A carregar...
Publicação
Pandemia, quando a informação crível se torna vital. O jornalismo e a cobertura de picos mediáticos nos diferentes contextos políticos do Brasil e de Portugal
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.83 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
O objetivo deste estudo comparativo é analisar as coberturas dos jornais Folha de S. Paulo, no Brasil, e Público, em Portugal, no início da pandemia do novo coronavírus, em março de 2020. A análise acompanha a repercussão, ao longo de uma semana, de dois picos mediáticos: a declaração do primeiro estado de emergência da democracia portuguesa, no dia 18 de março, e o pronunciamento do Presidente da República aos brasileiros, quando ele comparou os efeitos da Covid-19 aos de uma “gripezinha”, no dia 24 do mesmo mês. Neste sentido, parte-se da hipótese de que as coberturas se diferenciam em função da gestão da pandemia adotada por cada governo - com base na ciência, em Portugal, e negacionista, no Brasil - e o relacionamento estabelecido com a imprensa a partir de então. A pesquisa resulta em uma análise de conteúdo, quantitativa e qualitativa, de 78 peças, na Folha de S.Paulo, e 122 peças, no Público, completada com entrevistas semiestruturadas com profissionais dos dois jornais. A conclusão confirma a hipótese. Enquanto o Público apresenta uma cobertura de adesão e colaboração com a medida excecional proposta pelo Governo para conter o vírus, a cobertura da Folha de S. Paulo é caracterizada por um clima de conflito veemente com o governante brasileiro e suas desinformações que visam descredibilizar as orientações das autoridades sanitárias. Apesar de diferentes, as linhas editorias dois jornais compartilham também semelhanças. Ambas assumem posicionamentos pouco usuais, não são isentas de riscos e refletem os diferentes contextos onde estavam inseridas.
The objective of this comparative study is to analyze the coverage of the newspapers Folha de S. Paulo, in Brazil, and Público, in Portugal, at the beginning of the new coronavirus pandemic, in March 2020. The analysis follows the repercussion, over a week, of two media peaks: the declaration of the first state of emergency for Portuguese democracy, on March 18, and the pronouncement of the President of the Republic to Brazilians, when he compared the effects of Covid-19 to those of a “little flu”, in the 24th of the same month. In this sense, it starts from the hypothesis that the coverage differs depending on the management of the pandemic adopted by each government - based on science, in Portugal, and denialist, in Brazil - and the relationship established with the press from then on. The research results in a content analysis, quantitative and qualitative, of 78 pieces, in Folha de S. Paulo, and 122 pieces, in Público, completed with semi-structured interviews with professionals from both newspapers. The conclusion confirms the hypothesis. While Público presents coverage of adherence and collaboration with the exceptional measure proposed by the government to contain the virus, the coverage of Folha de S. Paulo is characterized by a vehement conflict with the Brazilian ruler and his disinformation that aims to discredit the guidelines of the health authorities. Although different, the editorial lines of the two newspapers also share similarities. Both assume unusual positions, are not risk-free and reflect the different contexts in which they were inserted
The objective of this comparative study is to analyze the coverage of the newspapers Folha de S. Paulo, in Brazil, and Público, in Portugal, at the beginning of the new coronavirus pandemic, in March 2020. The analysis follows the repercussion, over a week, of two media peaks: the declaration of the first state of emergency for Portuguese democracy, on March 18, and the pronouncement of the President of the Republic to Brazilians, when he compared the effects of Covid-19 to those of a “little flu”, in the 24th of the same month. In this sense, it starts from the hypothesis that the coverage differs depending on the management of the pandemic adopted by each government - based on science, in Portugal, and denialist, in Brazil - and the relationship established with the press from then on. The research results in a content analysis, quantitative and qualitative, of 78 pieces, in Folha de S. Paulo, and 122 pieces, in Público, completed with semi-structured interviews with professionals from both newspapers. The conclusion confirms the hypothesis. While Público presents coverage of adherence and collaboration with the exceptional measure proposed by the government to contain the virus, the coverage of Folha de S. Paulo is characterized by a vehement conflict with the Brazilian ruler and his disinformation that aims to discredit the guidelines of the health authorities. Although different, the editorial lines of the two newspapers also share similarities. Both assume unusual positions, are not risk-free and reflect the different contexts in which they were inserted
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Jornalismo Sistemas de media Media digitais Comunicação política Desinformação Pandemia Infodemia Journalism Democracy Media systems Digital media Disinformation Pandemic Infodemic Political communication Democracia