Yesterday (January 27, 2010) the Jornal Nacional (National Newspaper, Globo TV) protested against the use of two weights and two measures in the Brazilian foreign policy. According to the pupils of Ali Kamel, Brazil supported Zelaia and it refuses to attack the authoritarian Hugo Chavez. The journalists of Globo TV silenced on the Brazilian National Plan of Human Rights, because the viewers were tired of the litany concerning a supposed violation of the freedom of press.



Who uses two weights and two measures? The Brazilian government or the Globo TVr?



In spite of the lamentations of Ali Kamel Brazilian foreign policy has been quite solid. Zelaia was chosen regularly and his mandate was interrupted by a coup d'état. Brazil could not stop giving him support. As much UN as OAS they affirmed in an unequivocal and vehement way that the deposition of the President of Honduras attempts against the international order. Therefore, it would be quite self-defeating Brazil to be beside the authors of the coup d'état. This Brazil did in the times of the Dictatorship, the same Dictatorship that was supported diligently by died Roberto Marinho (founder of the Globo TV).



Let us like or no Chavéz is the legitimate President of Venezuela. In reason of the beginning of the self-determination of the people most of the Venezuelans have right of to choose freely which will be the economical and political order of the country. Brazil doesn't have legitimacy to interfere in the intern politics of Venezuela, because that country has a legitimate constitutional regime that he foresees periodic elections, elections these that were accomplished in way absolutely correct.



Itamaraty is not using two weights and two measures. Therefore, we can conclude that the Globo TV doesn't like the current Brazilian foreign policy. I won't enter in the merit of the Globo TV preferences. But I cannot stop registering that Brazil has constitution and second this the legitimacy for the elaboration of the Brazilian foreign policy is of Itamaraty and not of the Globo TV.



In my modest way of to understand who used two weights and two measures was own Globo TV. The pupils of Ali Kamel attacked ferociously what considered an improper interference in the Venezuelan media. However, the viewers were not informed concerning which are the valid legal rules applicable the TV nets in Venezuela.



This omission is unforgivable. Without knowing the rules of that country nobody it can be evaluated if Hugo Chavéz acted or not in an authoritarian way. After all, let us like or no, he might just have used the prerogatives that are in the Venezuelan legislation. How can we consider illegitimate an interference in the media that was done inside of the Law? Does Venezuela have the obligation of adopting the same legal patterns what Brazil?



Besides the mentioned omission, there is another important detail. The Jornal Nacional complained of the lack of freedom of press in Venezuela, but it used the freedom of press that has in Brazil to conceal relevant information to the Brazilian viewers. That is correct? Where does it begin and does where finish the freedom of press in Brazil?



The Brazilian citizens have right of receiving information. But this doesn't mean that should receive "any" information. Information is something that reduces the uncertainty and for this reason a deformed information or with gaps a should be considered "no information". For consequence, in Brazil the media has the duty of publishing correct and detailed information and of avoiding to produce deformations or omissions (deliberate or no intentional).



Did Jornal Nacional have conditions of to consult and to publish the Venezuelan legislation concerning the media to allow to the Brazilian citizens to evaluate and to judge the decisions of Chávez? I think yes. The Globo TV has corresponding in Venezuela and the Venezuelan government makes available 'on line' his legislation (http://www.gobiernoenlinea.ve/legislacion-view/view/ver_legislacion.pag).



The deformations and omissions published by the media impede the citizens of exercising the citizenship fully. Exactly this happened yesterday. The Jornal Nacional concealed information concerning the Venezuelan legislation, information that they were to the journalists' disposition. I don't think absurd to affirm that it is unethical to defend the freedom of press through the diffusion of the mistake. What freedom of press does the Globo TV defend?



It is irritating Globo TV's insistence in defending RCTV impeding the Brazilians of knowing exactly if Hugo Chávez was able to or not to suspend the sign of that broadcasting station. Globo TV's behavior leaves me more and more curious. Which the stock composition of RCTV? Is the Globo TV defending the freedom of press or their business interests in Venezuela?



The episode provoked by the omission of Jornal Nacional is serious and it suggests a deeper debate on relevant subjects. Which the limits of the freedom of press in Brazil? Can a media company deform or to conceal relevant information? Does the freedom of press make possible the media companies to defend their commercial interests? Does a Brazilian Net TV have legitimacy to put the citizens against an appropriate government politics taken to effect by the legitimate government organ?



Of this way the Globo TV will get exactly what doesn't want. Ali Kamel is giving fuel for the defenders of the rules of PNDH that intend to brake the journalistic abuses practiced by the Brazilian media.