Censorship: the truth that lies within the Pope's rosary

The controversy that arose from the search for "truth" in the episode of the rosary given to Lula in prison in Curitiba by lawyer Juan Grabois, one of Pope Francis's advisors, attests to our tragedy as a country from the point of view of respect for the basic principles that guide a democratic society.

What's at stake isn't whether the Pope likes Lula and sent someone who enjoys his intimacy (something Google Images can demonstrate to the skeptics who don't trust the interview this blogger did with Pablo Gentili of CLACSO. Just search for Juan Grabois + Pope Francis) to talk to him.

What matters is whether this was a topic for fact-checking agencies that have become the network's police force through the agreement they made with Facebook. And whether, by focusing on such an unimportant fact-check, from a journalistic and social point of view, they could, behaving as censors, send Facebook a recommendation to punish just 3 journalistic sites that published the same story, which had similar content disseminated on dozens of other sites.

This is the underlying issue that needs to be debated so that the minimum agreement between media outlets of any ideological leaning in defense of press freedom is not thrown in the trash in this episode.

Today, an Insper professor, Fernando Schüller, tears up this pact in an article for Folha de S.Paulo, treating the episode as something that could guarantee maturity for fact-checking agencies.

Either he is unaware of the episode and analyzed it from the perspective of his ideological beliefs, or he perceived the movement and wanted to present himself as the formulator of a new modus operandi of censorship that may soon affect Folha de S. Paulo, where he published his article.

This episode of the Pope's rosary has numerous problems and threats. I will list them here, attempting to spark a debate about these issues with everyone involved in journalism in the country, regardless of the media outlet they work for or their worldview.

1 – There was doubt as to whether the rosary had been sent to former President Lula by the Pope; verifying this information could be relevant. Is it reasonable to attribute any possible error in reporting by any media outlet to the production of fake news when there was strong evidence suggesting it might be true?

2. Based on the classification of this information as false using only one source (Vatican News website), suggesting that Facebook punish and threaten to delete three news websites is not far beyond the role a fact-checking company should play?

3. When nearly a hundred media outlets used the same source (the Lula.com website) to report that the Pope had sent a rosary to Lula, why were only 3 of those outlets flagged for censorship by Facebook and threatened by them?

4. Once fact-checking companies partner with Facebook, is it reasonable for them to maintain partnerships with media outlets that compete in the news market, as is the case with Lupa, which is part of Revista Piauí?

5. What powers do these companies have in classifying news websites on Facebook? If they have the power to censor content and threaten to delete pages, do they also have the power to classify the reach of those pages?

There are many other issues to be debated. And in principle, it is understandable that Facebook seeks to hinder the circulation of lies that violate human rights, that may cause harm to society, and even that defame people.

Is this the case with the Pope's rosary? Does it make sense to choose this as the first action of the partnership between fact-checking companies and Facebook to punish news outlets that have well-known journalists in their leadership and employ several professionals? One of them, as in the case of Fórum, with 16 years of existence?

The attack these media outlets suffered cannot be treated as something that happens in a game, as a sign of maturity, or as a mere detail. It is something extremely serious and concerns the entire information ecosystem, regardless of each individual's religious beliefs.