Monday, November 08, 2004
Brazilian Biased Media on Bush Reelection News
I delayed this posting in a way to see a complete set of thoughts spread out in Brazilian media on the subject of American elections and Bush´s reelection.
Weekend issues of the main newspapers gave me a clear sight of how deep is our media biased towards liberal side.
One example of this is comic showed above: the reelection of Bush represented a clear defection in a "world-peace effort". This is the current opinion through out Brazilian media.
Sometimes it seemed that I was reading some French newspaper...
I believe that is not a problem when a media vehicle assume a side on a electoral dispute. But it must be written in the right place: in an editorial box explaining it to the public in a clear way.
But it is not what happens here. The bias is INSIDE the subject, embebbed as “news coverage”. And they simply lie when caught on action. The results were awful.
Here I list some of the worse exemplos of it in this historic week:
Monday night – Globo Network´s “Jornal Nacional” :
A special bulletin on elections gave special attention to Zogby´s exit polls. The results were given with a demi-laughter smile when was reported that “according to the only institute that was right on 2000 elections”, “Kerry would be the next president”.
Another reporter was sent to cover the election as insider and he was allowed to fly with Bush´s campaign crew while another one tried to take part in one of the democrat entourage rally... The democrats denied his access...
The "home alone" media guy insisted with Kerry later to “speak some words to Brazil”... Kerry denied too.. It was laughable. If Kerry knew how Globo Networks loved him he would give ´em full access. But were the 'baddies' republicans who gave them full access.
Weekend analysis- newspapers (various):
All newspapers delivered lefty bias instead of information. One of theses analysis was that the republicans were helped by the “terror scare” to win the elections. The report even cited the ABC poll that showed that “moral values” was the first issue followed by “economic/ jobs” issue. But it was underrated. It was important to rely the victory of presidency and the senate house solely on “terror”. No facts and no hard evidence.
Another syndicated columnist wrote about “moral values” and how they changed in meaning, because these “moral values” has caused 100,000 deaths in Iraq.
Note that it seems that Saddam never killed anyone. I imagine that this same twisted interpretation wold be given to death polls in WWII related the western effort to topple Hitler.
I wrote myself a letter to one of these columnists. He argued that Rupert Murdoch´s newspapers were not “impartial” and showed a clear pro-Republican bias. Just a week after NYT had opened its vote for Kerry.
He answered me that I was wrong and he was reporting the “truth” about the feeling of American people. It is not necessary to say that he was reporting directly from New York City. His polls were actually street polls, with no consistency at all. I even imagine that he just copied all the subjects from moveon.org - Soros website effort to "oust" Bush. There is an exact copy of this kind of charge against Murdoch on this website...
But the “grand finale” was even worst: the main newspaper from my state “Zero Hora” (something like “hour zero”) reported yesterday that Bush´s reelection was a good thing to our state´s economy and jobs. It might boost the exports and create hundreds of jobs in Rio Grande do Sul - Brazil.
"ZH" wasted last three years shouting on the contrary ! Bush was the evil´s impersonation, that he was another Hitler and nazi and supported whatever it takes to make him look worse to all brazilians.
Three years later and five days after the election ZH reveals that Bush was GOOD for our economy?? They charged Americans of being bloody-profit-searchers but forgot our own interests. And deny to showed it until the race was won.
It´s what I called "treason".
That´s the way ou media works: We always choose the wrong side – if its against USA – even if it hurts our own interests.
That´s why the world call us “third world”: as we don´t have our own reasons we borrowed it from third parties, specially from Europe..