Surrender Unto Cesar! The Naked Maia Strikes Again

People are going to start saying that I am a paid agent of Cesar Maia, the famous ex-blogging mayor of Rio de Janeiro.

I am not, and I am not a Brazilian voter, either (although I sleep with a very nice one, and I do pay property taxes in São Paulo).

But the guy is always funny and on point as to the Tupi Zeitgeist.

Like a freaking laser.

And I do believe he and I have the same B-school cases in mind at the moment.

So I translate a portion of today’s Ex-Blog for you gringos as I read it.

Because caring is sharing.

A DECADÊNCIA DE TANTOS POLITICOS E INTELECTUAIS NA SOCIEDADE DA INFORMAÇÃO!

The decadence of so many politicians and intellectuals in the Information Society!

1. Em 1990, um deputado de enorme prestígio nacional e especialmente junto à mídia dizia a um pequeno grupo, estimulado por algum vinho tinto, que a fórmula de se aparecer na imprensa é fazer declarações, discursos, opinar na mesma linha das matérias da imprensa e dos editoriais. Com isso, dizia ele, a “suíte” das matérias durante o dia e no dia seguinte abria espaço generoso para ele.

In 1990, a federal legislator of enormous national prestige, especially with the media, was telling an intimate group, with the help of some red wine, that the formula for getting into print is to make lots of statements and speeches, following the same line the press takes in its reporting and editorial. In that manner, he says, he made sure that the editorial “packages” of the day would give him plenty of play.

2. Durante a crise ética de 2005, 2006, um deputado dizia -em uma pequena roda motivada pelo mesmo vinho tinto- que ele falava para a mídia na linha da mídia, porque era a mídia que falava com o público e que era impossível no mundo de hoje falar direto ao público.

During the ethics crisis of 2005 and 2006, one federal deputy said — in an intimate circle and moved by the same vintage — that he always talked to the media by repeating the media’s own line back to it, because it is the media that talks to the public, and it is impossible in this day and age to speak directly to the public.

3. As relações entre mídia e política -nos últimos anos- estão exaustivamente estudadas. Destacaria Patrick Champagne, que diz que acabou a opinião dos políticos que representam setores de opinião. Agora a opinião pública são as pesquisas de opinião com todas as distorções das perguntas. Os políticos comentam as pesquisas e não são mais fonte primária de opinião pública. Ou Wolton, que diz que o tempo da imprensa é instantâneo e os políticos se ajustam a ele, mesmo não podendo dar respostas neste tempo que não é o deles.

The relationship of media to politics, in recent years has been exhaustively studied. I would point especially to [the work of] Patrick Champagne, who argues that politicians no long believe that they represent sectors of public opinion. Politicians comment on the polls and are no longer a primary source of public opinion. Or Wolton, who says that the modern press operates in an instantaneous time frame and that politicians have adjusted to that fact, even though they cannot really respond adequately within this time frame, a time frame that is not their own.

Sensing a certain Francophilia in the reading list? You are not paranoid. See also Ancillary Anthropological Anecdote. But I bet you the red wine was Italian. French downmarket table wines are just starting to break in here, I notice.

4. O tempo da mídia -instantâneo- responde a lógica da audiência, com algum grau de liberdade para os jornais e revistas de assinantes. O que tantos políticos e intelectuais -politólogos, sociólogos, economistas…- não entendem, ou não querem entender, é que a atividade deles é apenas aparentemente análoga a da meada, pois há a interveniência da opinião pública. E esta produz uma interação e interdependência entre eles.

The instantaneity of media time responds to the logic of conquering audience, with some latitude still enjoyed by newspapers and subscription magazines. But what so many politicians and intellectuals — poliscientists, sociologists, economists … — do not understand, or do not want to understand, is that their activities only seem to be in step [aligned, in tune] with what the media does. The fact is that public opinion does play a role in producing a certain degree of interaction and interdependence here. [But ...]

This probably sucks as translation. Mr. Maia gets a little abstract sometimes. Is meada a Joycean pun on “media” and words for “intrigue” and “a pissing contest”? I will have to think about that. But no time. Keep typing! –Ed.

5. O negócio de uma empresa privada é o faturamento com a venda de seu produto. O negócio de uma fábrica de cimento é vender cimento. De uma fábrica de bicicleta é vender bicicleta. O negócio da imprensa é vender espaço publicitário. Para que esse produto -publicidade tenha mais valor- é necessário que o meio de comunicação- tenha audiência ou tiragem e que esta seja direcionada ao consumidor objetivado por quem paga a publicidade. Neste sentido, o departamento comercial de um órgão de imprensa tem prevalência sobre o jornalismo. Alugue o filme “Boa Noite e Boa Sorte” em sua vídeo-locadora. As notícias são meio e a publicidade é o fim do negócio de um meio de comunicação. Mas a credibilidade e o prestígio de um meio de comunicação, exige que o jornalismo tenha uma margem de liberdade de forma a que a relação interna entre o departamento comercial, hegemônico, e o jornalismo, não fique clara para sua audiência. Mas isso tem limite, quando a audiência e -por isso- a venda de publicidade é afetada. Os editoriais sobretudo, talvez porque sejam pouco lidos. Jean Daniel (Nouvel Observateur), diz que “o editorial é a consciência de culpa do noticiário”. Ou mesmo colunistas de opinião, que com liberdade e pouca leitura, dão lastro semelhante.

A private business is in business to earn money selling its product. Cement factories sell cement. Bicycle factories sell bicycles. Newspapers sell advertising space, because publicity has more value than news. In order to do that, the organ of communication has to have enough audience or circulation among the target consumers that the advertiser wants to reach. In that sense, the business side of a newspaper is more important than the journalism side. Go rent “Good Night and Good Luck” at your local video store. News is the means but advertising is the end. The crediblity and the prestige of the media outlet, however, demands that journalism maintain a measure of apparent independence so that the internal relationship between the hegemonic business side and the captive journalism side are not clearly visible to the audience or readership.

But there are limits to how much of this you can indulge in, especially when your audience and therefore your ad sales start to go south. Editorials above all, maybe because they are little read. Jean Daniel of the Nouvel Ob says that “editorials are the guilty conscience of the newsroom.” And likewise for opinion columnists, who enjoy some freedom but are little read.

6. O que é meio para a mídia é fim para a política. E vice-versa. Isso tantos políticos e intelectuais não entendem. E quando simplesmente acompanham a lógica do noticiário, podem estar simplesmente vendendo publicidade pelos jornais e não opinião.

But what for the media is merely a means is an end in itself for politicians. And vice-versa. This is what so many intellectuals and politicians fail to understand. When they simple acquiesce to the logic of the news cycle, they are doing more to sell ads for the newspaper than they are to sell their own opinion to the public and press.

7. Outro dia -num jantar em restaurante da moda- um editor sênior de um grande e nacional veiculo de mídia, dizia, após aquele mesmo vinho tinto- que o fundamental para -fidelizar- sua audiência, é falar mal dos governos. Que esta é a sensação das pessoas que não querem se atribuir seus fracassos e que assim atribuem os problemas todos à responsabilidade dos governos. Falar mal, criticar, encontrar defeitos e generalizá-los, mostrar um ponto como um todo, leva sempre a concordância do leitor, do telespectador, do ouvinte, enfim da audiência, e que os veículos que vão bem são aqueles que dão de beber a audiência -isso- que ela -espontaneamente- pensa.

The other day, at a dinner in a fashionable restaurant, a senior editor for a major national media operation was saying — that same red wine again — that the fundamental thing you have to do to “loyalize” your audience is to trash the government.

That this is the common attitude of people who would rather not take responsibility for their own failures and therefore like to hear that all of their problems are the government’s fault. Trash, criticize, find errors and generalize them, show one side of the dispute as if it were the whole picture, this is the kind of thing the reader or view or listener never tires of hearing, and the people who thrive in the media business are the ones that give the people what they really want.

This sounds an awful lot like things that William “My target audience is Homer Simpson” Bonner of the Jornal Nacional has said in the last year.

Not having seen the episode, apparently, in which Homer’s stupidity turns out to be the temporary result of a pencil he shoved up his nose as a child, which, once removed …

8. Nada contra! Afinal se trata de negócio e de mercado e, portanto a obrigação das empresas é maximizar seus resultados -permanentemente. A imprensa não pode ser diferente. Tem seus limites. Procura paliar com alguma liberdade do departamento de jornalismo, com seus editoriais, com seu marketing de marca (social em geral hoje), com serviços…

By all means! After all, we are talking about business and the market here, and therefore about the obligation of companies to maximize their financial results — permanently. The press cannot be any different. It has its limits. It may try to soften the blow by affording some independence to the journalism department, or with editorials, or brand marketing (mostly social responsibility branding, these days), or public service …

More a few politicians and intellectuals, NGOs, professionals, and presidents various associations are constantly prepared to tell a news operation exactly what its editorial line is lacking. They do it by producing more articles and using the same technique as the newsroom does: Amplifying their own point of view and presenting it as the whole picture. Or they do it using polls and studies, which they read against the grain, or even totally upside-down.

But in doing this, they are really only serving the (legitimate) business needs of the news operation rather than their own “business.” They employ a ruse in order to get play. But this is intellectually and politically dishonest. It is a sign of decadence on the part of the many, many politicians and intellectuals who have transformed themselves – whether knowingly or not — into employees of a business they do not understand and have wound up working for the business side of the media companies.

Media companies that attract audiences by addressing them with prefab opinion rather than actually trying to form and inform genuine opinion. They only do the latter when a new opinion in formation achieves a certain critical mass that guarantees it an audience.

But the job of politicians and intellectuals is to form opinion, to be a vanguard.

(Dick Morris says that politicans should approach audiences, touch them with new ideas, and progressively work to divert their course into new channels, creating new public opinion.)

Aha! So you admit knowing Dick Morris, do you …. ?

10. Mas o que se vê, a cada dia mais, é um contrato virtual com os departamentos comerciais da imprensa é a desonestidade e a decadência de tantos políticos e intelectuais.

Instead, what see more and more of every day, is a tacit contract between politicians and the business side of the press, and the dishonesty and decadence of the politicians and intellectuals.

Gets a little repetitive there, but you see my point: I read Mr. Maia because he seems to have a working brain, or at least to take good notes at those international mayors’ conferences.

And because the Ex-Blog apparently has quite a select list of readers.

I hope he does not start thinking about charging for it.