One of the main objectives of journalism is getting exclusive information. A newspaper, above all else, should be well informed. While it should not be the only criterion used to evaluate a professional news organization, the well-done scoop (as it is called in newsroom jargon) contributes to a newspaper’s credibility.
Competition for scoops is so intense among news organizations that it leads to some distortions. One of them is to ignore or underestimate the importance of news if it was originally published by a competitor.
This week, Folha behaved differently in this area. Like the rest of the press in So Paulo, it got scooped big time on Thursday. O Dirio de So Paulo reported exclusively the following headline: “Document pointed to winners of trash bidding already in February.”
The newspaper reported that a consultant from the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul registered in February at a notary the names of the groups which on Tuesday won the biggest competition for the collection, transportation and treatment of trash in the country, worth 10.33 billion reals (US $3.4 billion). It was an indication of fraud.
On Friday, Folha also had a headline on the topic, by coincidence from another document also registered in a notary, but two weeks earlier. The documents in Folha and Dirio are different, but both got the names of the winners right equally.
The use of these kinds of methods to try to prove deals and fraud in public contracts is not new. The most famous case was an initiative by Folha columnist Janio de Freitas in 1987 when the results of competition for the construction of the North-South Railway Line were published coded in the classified section of the newspaper: “Competition on North-South Rail Line was a farce.” Then the results were annulled.
If Folha had the notarized registry of winners of the So Paulo trash contract 15 days earlier, why did the newspaper not publish the information on Thursday, as Dirio did?
Suzana Singer, the manager editor for this area, responded: “We did not use it Thursday out of caution. We did not know that Dirio also had similar information. Our material was not ready on Wednesday night. It was necessary to get reactions from the other side (the explanation of names cited in the story), it was necessary that one of our lawyers read the material carefully, and it was necessary to improve the story. We didn’t want to run the risk of publishing something poorly done. It was an excess of prudence, but it was correct.”
And why did it put information that Dirio had already reported in the headline, and furthermore, not completely new? Suzana Singer’s response: “The case is important for the size of the contract, $10 billion reals, and for involving public resources. Besides this, we determined that the Folha’s material was stronger and had more information.” Would Folha have used the same prudence if it knew that Dirio had similar information?
The purchase of Embratel
Last Sunday, Folha published its story with the biggest impact of the year. Based on analyses of documents seized by So Paulo police from the presidency and vice presidency of Telefnica, the newspaper reported that the three main telephone companies in the country, united together in a consortium to purchase Embratel (Brazil’s long-distance phone company), intended to recover their investments in the business by increasing rates “through the roof.”
The documents seized by police gave the newspaper the following headline: “Phone companies negotiate the purchase of Embratel to raise prices.” This type of story, which involves private companies and competition for markets, usually generates immediate complaints and requests for clarification. This time, it did not happen. On Thursday night, the public relations team at the phone company sent the ombudsman a document titled “Dispute about news in Folha de So Paulo” with two complaints.
The first related to the April 27 story “Editing of law to be investigated” on page B4 of the edition that circulates in So Paulo. According to Telefnica, the story carried the suspicion of supposed interference by the president of Grupo Telefnica in the editing of a decree in June 2003 which ended indexation for the adjustment of phone rates. The company argued, rightly, that the decree was discussed in a meeting that phone companies held with the president in June last year and was amply reported by the press.
The second complaint was about the story “Seized document shows X-ray of CADE,” referring to federal regulators. This story was published Wednesday on page B6 in the business section. The story reported that, among the papers analyzed, an “itinerary of lobbying orientation arranged by the three phone companies was found.” A report by Telefnica detailed the political profiles of the members of agencies which control and regulate the telecommunications system. In case it found a buyer for Embratel, the consortium of the three phone companies would need the authorization of these agencies.
According to Telefnica’s public relations team, the “story tries to paint as illegitimate a common practice by companies and public agencies (and even the press itself) with profiles of members of Congress or Cabinet ministers at the start of a new administration or a new legislature. Folha, however, in the story in question, tries to characterize this routine and legitimate practice as a tool for pressure against the organizations which defend competition, which is absurd.”
In this case, I disagree with the public relations team at Telefnica. The published information took on journalistic interest because it is part of a bigger context in the fight for market. The fact that creating profiles is routine work at a company does not mean that it should not be news.
Folha already published these complaints in its Letters to the Editor section on Friday, but without a response from the newspaper. I asked the managing editor if the lack of response meant that the newspaper admitted mistakes, and I got the following answer from Managing Editor Suzana Singer: “We decided to not respond to the Telefnica letter because it did not contradict any information published. They are only different interpretations of the seized material.”
Reader’s phrase
“The newspaper should surprise readers. No newspaper is doing that now.”
Mrcio Paula Moraes, 36, business owner in So Bernardo do Campo, So Paulo state, by email.
Notes
Globo TV in the Amazon
The news department at the Globo TV network, referring to last Sunday’s column about journalistic coverage in the Amazon (Brazil does not know Brazil), that it presently has the services of 305 journalistic staff members under contact at affiliated stations in the northern region. It also said that the reporter it sent from Braslia to follow Operation Mamor, by the federal police in Porto Velho did not cover the rebellion in the Urso Branco Prison.
Annual conference of ombudsmen
Today in St. Petersburg, Florida, the annual conference of newspaper ombudsmen affiliated with ONO (the Organization of News Ombudsmen) begins. The attendance of representatives from 11 countries is expected. I will be away all next week to participate in the conference. Therefore, I will not write daily internal critiques nor a column next Sunday.
Translation by John Wright
