Fenaj sees "restriction and inhibition" of journalism in politicians' actions.
"These actions, by politicians during election time, escalating against journalists and media outlets, characterize a trend towards curtailing their work. It's an inhibition of journalistic activity, which is detrimental to democracy," states the president of the National Federation of Journalists, Celso Schröder. He emphasizes that against the "exaggeration and error" of journalists, mechanisms should be applied "a posteriori" and not prior prohibitions. He affirms that politicians must understand the "public dimension" of their activity; "The more they throw themselves into public life, the more public their lives become," he adds. Schröder says there is "an industry of lawsuits" in the country; in Sergipe, in 30 days, there were 50 complaints filed by candidates against media professionals.
Valter Lima, from Sergipe 247 - The president of the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), Celso Schröder, said in an interview with Sergipe 247 that the lack of a Press Law in Brazil has harmed journalistic activity in the country, causing excessive judicialization of journalists' work, which, in his view, is detrimental to democracy. He is concerned about the large number of lawsuits filed by politicians against journalists. In Sergipe alone, in the first 30 days of the election campaign, 50 lawsuits were filed against media professionals (see previous article). here).
"These actions, by politicians during election time, escalating against journalists and media outlets, characterize a trend toward curtailing their work. It's not quite censorship, because to say that is an exaggeration, but it is an inhibition of journalistic activity, which is detrimental to democracy," Schröder stated.
He emphasizes that mechanisms should be applied "a posteriori" to counter the journalist's "exaggeration and error," rather than establishing prior prohibitions. "A blog taken offline, a newspaper prevented from mentioning certain candidates seems very harmful to me," he asserts.
According to the president of Fenaj, there is a dangerous process of the Judiciary interfering in journalism. "It's a serious obstacle to journalistic activity. There's a perspective that has privatized what is public and is taking away journalists' prerogatives, which is to inform society. What is happening is that newspapers and journalists are being taken to civil and criminal courts, and judges are ruling based on their experiences in these fields without taking journalistic activity into consideration," he stated.
He states that politicians must understand the "public dimension" of their activity. "Politicians must understand that the public dimension of their lives is much greater than that of ordinary people. The more they throw themselves into public life, the more public their lives become. Judges cannot attribute to someone who is running for public office a private dimension, restricting access for voters. Obviously, there are dimensions of private life that need to be preserved, but there are other spaces where, when I propose to be a public figure, I cannot claim a certain degree of privacy," he emphasizes.
"COMPENSATION INDUSTRY"
It is in this context that Celso Schröder defends the creation of a Press Law, to provide security for both society and journalists. "At this moment, society lacks the tools, with the end of the press law, to react to errors in our professional activity, and we are also left without tools for protection. We urgently need a new law that takes journalistic activity into account, so that society can better defend itself, and journalists can protect themselves from actions that end up inhibiting them," he stated.
Celso sees the judicialization of the system as a "flaw in Brazil," which generates an "indemnification industry" to the point of "making small media companies unviable" due to recurring fines. As a result, he also warns journalists about professional conduct.
"The rule for journalists and companies is to be careful in their work, in order to produce a good journalist. Judges should exercise restraint in understanding that there is a difference between the public and the private spheres. And in the public sphere, the journalist decides. If he errs in this judgment, he will be condemned after the fact and not preventively, which is a problem that arises," he says.