MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, March 28th 2024 - 12:51 UTC

 

 

Rousseff takes distance from ruling party’s intent to control the Brazilian media

Friday, September 9th 2011 - 09:43 UTC
Full article 8 comments

The Brazilian government took distance from the ruling Workers Party demand for an urgent implementation of a controversial media bill, arguing the issue was not urgent. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • GeoffWard2

    Summarizing:

    The Brazilian press - especially Veja - has repeatedly exposed corruption cases involving the ruling coalition and particularly the Workers Party (WP).
    Presidenta Rousseff defends and protects freedom of the press and freedom of expression, saying that the Brazilian constitution bans any form of censorship or media content control; a position supported by the Socialist Party (SP).

    The WP wishes to change the Constitution to stop the media from publishing details of major corruptions within Government and the administration.
    It seeks to pressure Congress to “democratize” information, and to create a regulatory framework to impede ‘crossed assets and interests’ (‘media monopolies’ that control different forms of media expression).

    Bernardo, Dilma’s Minister of Communication, supports the Presidenta, and is trying to take the heat out of the debate, saying that the WP does not preach for the control of the media nor does it attack freedom of the press. He argues that the WP and the media have the right to criticize each other, and says that controls of the media – checks and balances researched by Lula’s own WP - are underway and that change is not urgent.

    . . . . . . . . . .

    Bernardo’s words are political ‘double-speak’, he is seriously at odds with the Workers’ Party (WP).

    The WP created Institutionalized Corruption and don’t want to be publically hoist by their own petard.
    They wish to Carry On Corrupting in private. Their individual personal fortunes depend on this.

    Brasil NEEDS the robust defence of the Ficha Limpa against these vested interests;
    it also needs the defence of this part of Brasil’s Constitution – Free Speech and Free Press - so the people can know and address the corrupt practices of those with the vested interests.

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    It's not media control. It's a sort of media regulation to distribute ownership and avoid corporate monopoly - something that exists in Europe and Argentina and that would fit Brazil's needs as media in the country is concentrated in the hands of some few rich families which one can count in the fingers of one hand. Mercopress is showing its briefs with its vulgar presentation of the issue.

    And I won't even read Geoff's overly long post. Bet it is ridden with the same empty partisanship and preaching tone of his other posts.

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Read, Forgetit.
    Read and learn.
    Learn about the views of others,
    especially where they might differ from your own.

    In this instance, what people (WP) state as their rationale - breaking up a great media monopoly - may be a proximate reason, but the ultimate (perhaps covert) reason is, in my opinion, the gagging of the validly-critical press.

    Do have another go, and read my #1;
    I feel there is little with which you might fundimentally disagree.

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 06:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    ”In this instance, what people (WP) state as their rationale (...) may be a proximate reason, but the ultimate (...) reason is, in my opinion, the gagging of the validly-critical press”

    Unnuanced polemicism and partisanship - that is just what I expected from you. Is there a reason to read anything you write if I can always guess what the gist of your message will be?

    Brazil has strong institutions, a media that is critical of the government - overly critical, one could say - and a vocal opposition coalition in the legislative and in control of key states such as São Paulo. This has been the case since the return to democratic rule. And since that time, political system has in fact evolved to become more stable. Even if they wanted to, which I don't believe, the executive government and the PT just have no power to impose themselves on the media in that way. Such a gross assault on the constitution occurs either in times of social unrest or extreme political polarization: neither of which fit the Brazilian situation at the moment. Of course, there will be accusations driven by opportunism: opposition parties who are just doing their job, to sling mud at the Executive; and media moguls who don't want to let go of their monopoly.

    And finally, Geoff, you must know that the only true censorship bill under discussion at the moment was that created by Rep. Eduardo Azeredo, from the major OPPOSITION party, the PSDB.

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    I am certainly consistent, until the evidence causes me to shift my argument (eg. Dilma), and I do like big words like 'unnuanced', 'polemicism' and 'partisanship'.

    I also like 'unreconstructed' (or is it 'undeconstructed'?) and if I knew what they were also, I could also be consistently them, as well.

    Seriously, Forgetit, it's just a blog. I make my point - trying to be consistent; you make your point.

    Wrt PT getting their claws into the media, it just happens to be PT because they did what they did.
    If the other guys had been in power and did the same I would be gunning for them.
    All parties seek to minimise criticism of their actions, but PT have been just SO BIG and SO BRAZEN about it, that they deserve everything coming to them.
    I hope they get it!

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    I, too, can change my opinion in face of evidence. For example, regarding Dilma, I have changed from being supportive to critical.

    What I won't change is my opposition to this base and vulgar demonization against selected parties and ideologies that a large part of the population - you included - engage in. Such a hysteric, self-righteous, partisan, and accusatory demeanor - which in a great extent is fed by the media - will someday result in political polarization and instability: and from the US example, we can see that won't work for the benefit of Brazil's interests.

    Have a look at your own word choice:

    “Wrt PT getting their claws into the media,”
    Do you picture a petista as a red-skinned being with horns and a pointed tail? Do you think he eats puppies for breakfast? :)
    Geoff, mainstream political parties in Brazil are all the same. They may defend slightly different political ideologies - but when they reach power, their behavior, their relations to institutions, is all the same. In more than 8 years in power, the PT has never attempted to curb media freedom - not even during the Lula's 1st term, when the government what shaken by the mensalão scandal; and not even during his 2nd term, when Lula's political capital increased due to high levels of popularity: levels not achieved by any Brazilian president in history. As I said, the only high profile attempt to curb media freedom is that by opposition Rep. Eduardo Azeredo. And the major assault against the constitutions, it was again the opposition who perpetrated: the reelection bill pushed during the 90s by FHC, who had to bribe Congress to make it pass.

    Sep 09th, 2011 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Forgetit87’s Heideggerian Abbau of GeorgeWard’s partisan ontology is like the icy morning breeze rolling down my mountains…..

    Very enjoyable….

    Sep 10th, 2011 - 05:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Think, :-)

    Forgetit,
    “. . . it just happens to be PT because they did what they did” - fixing corruption as the modus operandi of governance.

    “If the other guys had been in power and did the same I would be gunning for them.” - but it was not, it was PT and its partners.

    ”. . . . PT have been just SO BIG and SO BRAZEN about it (corruption), that they deserve everything coming to them.” - Forgetit, it doesn't have to be like this. If you, and people like you, want it to change, it can be changed. You can be part of the solution rather than the perpetuation of the problem.
    Surely YOUR country is worth the effort. ? Your effort.

    Sep 10th, 2011 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!