It’s a fact that we are accustomed to all sorts of violence in our big cities, mainly in So Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. But what happened 10 days ago in proximity to the S Plaza in So Paulo, ground zero in the biggest Brazilian city and historic location for huge civic and religious demonstrations, should shock us.
In a period of three days, 15 street people were attacked in the middle of the night as they slept. In the first incident, Wednesday night/Thursday morning, Aug. 18/19, three people were killed and seven were seriously injured. The next day, two of the injured died. In the second attack, Saturday night/Sunday morning, Aug. 21/22, another five unfortunate people were attacked. One woman died.
Six died, nine were injured and five remain in danger of dying. This was the total of the biggest slaughter of people on the margins ever perpetrated in the heart of Brazil’s richest city.
Through the deadline for this column, the police had no clues about the killers, and the city did not know what happened. There were hypotheses and speculation, but the silent violence that marked these two late nights is still being deciphered. Who killed them? And why?
What makes these massacres such a big deal? The number of dead and injured, the cruel way and cowardice in which the people were attacked and killed, the fact that they were slaughtered like animals in the center of So Paulo, the public exposure of a problem that we are afraid of and don’t face concerning people who live in the street, the heated atmosphere in the race for mayor, intolerance, these seem to be behind the consecutive attacks – all that had to do with ending the status of the crimes in the plaza as a local and police matter to transform it into a case with national repercussions and interest.
In the pages of newspapers
Folha and Estado de So Paulo did not immediately understand the dimension of the crimes, did not understand that it was not just about acts of barbarism, but did not manifest the contradictions of the city. What explains why there are 10,000 people living in the streets? And what explains that one person, or various, is willing to kill them in the middle of the night? What is happening to this megalopolis?
Neither of the two major newspapers considered that the case merited play as the main story. Estado on Friday, Aug. 20, had “States attack new ceiling of inactivity.” And it had the massacre in the middle of the page: “Beggars killed and bludgeoned in So Paulo.”
Folha was even colder. The top of the front page had a big color photo with three maps illustrating the headline “More youth concentrated in poor areas of So Paulo,” resulting in a survey about social indicators in the city. The photo was that of a gymnast in Athens. And the headline about the killing was shrunken: “Ten street people are attacked by bludgeoning in So Paulo; 3 die.” It was mentioned only once.
I commented in my internal critique that I write daily: “With no photo, without any drawing that showed the location of the crimes, without any sort of art that would give value to the news, it was put on the front page without the indignation that the newspaper is accustomed to expressing in cases of affronts to citizens.”
This was, in my opinion, the biggest error by the newspaper throughout the coverage: the newsroom lacked sensitivity to understand the dimension of the facts.
On Sunday, Aug. 22, the newspaper did not prepare anything special about the topic. On Monday, it became the main story for the first time: “Street resident dies in new attack.” On Tuesday, it was evicted and ceded space to topics without the same impact and importance. On Wednesday, it returned as the lead story (“Street resident says he was attacked by group”), but on Thursday and Friday ended up being reduced to routine mention.
And readers?
It was not only the editing that lacked sensitivity to highlight the relevance of the drama in the city. Letters to the Editor, which should be a space for protest through Friday, published only six letters about the topic. It was not due to lack of motivation by our readers because through the day before yesterday the section had received 31 letters. During the same period, the Rio daily O Globo published 15 letters from readers commenting, debating and proposing solutions.
Folha’s coverage had one other failing: it did not know how to take advantage of the moment to start a discussion about the street population. What do the citizens of this city think about this problem? Why are 10,000 people forced to live in the streets? What do we do with them? How do we avoid an increase in their number?
Three editorials published through the week, “Barbarism in So Paulo” (Saturday), “Savagery” (Tuesday) and “Grave suspicions” (Wednesday), were exceptions to this type of mistake. They showed more attention to the problems of So Paulo than did the newsroom.
I sent various questions to editors about the coverage. I wanted to know why the newspaper was so uneven in this case. The editors preferred not to comment.
The newspaper this week lost a good opportunity to practice journalism that goes beyond the facts, crimes and quotation marks. There is still time to do it.
INTERVIEW
“Who are these people?”
Father Jlio Lancelloti is responsible for ministering to street people for the Archdiocese of So Paulo.
——————————————————————————–
Ombudsman – In your opinion, did So Paulo newspapers have good coverage of the killings that occurred in the city center?
Jlio Lancelloti – One of the things that people have asked the press, but it seems that nobody hears, is not to call them beggars. It is a request of theirs that they be called homeless people, street residents or street people. However much these people ask not to be called beggars, people still call them that.
Ombudsman – Do you believe that this would change anything?
Lancelloti – It changes in the formation of public opinion. What is the concept of mendicancy? It has a certain pejorative feeling. Among them, there are people who live in mendicancy. Now, why do they continue in mendicancy? This phenomenon, the human drama, ends up obfuscated. Who are these people? Why do they have this behavior? We have worked a lot with the concept of citizenship. It would be an advance for a newspaper of Folha’s size to help public opinion to understand that mendicancy is not a social condition. There are street people who beg, but there are those who gather cans or cardboard or do other things. In truth, the term mendicancy does not show social vulnerability.
Ombudsman – Do you see other problems in coverage?
Lancelloti – I believe that this coverage could help to understand more about who these people are, why this is a phenomenon that grows and brings this type of result for society. Why do society and public power have so much difficulty dealing with this? I believe that the press, and Folha too, are a lot more interested in political squabbles, in accusations of municipality against state, and vice-versa, than in realizing how society could change their views and treat this topic in a more appropriate manner.
Ombudsman – In matters such as this, do the state and municipality have responsibilities, and do newspapers have to point it out?
Lancelloti – Yes. But it is no use to simply point out responsibilities in the midst of a conflict because of a lack of focus.
Ombudsman – Do you believe that newspapers don’t take the discussion deeper?
Lancelloti – There is an attempt to dive into the problem, but there is no depth. Coverage in general, not only in Folha, deals more with law-enforcement, political and electoral questions and does not deepen the social phenomena that are behind this whole question in the comprehension of these people. We don’t just want shelters. We need to find solutions. The great challenge that arises today is what to do with the most vulnerable who end up living in the streets.
