Can we still believe in journalism?
Journalism, as an instrument of divulgation of the truth in a post-Covid context, despite heaving breaths, suffers an identity crisis stimulated by the internet and fake news.
Níkolas Schildberg informs himself daily, especially through digital media because of the practicality. Politics, sociology and economy are his main reading themes that are not searched only in the Brazilian journalistic oligopoly formed by names like O Estado de S. Paulo, Folha de S. Paulo or O Globo. Only Folha de S. Paulo integrates his appetite for information from these vehicles, also solved with BBC, CNN and G1. In his opinion, also, Fundação Padre Anchieta, BBC and Deutsch Welle are brands that inspired trustiness, because of their publicly funded, independent of government administration and their variety in distinct contexts.
Ana Luiza Baylão, on the other hand, informs herself every three days, also motivated by practicality. Folha de S. Paulo is a name that appears in her appetite for information, for having consumed it for a while. However, he is not the unique newspaper that generates trust when the theme is to be informed. Rede Globo and CBN are brands that, for her, suggest trustiness because of the time they have in the information market.
They and are only two examples of the information’s public, an area that is suffering danger in lockstep with journalism, the profession for delivering it in the most objective, transparent and impartial way to the masses and that, today, lives an identity crisis. And the pandemic context brought a scenario that weakened the relation of public-media a lot more: fake news.
It showed the fragility that already exists, but they overshadowed the reliability of the journalistic work in the divulgation of the facts and the truth of the events. Not by chance that today, according to the study by Trust Barometer 2022, the 22nd trust and credibility survey conducted in November 2021 by global communications company Edelman, the concerns with fake news as a gun of disinformation reaches 76% of the 36 thousand respondents from 28 countries. Yet, research of Instituto Datafolha, made by the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo announced in March 2020 that it indicates that, for 56% of the 1558 interviewees, print paper is trustable in the information that it brings. For 61%, this trust falls on journalistic programs and, for 38%, news websites have credibility.
During the pandemic period, journalism showed its importance by doing severe coverage, with data and specialist information. Also, journalism collaborated with society in the prevention and consciousness surrounding the virus’ damages. But that has not deleted the increase of disinformation.
For the coordinator of the journalism course from ESPM Maria Elisabete Antonioli, the disinformation phenomenon that was spread around the world in 2016, contributed strongly that one portion of the population had lost its trust in journalism. “This event is so strong that many people believe in it even when there is contrary evidence.” Antonioli observes.
Because of that, the fight against disinformation needs to be defended with actions made by many social sectors and journalism itself, because it is a way to give consciousness to people. According to Maria, media education programs that can be offered in all the educational stages, and are already foreseen at least in the Brazilian curricular base, are relevant and can collaborate so that people can identify fake news. “Besides that, they can give a sense of consciousness about the loss that disinformation brings to society and, more than that, about the importance of journalism qualified news”, Maria defends.
However, according to the study Trust Barometer, from Edelman, only 46% of the 36 thousand respondents still have trust in journalism. Besides, in that case, traditional media with a trustiness index of 57%, behind 59% stored at research motors.
Another research, Digital News Report, announced by Reuters in June 2022, indicates that, in the specific Brazilian case, the country had a drop in its information reliability index brought by the media. From 2015, when the rate was 62% of confidence, to 2022, whose index was 48%, the country experienced a popular discredit with media through a decrease, between the 2.022 listeners, of 14% in the probation index of the sector.
From that research, Brazil showed the second-highest drop in interest in the news among those 46 countries polled in that study. Between 2015 and 2022, the attraction index fell from 82% to 57%. The country stays only behind Argentina, whose drop was, in the same period, from 77% to 48% between the 2.012 listeners.
The public is losing confidence in journalism and in the traditional media, in a general way, which is not a recent phenomenon, but is an event very characteristic of this century. For the writer Jorge Tarquini, journalist and teacher of ESPM’ journalism course, in the occidental world, whether they were right-wing, left-wing or center-wing governments, occurred a nursery that everything was the media’s fault. According to him, then, the role of the press, which is to point out problems and to investigate things that need to be investigated, began to be attacked by governments and put, the credibility and motivation of the press, in check and questioned.
In Brazil, that was not different. The country experienced, both Lula’s era, Dilma’s era, Temer’s and Bolsonaro’s era, especially, an aversion to the critical press. That, however, would not have had the same effect if not happened contemporary to the information revolution.
In that way, Twitter, WhatsApp, Telegram, and Instagram started to be important information search tools, which, in one way, is related to the question of criticising the media. “The media is not above good and evil, so she needs to be criticised.” highlights Tarquini. “But, when, whether the governing ideology, this same organ criticises the media because of the work done, there comes a moment when you have a reach in which this attitude infects the masses,” he considers. “And the unhappiness that happens simultaneously to the development of the information search tools, like social media,” Tarquini ends up.
Taking off the government, the biggest problem in relation to journalism and traditional media falls into generational question. Information is no longer searched by people between 15 and 20 years old. This is because the freedom that the internet gives has a side that makes it possible to consume what, when, and how the information is taken. On the other hand, it creates a sense of laziness because everything arrives to people, especially from their friends posting and sharing. If not in that way, the news is not viewed.
That reality, according to Tarquini, highlights the question of consumption of information and, on another side, also the parallel existence created by the echo chambers of social media and the internet, in which more and more people only consume and only relate to things that are in line with what they think. “And in it, the problem is ours, journalists, of journalistic enterprises, of media enterprises,” alerts. “We did not know how to adapt ourselves to this new reality,” laments.
Besides the government’s discredit in journalism, the transition to the digital environment is an element that, also to the journalist Helen Garcia,Trama Reputale Group’s integrated communication director, is a factor that animates the disregard in relation to the profession. After all, to her, journalistic companies did not make a good adaptation with respect to publicity and monetisation.
With the ascension of technology companies that domain the market, or Big Techs, as they are known, such as Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Apple, for example, both audience and money that circulated in publicity changed their ways. “So all that context harmed the media, because, with less money, the communication vehicles also started to produce materials with less quality,” explains Helen. “That crisis also generates a disinterest in journalism by media professionals,” observes.
Yet, the information industry continues in activity and, each day receives materials of remarkable confidence from many vehicles. In that case, objectivity and maximum impartiality are still seeking to better inform the public. Those qualities were advertised by Mirror Theory.
Going back to the 19th-century positivist movement defended by the French philosopher Auguste Comte, the theory starts from the assumption of total objectivity in journalism, but in reality that is different. “We, journalists, search impartiality, objectivity, neutrality, but we can not say that we are totally impartial, objectives and neutrals, because besides our vision could have interferences in the verification process,” explains the coordinator of the journalism course at ESPM Maria Elisabete Antonioli. “That process is complex and shows elements that oppose each other from the Mirror Theory, however, she could not be ignored,” highlights.
The Mirror Theory, and especially its guidelines of impartiality and objectivity still defines journalism work. However, it falls into a trap. The opinion, acceptable in texts such as editorials, columns and articles, ends up contaminating the newscast.
For the writer Tarquini, when journalism moves away from that quantity of opinion in news, he’ll be on the way to regaining a greater public attraction. The second way is for production to stop its headline just to gain clicks. “We have that, first, decontaminate oneself from opinion in news, throw off the click’s trap and rethink about how to create an interesting, relevant and desirable product by the people,” observes.
That attitude helps in the resumption of people’s interest to consume journalism, but that does not guarantee a greater appreciation either for the profession or for journalists. Not by chance that the report The College Payoff, a study announced in November 2022 by Georgetown University (USA), reports that journalism is the most unwanted activity among the 10 higher education courses evaluated.
In Brazil, between the comings and goings of the necessity of a diploma to exercise the profession, nowadays, by Brazilian law, there’s no necessity for a diploma to be a journalist. Besides that, in Brazilian territory, companies are not obligated to accept journalists with a diploma, which ends up underestimating the profession.
Brazil is a young country that left illiteracy on a higher scale recently, besides that it’s a territory in which higher education training does not reach all of its population and where universal access to information does not happen. “So, what is the problem of having professions that demand higher education training?,” asks the writer Jorge Tarquini, journalist and teacher of ESPM’s journalism course. “We are a country that needs higher education”, points out.
In order for a professional journalist, the idea of what he did can be made by every person is dangerous in the way of which responsibilities the journalism exercise demands. “I agree with the idea that not requiring a diploma impoverishes the profession, because, in that way, companies pay what they want, an attitude that goes depreciating the salary, the category and helps to pull the way public opinion disregards journalism and journalists”, opines Tarquini. “And the special question is that: the accountability,” observes. “Because if a big journal, TV or online media press produce something wrong, they are responsible for that, and those who only claim to be journalists do not,” he highlights.
Improving confidence, attraction and, especially, journalism image, is a necessary way and can be made from the regulation of communication media. Brazilian media, especially, is with outdated regulation, because the last changes in that document occurred in 1988.
In that era, the internet didn’t exist, which, for sociologist Marcos Brey, means that a big part of the problems that are in Brazilian media nowadays don’t have prescribed solutions precisely because they come from the connection network itself. “So, the question is: what kind of regulation do we want?”, reflects.
