Theory and practice
By Bernardo Ajzenberg
August 31, 2003
Once again I return to Folhas Stylebook. In the didactic passage on page 62 it says: Essential quality in journalism is one of the basic objectives of Project Folha. Every story should be edited based on the principle that the reader is not familiar with the topic. Explain everything in simple, concise, and exact terms with context.
That is the theory. Here is what we have in practice, considering only last weeks editions:
1) A report on statements given about Latin America by American economist John Williamson, one of the creators of the Washington consensus, did not explain what this consensus means;
2) A story about assertions by Central Bank President Henrique Meirelles in which deceased poets Joo Cabral de Melo Neto and Carlos Drummond de Andrade were quoted but did not carry parentheses with the years of their births and deaths, making it appear for readers less knowledgeable about the topic that both are still alive (or, for ones who know, making it look like the newspaper believes that they are still alive);
3) A story reporting that the government postponed the deadline for students to sign up for financial aid mentioned the use of a price index without explaining what it means and no indication about how to find out;
4) The same for a story about health in which SARS is mentioned, without explaining what it is;
5) Fridays news about the corruption of minors in which politicians and notables are accused in Porto Ferreira, So Paulo state, did not have a map to show readers where this city is located;
6) Referring to the massacres at Candelria and Vigrio Geral in Rio de Janeiro, a story about a report by Amnesty International did not include any history about those events from years past.
One of the advantages that differentiates newspapers from other news media is its ability to allow deeper exploration into topics and accessibility for readers to contents it covers.
Folha, giving up on or relegating this essential quality of journalism to second place, not only fails to comply with its own stylebook but also runs the risk of giving many people (especially the youngest) the sensation that, having TV, radio and Internet, printed newspapers also are not as indispensable as it would seem.
One more Mexico
This is a revealing case about how journalists often encounter difficulties when dealing with statistics. On Tuesday, a story on a report by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL) said that, according to the institution, in 2002 there were 220 million poor people in Latin America (43.40f the total population), as well as 95 million indigents (18.8%).
The poor are those whose income is only enough to acquire the basic necessities of life. Indigents cant even manage that. In my internal critique, I asked: What about the other 380f the population? How are they divided, into middle class, wealthy, and very wealthy? It didnt say.
Alerted later by a story about the topic in the Spanish newspaper El Pas, however, I consulted the report on the CEPAL website and verified that the Folha story was way off the mark.
The report did not really address my doubts, but in compensation, it negated what Folha reported. In truth, the 220 million figure includes the 95 million indigents, since they are considered a category within the total number of poor. A correction should be published in todays edition on page A3.
From the data initially reported in Folha, the total number of poor and indigents grew by nearly the whole population of Mexico (about 100 million inhabitants). Thats no small thing.
Partial balance
An e-mail from a reader on Monday pointed to the lack of independence and impartiality in Folhas coverage about the political situation in Venezuela.
On Wednesday, Aug. 21, the newspaper devoted four columns on the top of its front page to the march held in Caracas the day before by opponents to the government of President Hugo Chvez, as well as almost an entire page in the world news section.
A pro-Chvez rally on Saturday received only a small note on Sunday, with no photograph on the lower part of an inside page.
That is the imbalance pointed out by the reader with whom I agree. Impartiality here does not mean the obligation to give the two events the same amount of space, starting with the difference in the number of protesters (there were about 1 million on Thursday vs. nearly 100,000 on Saturday).
The question is not only numeric. It is principally political. The analogies between Chvez and Brazilian President Luiz Incio Lula da Silva, the opposition there and the opposition here, the media there and the media here whether or not they are correct need to be considered in the coverage about a neighboring country such permanent tension in place.
In my opinion, if an entire page would be excessive regarding the pro-Chvez rally, a brief notice in the corner of the page, consciously or not, appeared almost to be hiding it a clear sign of partiality.
Anything can
Despite being used frequently, the verb can is one that every school of journalism teaches its students to avoid in the construction of headlines. It is imprecise, denotes uncertainty, and tends to be speculative. In the end, as it is said, anything can …
Another thing that the student learns in the beginning is: You should not repeat verbs in headlines on the same page. Besides showing a lack of creativity, the practice creates a type of dj-vu in the reader.
At the same time the supplement Fovest, a tabloid about college entrance exams, last Wednesday managed to not comply with both recommendations. The verb can appears in headlines or subheads on its seven pages (the eighth was an ad) nine times five alone in stories on the main topic (about the stress of college entrance exams).
It was not a good example, especially for those who try to compete for a spot in a journalism school.
