Posts Tagged ‘Brazil’
May 17th, 2013
Brazil loves football – and it loves the game so much it’s hosting next year’s World Cup finals. But a huge number of fans from the state of Paraná are having a very hard time following their team this year because of media restrictions imposed by directors of the local club, Rafael Spuldar reports.
Atlético Paranaense from Curitiba, one of Brazil’s top flight teams and Brazilian champions in 2001, banned press conferences and independent media work during their weekly activities and on match days.
On top of that, no staff member — including players and managers — of Atlético is officially allowed to speak to the media. The club says that radio stations and newspapers should pay for the right to report on the club, along the lines of fees television stations pay to broadcast matches.
However, a 2011 federal law forbids football clubs from charging money for radio broadcasts.
The club’s policy is that all information about the team will be funneled through official channels ike the team’s website, online radio and TV. Independent journalists will be limited to background information and off-the-record statements.
It’s a common practice in Brazil’s football industry to have at least two press conferences a week with players and managers and regular media activity on match days. It’s also usual in the country to have people from clubs on sport shows airing on TV and radio, which makes Atlético’s move a rare one in Brazilian football.
“The content we offer is not of a primary importance to the audience, it’s pure entertainment. So we don’t feel obliged to let anyone enter the club’s premises and profit from our business without paying for it, like radio stations do”, says Mauro Holzmann, Atlético’s director of communications and marketing.
“Less than thirty years ago it was OK for televisions to broadcast football matches without paying for it, but now it’s unthinkable to do so. So why don’t the other media pay for it? We know it’s a paradigm shift, but maybe other clubs will do this too”, Holzmann told Index on Censorship.
Broadcasting of matches became another problematic issue. Atlético did not reach an agreement for Paraná’s State Championship with TV rights holders RPC – a local affiliate of national media giant Rede Globo. Because of that, fans were not be able to watch the games unless they bought tickets and went to the pitch.
“This is a complete enclosure that ends up damaging everybody”, says Leonardo Bonasolli, reporter at Gazeta do Povo, Curitiba’s biggest newspaper.
“The club loses exposure at the media, and exposure means more sponsorship money. The press loses the chance of providing a different, independent point of view and, of course, fans also lose because they are not interested only on the team’s monolithic media work”, Bonasolli told Index on Censorship.
Atlético’s chairman Mário Celso Petraglia said the State Championship – which runs from January until early May – is not profitable, so he would not only deny TV broadcasting but would also put the Under-23 team on the pitch, while the main squad would have an extended pre-season in Europe until the start of the Brazilian Championship.
About the media ban, Petraglia said in a rare interview that the club “reached a limit” in its relationship with the press, and that journalists “should be neutral and conduct [their work] in an ethical and moral way”, something he believes does not happen in Paraná.
Petraglia’s disturbed relationship with the press has a long history – it started in the late 1990s, when he was involved in a bribery scheme with referees to fix match results. He was neither convicted nor banned because of the episode.
Atlético first tried to charge money from radios to broadcast its games in 2008. However, a judge ruled the fees were illegal and radio stations have since been given stadium access on match days.
Atlético’s media ban was effectively shut down in early May, during the State Championship finals against historic rivals Coritiba. Rede Globo, which also owns the TV rights of the Brazilian Championship, made a deal with Atlético to allow both matches to be aired. It also closed an agreement for broadcasting the State Championship in 2014 and 2015.
After the game, Atlético’s players gave interviews normally, even to outlets other than Globo, as if there was no ban.
Paraná’s Sports Journalists Association believes Atlético’s attitude towards general media won’t change much, even with the upcoming Brazilian Championship, which draws national attention to all clubs.
“When the Brazilian championship starts, Atlético will be forced to speak to Globo, and they will also feel pressed to hold conferences after matches, because there will be so many journalists from the whole country. But I doubt they will allow other radio or TV stations inside the club during the week, so Globo will do all interviews and share their material to the other outlets”, says the Association’s president, Isaías Bessa.
Local journalists also say the club’s lack of transparency damages Curitiba’s position as one of the host cities of the 2014 World Cup – Atlético’s stadium will a venue. Renovations on the stadium are said to be the most behind schedule of any of the 12 World Cup venues, but independent media was never allowed inside after the works began.
Atlético’s Mauro Holzmann firmly says the stadium will be ready by the end of 2013, like FIFA demands, and blames all delays on “Brazil’s bureaucracy” to deal with public financing.
May 9th, 2013
The Brazilian Congress is considering draft legislation to ease the publication of biographies without prior authorization from the subject, but the move is not without opposition, Rafael Spuldar reports.
The country’s 2002 reformed Civil Code made it mandatory for works of a biographical nature – films, books or otherwise – to have prior authorization from the subject of the work before public release. As a result, most biographies published in Brazil end up being eulogistic to the people they portray.
Critics contend that the current legal framework causes editors to practice self-censorship. “Instead of only taking care of the literary quality of the work, editors end up being busy with judicial problems and carrying out a self-censorship that is harmful to the industry”, says Sônia Machado Jardim, president of Brazil’s National Union of Book (Sindicato Nacional dos Editores de Livros, Snel).
Sônia Machado Jardim supports a change to Brazilian law, which would allow publication of biographies without prior approval of the subject. Photo: www.snel.org.br
Jardim also says that many relatives of people portrayed in biographies try to take advantage of the need of previous approval to demand huge amounts of money, making it impossible to have the works published.
Some controversial cases have become notorious in Brazil. Singer Roberto Carlos, one of the most popular artists in the past 50 years, not only barred in the 2007 circulation of a biography written by Paulo Cesar de Araújo – the copies were already printed and ready to go to the stores – but also banned the publishing of a master’s degree thesis on Jovem Guarda, the musical movement he was part of in the mid 1960s. Before that, in the 1980s, Carlos also prevented the publication of magazine articles about him.
The biography of former footballer and two time World Cup champion Garrincha, who died in 1983, provides another infamous example. Written by journalist Ruy Castro, the book was withdrawn from circulation in 1995 because of a lawsuit filed by Garrincha’s relatives. The author appealed and his work eventually went back on sale.
In 2011, controversies like these led deputy Newton Lima (Workers’ Party) from São Paulo to draft legistlation that changes the Civil Code and annuls the need for prior authorization of biographies from public people – like politicians and media celebrities.
“When people go into public life, they give up part of their right for privacy. Of course one does not want to deprive public people of all their privacy, but it certainly gets diminished”, says the draft bill’s rapporteur in the Congress, deputy Alessandro Molon (Workers’ Party) from Rio de Janeiro.
“It doesn’t mean that the modified law will make it free for anyone to publish anything about anybody. If the person portrayed in a biography feels attacked, he or she can go to the court against the author, and the author himself is still responsible to answer for his work”, says the deputy.
The Chamber of Deputies’ Constitution and Justice Committee passed the draft bill conclusively in early April, which meant it should have gone straight to a Senate vote. However, deputy Marcos Rogério (PDT Party) from the state of Rondônia filed a petition against the proposed bill, making it mandatory that the deputies voted before senators, which slowed down the approval process.
Rogério justified his petition by saying the draft bill’s language left some issues unaddressed.
“What is ‘public dimension’ anyway? It’s a relative concept. Someone can write, for example, a biography about a city counselor either accusing him or promoting him electorally. It can be used for good or for evil. Constitution protects both freedom of expression and privacy”, the deputy said during a Constitution and Justice Committee debate.
Molon regrets this reaction to the draft bill. “While this bill is not voted by the deputies, it cannot go on, and now we depend on the Chamber of Deputies’ speaker’s good will to put it on the voting schedule”, he says. Marcos Rogério could not be reached by Index on Censorship to comment about this subject.
Aside from the new biographies bill, a group of publishers filed a direct action of unconstitutionality with the supreme federal court in July 2012. In their filing, the book firms argue that the Civil Code clause governing prior authorization generates censorship, which is prohibited in Brazil.
Opinions of the suit are to be issued by Brazil’s Solicitor-General Luis Inácio Adams and Attorney-General Roberto Gurgel. Minister Carmem Lúcia is responsible for ruling about the case in the federal supreme court. There is no deadline for the opinions or the court’s ruling.
“When you have a restriction for publishing stories about personalities, the preservation of history’s knowledge is lost. It’s a higher issue than looking for profit”, says Snel’s Sônia Jardim.
“After so many years of fighting to reestablish democracy and freedom of expression in our country, we cannot allow censorship to put its clutches over artistic works ever again”.
May 3rd, 2013
Brazil’s position in free speech’s world charts like Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press and RSF’s Press Fredom Index has consistently worsened in recent years, Rafael Spulder writes from Sao Paolo.
(more…)
April 29th, 2013
Local broadcasters, the lifeblood of many Brazilian communities, face tough times. Rafael Spuldar reports
(more…)
April 18th, 2013
A photojournalist was gunned down on 14 April in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais. Photographer Walgney Assis Carvalho was shot in the back during a day spent fishing in the town of Coronel Fabriciano.
According to the police, Carvalho was accosted by a hooded man on a motorcycle who shot him several times before fleeing. The crime has been linked to the killing of a radio presenter last March.
Police have not confirmed the cause of the crime. However, state deputy Durval Ângelo, who is president of the Human Rights Committee for Minas Gerais’s Legislative Assembly, posted on Twitter that the photographer had information about the shooting of radio presenter Rodrigo Neto, who was killed in the town of Ipatinga on 8 March.
Although Neto’s murder remains unsolved, state deputy Ângelo claims the presenter had given Carvalho information about policemen involved in crimes on the Ipatinga area. The case is still being investigated by police.
Walgney Carvalho worked freelance for 5 years at Vale do Aço’s Police desk. Rodrigo Neto had started working on the same newspaper one week before getting killed.
Both Brazil’s National Newspapers Association and the Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism issued statements denouncing the photographer’s killing.
April 10th, 2013
One month has passed since a radio presenter was gunned down in the Brazilian town of Ipatinga, in the state of Minas Gerais, with no results from the police investigation. Both his colleagues and authorities believe the crime was caused by sensitive information the journalist presented on this radio crime show.
Rodrigo Neto was shot while leaving a restaurant on the evening of Friday 8 March. Two men on a motorcycle accosted him and opened fire. The presenter was hit on the head and on the chest. The gunmen escaped unidentified.
The case is still being investigated by the police.
State Deputy Durval Ângelo, who is president of the Human Rights Committee on Minas Gerais’s Legislative Assembly, claims the journalist had given him information about policemen involved in crimes on the Ipatinga area.
Workmates of Rodrigo from Vanguarda radio station are sure the murder is connected to his work as a crime show presenter.
Rodrigo was not the first radio presenter to be gunned down in Brazil this year. On 22nd February, journalist Mafaldo Góis was shot and killed in the town of Jaguaribe, in the northeastern state of Ceará. His death is believed to have been ordered by a local drug dealer, cited by Góis in this crime radio show.
Brazil had the 5th highest number of journalists killed in the world in 2012, with 5 cases, according to the International Press Institute .
April 10th, 2013
A judge from the Brazilian State of Goiás has ruled that a football club director allegedly linked to the killing of a sports journalist must remain in prison while he awaits trial.
Radio presenter Valério Luiz de Oliveira was gunned down at the front door of 820 AM radio station in the state capital Goiânia on 5 July 2012.
Businessman Maurício Borges Sampaio, who acted as Atlético Clube Goianiense’s vice-president up to 10 days before Oliveira’s murder, was arrested in February this year accused of having ordered the killing. He denies having any link to the crime.
Days before being killed, Oliveira went on air to strongly denounce Atlético’s management for the team, after poor results on the pitch led to the club’s relegation to the second tier of the Brazilian league later that year .
Among other statements, the presenter compared Atlético’s directors to “rats” that abandon a ship before it sinks .
In a testimony given to the Police, Sampaio admitted signing a document that barred Oliveira’s radio staff from the club’s premises. The former director also claimed the radio presenter had already being banned from Goiás and Vila Nova, two other football clubs in Goiânia.
Three other people accused of acting in the journalist’s killing are also being held in prison.
April 3rd, 2013
Brazil has been caught up in a fresh controversy over attempts to curb online criticism of politicians. This time, the main players are tech giant Google and the Chamber of Deputies, the lower house in the country’s congress. Brazil is already one of the world’s leaders in online content removal.
In early March, the Chamber of Deputies’ Attorney General, Cláudio Cajado, contacted Google in order to request the removal of online videos and content hosted by the company, for being offensive to deputies.
Cajado, a Democratas Party representative from the state of Bahia, denies that his requests were attempts to restrict freedom of expression, and claimed that he only wanted to speed up the processes that, when left to the Justice, could take months — or even years to be solved.
According to Cajado’s office, Google has responded to his requests by being very “thoughtful” in explaining its policies on content removal.
The Attorney General’s office says it receives an average of two complaints per month by the deputies, mainly because of videos uploaded on YouTube, or posts published on its Blogger platform.
The Chamber of Deputies’ Attorney General is responsible for defending the deputies’ honour and the House’s image.
“We seek a partnership [with Google] to set up actions and attitudes, without creating any kind of erosion [of the House's image] or harsh consequences”, said Cajado to the Chamber of Deputies’ website.
He cited the case of federal deputy and former Rio de Janeiro governor and presidential candidate Anthony Garotinho, who filed a lawsuit against Google demanding the removal of 11 YouTube videos during the 2010 electoral campaign.
“We have to count on Google executives’ good will and on their comprehension over the importance of measures like this to our country’s life and our democracy,” said Cajado.
As he took office as the Chamber’s Attorney General in early March, Cajado also said he planned to ensure that deputies had enough media time to reply to criticism, and plans to do the same online.
All complaints brought by deputies to the Attorney General are analysed by his office’s legal team, to ensure that cases that can lead to actual lawsuits are taken forward.
The most common cases of online attacks brought to the Attorney General’s office are related to slander and — more seriously — crimes against honour, which is a punishable offence according to Brazil’s law.
When it comes to the Brazilian judiciary, rulings about the internet can be very diverse and — sometimes — illogical.
In September 2012, a judge from the state of Mato Grosso do Sul ordered the arrest of Fabio Coelho, Google’s top executive in Brazil, after videos deemed offensive to a mayoral candidate were uploaded to YouTube. When the posts were not immediately deleted, Brazil’s federal police temporarily detained Coelho.
While the Superior Court of Justice has already ruled that internet providers are not obliged to pay reparations to users because of offensive content, the Supreme Court is about to judge if internet companies should supervise information that is published.
This is related to an appeal by Google after the State Justice of Minas Gerais, Brazil’s second most populous state, ordered the company to pay BRL 10,000 (around USD $5,000) to an offended user, and to remove content from Orkut, Google’s social network.
The Attorney General’s new initiative has already worried a few of his fellow deputies.
“The Parliament’s best defence is a transparent behaviour, one that seeks the public interest. And anyone that feels injured or vilified can always go to the Justice and seek reparation. I believe the Attorney General should have other priorities.” says Chico Alencar, a Rio de Janeiro representative for the Socialism and Freedom Party, PSOL.
Alencar also fears that these actions taken along with Google could worsen politicians already tarnished public image.
“Public opinion would consider this as censorship and a privilege for people that already have many other privileges. We should learn how to reply to websites by creating another websites and, if that’s the case, asking those who offend us for the right to reply. That would be enough.”
Editor’s note: Google is a funder of Index on Censorship
