Final Country Report

“Protection paradigm” – RSF’s unprecedented report on protective mechanisms for journalists in Latin America

The story that I chose to focus on was titled “Protection paradigm – RSF’s unprecedented report on protective mechanisms for journalists in Latin America,” written and published by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) in February 2022.

Cortez, Y. [Image]. Photo of a candlelight vigil for journalists murdered in Latin America. RSF.com

Reporters Without Borders is a non-profit organization that was registered in France; hence the abbreviation actually stands for “Reporters Sans Frontières.” UNESCO partnered with Reporters Without Borders in a survey that was launched in 2021 in order to determine the protection mechanism measures in their effectiveness in helping journalists that are being threatened in Latin America’s four most dangerous countries for the media: Mexico, Honduras, Colombia, and Brazil. The survey’s name was called “Protection Paradigm: making protection mechanisms work for Latin American journalists.” The survey was conducted by interviewing 75 various actors involved in the measures–beneficiaries of protection measures, those implementing them, and civil society representatives involved. From the interviews conducted and the results of the survey, RSF has produced 80 recommendations in order to help resolve flaws found in the protective mechanisms. The work that Reporters Without Borders have done allows protection policies within each country to implement the specificities identified in the analyses of the flaws, which should increase the effectiveness of protecting journalists in Latin America.

The current predicament facing Latin America is that around 90% of the murders of journalists took place in Mexico, Brazil, Honduras, and Colombia in the last 10 years. In each of these countries, there is a de facto censorship of news and information, however, these journalists have come to bear the brunt of the abuse, violence, harassment, arbitrary arrest, and so on. In the last 10 years, there were a total of 134 journalists that were murdered, which led to fierce pressure from civil society and international organizations to create policies that would help to protect journalists. (Vargas, et. al, pp. 2)

These reports contained a detailed analysis of the programs of each individual country, in which women journalists are extremely vulnerable in Brazil. The protection plans were found to ignore gender violence that affects both women and the LGBTQIA plus population. In Brazil, there reports being too little transparency with resources and procedures for processing case files. Because there is so little transparency, it causes distrust between the beneficiaries of protection programs and civil society implementers designed to cooperate with them. The reports of each country showed that journalists and activists were referred to with derogatory terms by authorities in each country, leading to a greater chasm of distrust and hostility. It can be seen that in Brazil the media climate is hostile especially when authorities such as police officers, politicians, members of the judiciary, civil servants, and officers, in general, are involved because they are often identified as those who instigate violence against journalists which hinders the main mechanism that allows for journalists to be protected by these programs. It is those authorities and those in power that should be protecting journalists, but the very people who are entrusted with that task are the exact force opposing them. what’s more is that attacks on journalists are hard to predict, and one that needs to be done by law enforcement is to identify areas of most risk against journalists. Reporters Without Borders found that Brazil does not have a special prosecutor’s office dedicated to crimes against freedom of expression (Vargas, et. al, pp. 5). In fact, the attorney general’s office is mainly absent from the protection program offered to journalists. Although there are measures being implemented in order to better protect journalists, the fact that there are already so many inherent flaws in implementing the program shows that the program seeks to provide external validation for civil society and journalists. Nevertheless, it does not actually get to the root of the problem, which should address the main aggressors of journalists, individuals most at risk, and basic intentionality towards helping beneficiaries of the protection program.

An area that is lacking for beneficiaries of the protection paradigm is the coordination between authorities and state agencies in order to create preventative measures that would allow for better protection of journalists. Something that authorities are doing wrong is only monitoring when and where attacks happen and tagging those areas as most “high-risk.” (Vargas, et. al, pp. 4). This doesn’t help with preventative measures, nor does it help with protection in the present. When authorities are the perpetrators of the protection of journalists, it’s difficult for journalists to even be protected in the first place. What emerges is the actual job of journalism itself, in the wake of President Bolsonaro imposing his political ideology on his Brazilian supporters and the Brazilian population, journalists have become the target of many who distrust the government, as well as science and reason. For this reason, journalists’ jobs have become insecure, their employment beginning to become increasingly obsolete, and their marketplace worth decreasing in value.

Brazil’s current political climate is extremely conflicted and polarized. This may be attributed to the current president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, as well as the country’s protests over economic issues such as bus fares. (Stuenkel, 2021). Brazil hadn’t experienced massive protests across all its major cities since the 1980s when it returned to democracy; However, protesters rose in 2013 over inadequate social services, and gradually, over the years, fake news campaigns and attacks begin running amok amongst elections and made Brazil’s political climate chaotic and dysfunctional. The center-left Workers Party in Brazil is one of the main culprits of Brazil’s descent into destructive polarization because once Bolsonaro became elected, he was seen as the anti-system populist who was going against the grain of the political system. This caused polarization to spread across the country and threatened to divide the country into pro-Worker’s Party and Anti-Worker’s Party camps.

Because of Bolsonaro’s polarizing views and influential polarizing tendencies, it has influenced journalism to take on a similar sentiment. Journalism in Brazil has become more and more polarized in recent years, leading to more tensions and reporting, reliable news sources, mainstream media outlets, and more aggression towards journalists.

As expected, the protection of journalists and news informants is not of great concern to Bolsonaro, as journalists around the country are seen as distrustful news mongers. It comes as no surprise that because of this polarised political atmosphere present within Brazil, journalists then suffer from violence across the country. The protection of these journalists is not prioritized, and the survey’s conclusive results show that the protective measures are still incomplete and still not being prioritized enough.

There is a change underway in the country of Brazil. Though change can be a good thing, under the helm of the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro, it may be a double-edged sword. According to Statista, the number of social media users has been increasing on an upwards trajectory and is projected to continue to climb higher and higher through the year 2026. This means that Brazil will experience a boom in innovation and technologies, social media usage, interconnectivity, and Internet usage, however, relating back to our current events, this may not be a positive change. Bolsonaro has made it nearly impossible for communications amongst officials to reach the ears of his supporters. When taking a look at how he handled the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, it was more radical and severe than how former US President Donald Trump handled the health crisis.

Bolsonaro belittled the Coronavirus as a “cold” that was manufactured and was adamantly against the practice of lockdowns that could help to contain the virus. This meant a downward spiral of consequences: an exponential number of infected populations in Brazil, as well as the unavoidable economic slowdown of the country due to the lack of action in its early stages. His demeaning of a public crisis did more harm than good, seen through his outward berating of mayors and governors for trying to contain the virus. Bolsonaro has used social media such as Facebook to depict COVID-19 as a “little flu,” and relied on reporters to share stories and articles across mainstream media, cable news, and newspapers about his stance on the pandemic.

All of this background on how Bolsonaro handled the pandemic points to the way Bolsonaro pushes his own ideology onto the public, a rhetoric that is ultimately dangerous for any country and its people. Brian Winter, the editor in chief of Americas Quarterly, describes Bolsonaro’s ideology as  “a refusal to take science seriously, to disregard whatever ‘the media’ says as a hostile elitist conspiracy, to reject the establishment generally” (Friedman 2020). This all adds up to be an extremely hostile environment that Bolsonaro has created, surrounding facts and data. To stir up mass confusion when the only form of information to be relied upon during the pandemic is from scientific institutions, political organizations, mainstream media, and social media, the public is at a loss when the leader of their country discredits each of these institutions as untrustworthy.

What can be seen from this recent incident surrounding President Bolsonaro and media usage?

The use of media is that President Bolsonaro used social media as well as mass media to infiltrate the information network used by Brazilians during one of the most confusion-filled times in Brazil. He led the country down a path that became more and more polarized on an issue that was global in scope and depended on science to unveil and quell. What Arose from the president Bolsonaro’s leadership was mass fear, distrust in officials, and the attack on journalists in Brazil.

Journalists in Brazil had been taking a hit ever since the beginning of President Bolsonaro’s presidency, But the handling of the pandemic by the president only fuels the imbalance of trust in journalists for doing their job. As seen in the executive summary for the protection paradigm in Brazil, there seemed to be a lack of political will envision in order to effectively carry out strategies that would help journalists to be better protected, adequately empowered, and more trusted in their communities. This highlights the public perception of journalists surrounding their role in reporting news and the influence of “fake news” by Trump and Bolsonaro.

However, despite the fact that there have been massive hate crimes committed toward journalists and reporters in Brazil, a new movement has been arising in Latin America where protests have been forming in support of journalists who have been murdered, abducted, or harassed. This outcry of support has been led by civil society activists, who wish to right the wrongs of the past and make clear the facts of this situation regarding reporters and the devastating costs of journalism in Latin America today.

Bibliography:

1. Friedman, Uri. “The Coronavirus-Denial Movement Now Has a Leader.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 31 Mar. 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/03/bolsonaro-coronavirus-denial-brazil-trump/608926/.
2. “Protection Paradigm” – RSF’s unprecedented report on protective mechanisms for journalists in Latin America: Reporters without borders. RSF. (2022, February 23). Retrieved April 3, 2022, from https://rsf.org/en/news/protection-paradigm-rsfs-unprecedented-report-protective-mechanisms-journalists-latin-america
3. Published by Statista Research Department, and Feb 11. “Brazil: Number of Internet Users 2026.” Statista, 11 Feb. 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/255208/number-of-internet-users-in-brazil/.
4. Published by Statista Research Department, and Feb 11. “Brazil: Number of Social Media Users 2021.” Statista, 11 Feb. 2022, https://www.statista.com/statistics/278408/number-of-social-network-users-in-brazil/#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20there%20were%20approximately,in%20the%20South%20American%20country.
5. Romero, Simon. “Thousands Gather for Protests in Brazil’s Largest Cities.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 June 2013, https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/world/americas/thousands-gather-for-protests-in-brazils-largest-cities.html.
6. Stuenkel, O. (2021, February 17). Brazil’s polarization and democratic risks – divisive politics and Democratic Dangers in Latin America. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved April 3, 2022, from https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/02/17/brazil-s-polarization-and-democratic-risks-pub-83783
7. Vargas, Marina. “Comments for United Nations Security Council Members on …” “Protection Paradigm” – RSF’s Unprecedented Report on Protective Mechanisms for Journalists in Latin America, RSF, https://rsf.org/sites/default/files/2013_july_rsf_note_unsc_protection_of_journalists_.pdf.