This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRASILIA 002069 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR WHA/BSC AND WHA/PD 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM SCUL ECON BR
SUBJECT: CRITICISM CAUSES BRAZILIAN GOVERNMENT TO RETHINK 
PROPOSED JOURNALISM RULES 
 
REF: A. BRASILIA 1987 
 
     ¶B. BRASILIA 2052 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY.  The Lula administration last week proposed 
a journalism law that created a stir in the Brazilian press. 
The Journalism Council bill would create a national oversight 
body with authorities to regulate and discipline the press. 
It created such controversy --including charges of 
"Stalinism" from some overwrought editorialists-- that 
congressional leaders quickly pushed it to the back burner. 
The bill may be the fruit of some residual statist tendencies 
in the Workers' Party (PT), but it also reflects a GoB 
frustration with sensationalism and inaccuracies in the 
press.  It is probably not coincidental that it was announced 
in the middle of two controversies involving questionable 
journalistic ethics:  the Banestado money-laundering scandal 
and a journalist's confession that a 1993 story that led to 
the expulsion of a Federal Deputy contained errors.  Lula's 
advisors may give the journalism bill token support, but it 
seems unlikely to come to a vote in Congress this year, if 
ever.  A second controversial measure, an audiovisual bill to 
regulate film and TV, is still being drafted and has not been 
sent to Congress.  END SUMMARY. 
 
JOURNALISM BILL SENT TO CONGRESS 
-------------------------------- 
¶2. (SBU) Since 1967 and the dictatorship era, Brazil's Labor 
Ministry has been nominally responsible for overseeing the 
profession of journalism but has done nothing more than 
maintain a registry of professional journalists.  The 
National Journalists Federation (FENAJ) claims to represent 
30,000 journalists from 31 unions but does not provide 
oversight.  (FENAJ is loosely associated with President 
Lula's Workers' Party (PT) and most of its directors are PT 
members.)  The Lula administration saw a gap in this 
structure: a lack of legal authority to oversee and regulate 
the field.  So, with FENAJ's input, the Labor Ministry 
drafted a bill to create a Federal Journalism Council (CFJ) 
and five subordinate Regional Councils (CRJs).  Lula sent the 
bill to Congress on August 6, and as soon as the text became 
public it sparked controversy.  Under the bill's rules, 
journalists would have to register and pay dues to the 
councils and would elect the councils' members.  The councils 
would create and enforce an ethics code, oversee the 
profession, and discipline journalists.  Lula's Press 
Secretary, Ricardo Kotscho, noted that the bill is 
 
SIPDIS 
"negotiable" and was designed to "open the debate".  FENAJ 
announced that "the CFJ is an essential instrument for the 
profession" and would "protect journalists from manipulation" 
by private interests. 
 
MANY JOURNALISTS ARE RESOLUTELY OPPOSED 
--------------------------------------- 
¶3. (SBU) Journalists were quick to react.  The Brazilian 
Press Association (ABI) and the major newspapers railed 
against the bill.  An editorial in conservative "Estado de 
Sao Paulo" called it an "authoritarian offensive" and noted 
that the GoB is "showing its dictatorial face".  Popular TV 
newscaster Boris Casoy called the bill "abominable" and an 
"obvious attempt to control journalists and the press".  The 
international press picked up comments in "Folha de Sao 
Paulo" that the bill is "authoritarian" and "Stalinist" and 
recalled last May's episode when President Lula threatened to 
expel a New York Times reporter for an unflattering article. 
The circle of critics eventually expanded to include leading 
political and intellectual figures within the PT party and 
across the ideological spectrum. 
 
CONGRESS WILL MOVE VERY SLOWLY 
------------------------------ 
¶4. (SBU) The bill is now in the Chamber of Deputies, where it 
faces a slow march through three committees before going to 
the floor.  In the unlikely event it passes the Chamber, it 
would face a similar trek through the Senate.  The PT 
Chairman of the Chamber's Labor Committee said he favored the 
creation of the Journalism Council if it is done in a 
"democratic spirit", adding that national councils already 
exist for lawyers and doctors.  But Chamber Speaker Joao 
Paulo Cunha announced that he will allow a "full debate", 
i.e., the bill will move very slowly.  Cunha noted that the 
administration could have saved itself the trouble, since a 
similar bill, sponsored by Deputy Celso Russomanno (PP-SP), 
has been pending in the Chamber since 2002. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The opposition PSDB and PFL parties immediately 
pounced.  Jose Carlos Aleluia, the PFL's floor leader, could 
be seen in Congress last week toting a book with Hitler's 
face on the cover.  He told the press, "I hope that President 
Lula is not taking the same path as Stalin and Hitler.  The 
bill is a clear demonstration of the authoritarian roots of 
the government.  The press should oversee the government, and 
not vice versa."  Aleluia promises to use parliamentary 
tactics to block the bill.  Sao Paulo Governor Geraldo 
Alckmin (PSDB) added, "Sometimes this government has an 
authoritarian relapse." 
 
GOB'S LATENT STATIST TENDENCIES 
------------------------------- 
¶6. (SBU) The administration did not help its own cause when 
Lula's Communications Secretary Luiz Gushiken announced that 
freedom of the press is "not absolute".  This is not the 
first time Gushiken has criticized the press: in April he had 
to retract a comment that the press ought to be focused on a 
"positive agenda" rather than "fomenting discord", and in May 
he suggested that the critical New York Times reporter was 
working for the US government.  Lula's Chief of Staff Jose 
Dirceu struck back at critics in remarks before an August 14 
PT party gathering, calling opponents "terrorists" seeking to 
"limit the debate by shouting".  He also slammed this week's 
edition of VEJA magazine that has a cover with an ominous PT 
party eyeball over the title 'Authoritarian Temptation'. 
Dirceu said, "we struggled for democracy against many of 
those who are shouting now, including some of these magazines 
that openly supported the military dictatorship." 
 
BANESTADO AND IBSEN PINHEIRO 
---------------------------- 
¶7. (SBU) Two recent cases have brought the issue of 
journalistic ethics into focus.  The first is the Banestado 
scandal, a long-running congressional inquiry into a massive 
money-laundering scheme.  In recent weeks there has been a 
steady stream of leaks --both substantiated and not-- from 
confidential banking records collected by the inquiry. 
 
SIPDIS 
Central Bank President Henrique Meirelles and Bank of Brazil 
President Cassio Casseb are among those being tarred by the 
press for alleged misdeeds (ref A).  Workers' Party and 
administration officials have charged that the PSDB Senator 
who chairs the inquiry is leaking information for political 
ends, and that the press is tacitly complicit by not 
verifying the anonymous allegations.  In the second case, 
this week's "ISTO E" magazine carries a cover story in which 
a former reporter admits that an error he made in a 1993 
story about corruption wrongly led to the expulsion from 
Congress of Federal Deputy Ibsen Pinheiro.  Ironically, the 
congressional staffer who gave the journalist the false 
information was none other than Waldomiro Diniz, who in 
February 2004 was fired from his job as a senior political 
advisor in Lula's office for soliciting bribes from a numbers 
racketeer.  This fact fuels opposition claims that in the 
past the PT used anonymous leaks to attack political 
opponents but now, in power, seeks to stifle the practice. 
 
COMMENT - JOURNALISM BILL UNLIKELY TO PASS 
------------------------------------------ 
¶8. (SBU)  Some of Brazil's older journalists remember the 
days of self-censorship under the military regime, and they 
are quick to condemn government efforts to restrict the 
press.  Thus, sensitivity to perceived attempts to limit the 
press is a healthy part of the consolidation of Brazil's 
democracy, even if some of the criticism about the Journalism 
bill comes across as a bit hysterical.  And the bill is not 
necessary.  The press here has its strengths and weaknesses, 
and there are well-used libel laws to address the latter. 
The national papers are reasonably good, represent a range of 
editorial perspectives, and have a healthy competition for 
readers.  Thus there is not a pressing need for a set of 
nationwide councils to "orient, discipline, and oversee" 
journalists. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Even before the formal debate has begun in Congress, 
the bill has generated staunch opposition both within the 
government coalition and in the opposition parties.  It is 
unlikely to ever win a congressional majority.  Its most 
likely fate is to waste away, unmourned, in a committee or to 
be pulled out of Congress by the administration for "further 
review".  Politically, the bill is not worth the grief that 
the administration is getting for it, particularly in advance 
of October's municipal elections, and when there is good 
economic news and Lula's popularity has rebounded (ref B). 
The administration is now drafting an Audiovisual bill to 
promote domestic film and TV content.  The text is not yet 
public and has not been sent to Congress, but industry 
critics say it also injects government interference into 
broadcasting content.  Look for this bill to be watered down 
considerably if it ever is sent to Congress. 
DANILOVICH