|
 Veja is showing the Lacerdist inspiration of its actions and reactions. Carlos Lacerda was a brilliant journalist, but as orator and politician he was our protorevolutionary, extremist, radical, crazed. And consequently intolerant, unfair, perverse. It was our first fundamentalist in political matters. As reward he ended up alone.
The team that directs Veja magazine has the right to try to re-edit this journalistic paroxysm. But they lack the talent. The clumsy way they chose to reply to the musings of journalist Luiz Weis shows that, although looking at Carlos Lacerda, they are, in fact, imitating his squire Amaral Neto (who some used to call Amoral Born - Amoral Nato).
In the vain attempt to answer to the repairs of this Observer on the hysteria with which the publication presents its "charges" (mostly in the cover story that provoked Finance Minister Palocci's press conference), Veja magazine's anonymous writers said the following:
"Veja's revelation provoked the wrath of provectus observers of the press who intoned their lament as the regime's official analysts." (issue 1921, of September 7, 2005, p. 68).
They muddled the vernacular, something unimaginable in a Carlos Lacerda text. As Mauro Malin showed in this Observatory, "provectus" (aged, advanced, experienced) is praise.
Official analyst is Veja itself, who right in the next sentence put its tail between its legs and ran out yelping a shameless flattery to the same Minister Palocci who they intended to oust in the preceding week.
"The Minister simply abided by his role and, in a press conference, with his always present charisma and verbal intelligence, refuted the main points of the report" etc., etc., etc.
This was one of the greatest printed exhibitions of brown-nosing and subservience since the current political crisis started. Phony pamphleteers, with no pedigree, are used to embarrass themselves like this - it happens.
Public Debate
What cannot happen in a journalistic environment that's considered modern, sophisticated and inspired by the best Anglo-Saxon models, is the kick-kind-of-answer when a publication is questioned.
To accuse this Press Observatory of being at the service of the regime is to express the purest of truth. This Observatory is, yes, at the service of the rule of law, of pluralism and of democracy.
The callow, badly paid, brash and not-used-to-the-dictionary editor, does not know the difference between government and regime. He (she) doesn't even know how to use the Internet search engine to find out how we behaved previously in face of other accusatory and irresponsible bouts.
We are at the service of the reader, that reader who does not have the privilege of seeing his criticism published in Veja.
In the previous administration, PT members taken by a similar hysterical bout accused some contributors of this Observatory of being at the service of the government of the time. This crossfire to which we are being subjected for almost a decade is the consecration of a coherence at the service of society.
The media observation is a political headway; the public and civilized debate about press demeanor is evidence of maturity. There are not many countries that managed to establish a citizen counterpower to confront the Bonapartist media's power. Prepotency when mixed to journalism produces distortions even more dangerous than those of censorship and authoritarianism.
Veja insists for exact 30 years in investing against those who dare to doubt their vitriol. In this continued and infamous exercise the magazine is becoming old. Disgraced.
The Severino Effect
No matter how much we abhor the image of House Speaker Severino Cavalcanti, that cover story of Veja on issue 1921 - "Severino's Little Monthly Wage" - follows the same standard of investigative nimbleness of the preceding issues.
It is no use to just hate or to cause indignation, it is necessary to investigate with competence. Without fluster. With one more week of work, today Severino could be knocked out and ousted. He is not.
If the weekly wants, indeed, to free the Brazilian nation from the grieve of watching the congressman acting openly in favor of corruption and traffic of influence it should adopt the demeanor of deputy-journalist Fernando Gabeira, who decided to confront the President of the Chamber in a frank, open and irrefutable manner - with the truth.
A cover story with Gabeira, while only rhetorical, would be more effective than an incomplete report that closes with the following confession: "Buani [the accuser] asked to talk again to the magazine when the busy lunch hour in his restaurant was over. He wasn't heard of again. "
If they didn't hear from the accuser anymore, can they state in the cover that Severino charged a monthly 10 thousand reais kickback?
Reporter's mistake? Editor(s) mistake.
That picture of restaurateur Buani tucking one sheaf of bills in his pocket (p. 54) is badly explained. The caption says it's money. Maybe it is. But there is nothing irregular or illicit if the owner of a restaurant pockets one sheaf of bills. Even if this money was earmarked for Severino. Astounding would be to catch Severino receiving one sheaf of bills.
Photographer mistake? Editor(s) mistake.
Phony Resource, Pure Malice
Severino gets stronger with badly investigated and hasty charges. His political and moral origin is the same as that of Paulo Maluf, both born in the territory of the Brazenfaced. Hasty charges are only good to harden his arrogant crust.
For now, Severino is strengthened. The scandal was not proved. He had cancelled his trip to New York Friday (September 2), before the Veja publication; now, daring and petulant, he did an about face and confirmed his departure. This is the service that Veja is rendering to the decency cause. [Text concluded at 10.54 PM on September 5, 2005.]
Alberto Dines, the author, is a journalist, founder and researcher at LABJOR - Laboratório de Estudos Avançados em Jornalismo (Laboratory for Advanced Studies in Journalism) at UNICAMP (University of Campinas) and editor of the Observatório da Imprensa. You can reach him by email at obsimp@ig.com.br.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
You can just refer to today's news, that demonstrate.....corruptions evidenced were even far bigger and deeper than initially thought.
When you open a dark hole...such as the brazilian corruption...you never know in advance where the bottom is ! But what is sure is that the corruption is even more deeply rooted...simply not proven....yet !!!!
If no proof is given....does not mean that there is no corruption ! Corruption in the political ranks are usually covered up...by threats, pressure...from the highest powered people. Even from the top of top....smile....as no doubt he/they should also have some proofs and evidences of corruptions...on his opposition members !!!!! smile.....
So the game is.....YOU tell.....I tell....!!!!!
This is exactly how this crisis started...with Jefferson !!!!
Why should he have been the only corrupted politician incriminated...to whom fingers should be pointed....even from his allies...the government and PT party ?????
Welll...well....THEY simply put an auto goal !!!!!