In a statement, Fenaj says that "journalism cannot be a captive of the logic of the spectacle, of audience at any price or of the strategies of candidates who disregard democratic dialogue."When questions are not answered, false statements are no longer confronted and arguments are replaced by performances, the Brazilian population loses out.
Related news:
- Civil society presents proposals to presidential candidates.
- Get to know the proposals of Flavio and Lula for public safety.
- Lula and Flavio hold their first TV Band debate.
"We recognize the trajectory of the professionals responsible for mediation, but we question the editorial responsibility of the broadcaster, the weakness of the rules and the absence of mechanisms capable of ensuring the purpose of the debate. It is not enough to offer equal time to the candidates. It is essential to guarantee relevant, substantiated and verifiable information," the document states.
Journalism cannot abdicate its responsibility to ask, confront versions, contextualize events and demand answers. Neutrality in the face of disinformation does not represent impartiality. On the contrary, it can contribute to its legitimation.
"It is serious when a debate favors slogans and personal attacks, relegating fundamental issues such as health, education, employment, income, inequality, security, national sovereignty, the environment, and social rights to the background. The future of the country requires concrete proposals, not performances aimed at producing cuts for social media," the Fenaj assesses.
In the document, the Fenaj argues that broadcasters should review their election debate models, with effective rules that ensure objective responses, editorial intervention in the face of demonstrably false information, and accountability for non-compliance with the rules.
This is not about restricting the right to debate or protecting the thoughts of voters, but about ensuring the constitutional right to quality information and preventing misinformation from compromising the freedom of choice.
Brazil knows the consequences of normalizing lies, verbal violence, and attacks on democratic institutions. Journalism cannot ignore this experience or repeat practices that have transformed aggression and misinformation into political weapons.
The note states that "it is up to communication companies, professionals, and representative bodies to reaffirm the ethical principles of journalism."Information is a right of society, not a commodity subordinate to commercial interests or the pursuit of audience." We reaffirm our historical commitment to freedom of the press, professional ethics, the right to information, and the unwavering defense of democracy.
"The electoral debate is not entertainment. Journalism is not a spectacle. Democracy is not built on lies. Brazilian society deserves debates commensurate with its challenges. And journalism has a responsibility to be commensurate with its responsibility," concludes the Fenaj document.