getting increasingly scarce. The countdown to war is starting.
About 240,000 U.S. soldiers are, as of this weekend, already in the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean.
In the United States, a good portion of the population is asking authorities and the press for orientation about how to protect themselves from unconventional attacks. They accentuate the preparations for the defense of Baghdad. China has gone along with France, Russia and Germany against immediate action. Turkey did not give into the United States, so it awaits a decision from the U.N. Security Council.
Arms inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency ask for more months to conclude their work. Despite this, apparently increasingly isolated, the United States, with the support of the United Kingdom and Spain, reiterated its willingness to attack Iraq, fixing a date in the form of an ultimatum: March 17.
This is only a brief summary of the tension and the effective preparations for war on an international level. I ask readers whether you feel sufficiently informed by the media, including Folha, about this situation and its economic, political and geopolitical implications for the immediate future, medium term and long term?
Do you understand why France, China, Russia and Germany, apart from the humanitarian and pacifist discussion, oppose the United States on this?
What are the significance, motivation and consequences of Chinas adhesion to the effort against an immediate invasion?
What has been the behavior of the media in the countries directly involved relative to the positions of their governments?
Where does the level of international mobilization of groups, protests and manifestations against war stand today?
What are the possible scenarios for Brazil, in terms of politics, diplomacy and economics?
Precariousness
As for Folha, my impression is that the newspaper has not been sufficiently prepared for what has already happened much less to provide quality coverage of the probable war. If that were not the case, its pages would already reflect the effort.
Im not referring to the occasional commentary by columnists, editorials and articles by philosophical and cultural intellectuals or essayists published, for example, in the arts and entertainment section. Its clear that all these texts have their importance.
What worries me, however, is the material offered to the reader on a daily basis, in the systematic coverage of the topic. In 18 days, through Friday, the international news section published only six pieces of analysis and commentary specialized in geopolitics or war distinct material that allows readers reflection and orientation. The latter was an editorial from the opinion of the New York Times.
Some change in this began to arise only in yesterdays edition, in which the principal investment is a text by Brazilian author Paulo Coelho with obvious qualities, but he is not a specialist in the area.
Curiously, by the way, another piece about the topic reminds me of the interview with Portuguese author Jos Samargo, on Feb. 24; and today, Briton Martin Amis (another writer) shares another opinion about the topic.
Another example: Only on the first of this month did the newspaper carry a story (from the correspondent in Paris) on the economic motivations (in particular, oil) of France and Russia in the discussion about the war, but without a breakdown afterward in the coverage.
What has prevailed in this period is excessive dependence on international news agencies (they are necessary, indispensable and unavoidable, but do not exempt a newspaper from having its own specified agency) and a journalistic product, precarious by itself, that is almost non-existent.
Energy
If war occurs, once again journalism will be in play as occurred on Sept. 11, 2001.
Now, however, the test could be even wider. It would not only endanger once again its ability to cover events impartially, offer analyses and prospects in other words, showing them to be socially indispensable but also to resist negative economic pressures resulting from the conflict, which could heighten the weakened business situation at a large number of news organizations.
The two things, in essence, are linked. On the occasion of the attacks in 2001, Folha demonstrated vigorous journalistic willingness, able to generate high-quality coverage, despite all the difficulties.
Even defending the proportions the war, in the end, still hasnt begun this energy, in my opinion, was not manifested up to now in the preparations for imminent conflict.
Carnival ennui
Once again journalistic coverage of Carnival showed an exhaustion in its own model. Esthetically, Folha tried to do something light, based on big photographs and short texts.
The faces photographed, however, were the same as always, completely scheduled by the sponsors of floats, celebrities and following the lead of television. Headlines and stories were limited mostly to basic, bureaucratic recording of events.
The only one that called a little bit of attention, besides the chronicles by columnists and certain inside information, was Wednesdays story about the tormenting Carnival in the historic town of Tiradentes, Minas Gerais state, due to the behavior of tourists.
Behind the sameness, I believe, could have been something worse: the underestimation by the newspaper of the importance that Carnival plays for big portions of the population and its own readership.
The press must be serious about the topic as a culturally significant social event, meaning that it should prepare a specific model of coverage each year to show readers that its not enough to follow radio and TV to know what happened in the parades. It would also be a way to journalistically rationalize the quantity of paper used over those five days.
Without connection
It sometimes happens that the newspaper, in the attempt to facilitate the lives of readers, ends up really irritating them. That was the case with a story published on Friday about the theft of a car in So Paulo belonging to the justice ministers wife.
The story said that the event occurred close to Lus Carlos Berrini Avenue in the southern part of the city. Later, it said that the thief fled with the vehicle toward Bandeirantes Avenue.
Appropriately, the newspaper found it convenient to put a map beside the story to help readers visualize what happened.
The result, however, was the opposite. Neither of those two streets is identified in the illustration. In it, the highlight of the map showed the western part of the city, not the south. Finally, the map did not show the supposed trajectory of the car.
A reader, in an e-mail, showed all her irritation and suggested:
It would be pleasing to pay more attention in stories. A map of streets and neighborhoods would be very useful for these occasions, dont you think?
