O presidente (PPE) do Parlamento
Europeu acha que é boa altura para
estas delicadezas
14 março 2019
No «El País»
Não esquecer
e não perdoar !
Capa dura 23,64 E
e não perdoar !
Capa dura 23,64 E
Apresentação :Esta obra es un libro imprescindible por arrojar luz sobre uno de los capítulos menos estudiados y conocidos de la represión franquista. Los campos de concentración fueron la primera pata de un sistema represivo, un holocausto ideológico, que convirtió a toda España en una inmensa cárcel repleta de fosas. En ellos, presos políticos y prisioneros de guerra fueron asesinados, murieron de hambre y enfermedades, padecieron todo tipo de torturas y humillaciones. Los datos son necesarios y las pruebas documentales resultan fundamentales, pero nada tiene verdadero sentido si no somos capaces de entender que detrás de cada cifra, de cada listado, de cada campo de concentración franquista hubo miles y miles de hombres, de mujeres, de familias..
.Citas:
«Escalofriante relato. Una obra de obligada lectura que desnuda las mentiras del franquismo, documentada de forma esplendida y minuciosa.»
Baltasar Garzón «Una investigación tan heroica como necesaria. El nuevo libro de Carlos Hernández de Miguel me ha conmovido hasta las raíces.»
Ian Gibson «Los campos fueron parte de una compleja estrategia del terror dentro de un proyecto ideológico muy amplio para aniquilar la cultura política y moral de la España Republicana. Este tema tan crucial para la recuperación de la memoria histórica en España ha encontrado en Carlos Hernández de Miguel su cronista ideal. Nos ofrece una historia dolorosa pero necesaria, basada en una investigación exhaustiva y presentada en una prosa lúcida, del sufrimiento impuesto sobre miles de españoles y sus familias por Franco y sus seguidores.»
Paul Preston
12 março 2019
Para quem souber inglês
A prestigiada Columbia
Journalism Review acerta
contas com Bolsonaro
Brazil’s Bolsonaro smears
reporters investigating his son
Journalism Review acerta
contas com Bolsonaro
Brazil’s Bolsonaro smears
reporters investigating his son
By Jon Allsop
On Sunday, a president attacked a journalist on Twitter. The president was Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s demagogic far-right leader, and the journalist was Constança Rezende, who works for the Estado de S Paulo newspaper. Bolsonaro accused Rezende of working toward his impeachment, and admitting to wanting to ruin the life of his son, Flavio, a senator. Bolsonaro shared audio—sourced from an article written by a party flak and published by a supportive website—to bolster his point. Rezende, Bolsonaro said, wants “to overthrow the government with blackmail, disinformation, and leaks.”
Bolsonaro’s attack was a lie. As the audio demonstrates, Rezende merely remarked that a corruption scandal involving Flavio Bolsonaro is ruining his father politically—Jair Bolsonaro campaigned on an aggressive swamp-draining platform—and could trigger the latter’s impeachment. A head of state lying to smear journalists is always dangerous, but the stakes of this example amplify its significance. Rezende has been active in reporting the allegations against Bolsonaro’s son, which center on irregular payments involving staffers. In his tweet, Bolsonaro also namechecked Rezende’s father, Chico Otávio, who, in his work for O Globo, has helped link Flavio Bolsonaro to a leader of a criminal gang.
Bolsonaro has a long track record of attacking individual journalists, media outlets, and the press in general. Vicious anti-media rhetoric was a hallmark of his presidential campaign, and he has continued it since he assumed office at the beginning of this year. Bolsonaro has routinely sought to undermine the credibility of independent journalism, and even pledged to withdraw government ads from certain outlets. In the 24 hours following his tweet about Rezende, Bolsonaro shared an old video of Denzel Washington saying newspapers misinform people, took a potshot at Vice Brasil, and replied to a Folha de S. Paulo article by tweeting “fakenews!”
If you swap out some of the details, Bolsonaro’s conduct looks almost identical to Donald Trump’s. The press climate in Brazil, however, is significantly worse than that of the US. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 25 reporters have been killed in the country in the past decade. Journalists in Brazil are commonly harassed and lack strong legal protections. Reporters Without Borders—which, before Bolsonaro was elected, ranked Brazil 102nd (out of 180 countries) in its 2018 World Press Freedom Index—describes the country’s media as “more insecure than ever.”
Journalists who write negative stories about Bolsonaro frequently find themselves swarmed on social media. Patricia Campos Mello, a journalist with Folha de S. Paulo, told CJR last year that she stopped using her byline in a bid to shake the trolls, but they harassed her anyway. Bolsonaro, who retweeted a viral fake story about Campos Mello, was one of them. In another instance, a journalist who happened to share his name with another reporter received threats related to his namesake’s work.
Following Bolsonaro’s Sunday tweet, Rezende, too, found herself hounded on social media. João Caminoto, director of journalism at Rezende’s newspaper, told The Guardian’s Dom Phillips that she’d had to suspend her accounts.
The audio shared by the pro-Bolsonaro website and then by Bolsonaro himself came, originally, from an interview Rezende gave to a man who identified himself as a student named Alex McAllister. Anna Jean Kaiser and Mauricio Savarese report speculation that the interview may have been a set-up—“similar to the way rightist groups in the US have presented fake sources to journalists and recorded them without their knowledge.” Fittingly, “McAllister” said he was working on a study comparing Bolsonaro to Trump. When it comes to their treatment of the press, such comparisons are plain to see. They should not, however, diminish the heavy price Brazil’s journalists are paying for their efforts to expose the truth.
Below, more on Bolsonaro and the press:
- The chilling effect: In November, Reuters’s Anthony Boadle and Gram Slattery described the impact of Bolsonaro’s press rhetoric: “Several seasoned journalists working for Brazil’s biggest news organizations told Reuters in recent weeks they have started to throttle back their criticism, fearing backlash from a Bolsonaro government—and violence from his supporters.”
- The election: CJR was following along as Brazil went to the polls last year. Zainab Sultan profiled fact-checking sites working overtime to bust junk information on social media. Kyle Pope, our editor and publisher, spoke with Sarah Maslin, The Economist’s Brazil correspondent, on our podcast, The Kicker. And, shortly after Bolsonaro was elected, I wrote about the importance of avoiding equivocation in the language used to describe him.
- The inauguration: Ahead of Bolsonaro’s inauguration as president, Zoe Sullivan outlined the state of Brazil’s media in a detailed feature in CJR. “Brazil’s media is highly concentrated in a few hands,” she wrote. “Fifty percent of the largest media outlets in Brazil are owned by five families; those outlets include RecordTV, Bolsonaro’s preferred outlet, which is owned by Edir Macedo, a billionaire evangelical pastor and media mogul.”
- The presidency: Last week, Bolsonaro drew scorn and ridicule for tweeting an explicit sexual video—an apparent rebuke to protests against his administration during carnival. In a follow-up tweet, he asked, “O que é golden shower?”—“What is a golden shower?” The Guardian’s Tom Phillips has more.
O senador Marco Rubio e o apagão
Chama-se a
isto sacar rápido
isto sacar rápido
«Numa conferência de imprensa a que Prensa Latina e TeleSurfazem referência, Rodríguez apontou como cúmplices do atentado o senador norte-americano Marco Rubio, o secretário de Estado norte-americano, Mike Pompeo, e o opositor golpista Juan Guaidó, fantoche de Washington e seus aliados, que o reconhecem como «presidente interino» da Venezuela.
Referindo-se a um tweet publicado por Marco Rubio menos de três minutos após a acção de sabotagem, Jorge Rodríguez disse que o senador da Florida «tem o dom da adivinhação» e que «devia explicar ao mundo como soube que o sistema de controlo automatizado de apoio da central hidroeléctrica de Guri tinha falhado», num momento em que «ninguém o sabia». Trata-se de uma «verdadeira confissão de um crime», sublinhou Rodríguez»
ler também aqui
10 março 2019
08 março 2019
Mudança de ramo
O Pingo Doce passou
a fabricar «classe média»
(favor dirigirem-se ao corredor 8)
a fabricar «classe média»
(favor dirigirem-se ao corredor 8)
post inspirado
na excelente crónica de
António Guerreiro no
«Ipsilon» do «Público» de hoje
na excelente crónica de
António Guerreiro no
«Ipsilon» do «Público» de hoje
07 março 2019
Venezuela
No «Público» e na
Renascença não sabem
lidar com o Google
nem mexer na Net
(e,claro, não lêem
«o tempo das cerejas»)
No «Público» de hoje, em entrevista a João Ferreira, Helena Pereira e Graça Franco (R.R.) perguntam a dado passo ao entrevistado: «Reconhece-se nos valores de Maduro, que coloca na prisão opositores, não deixa haver uma imprensa livre ?»
Renascença não sabem
lidar com o Google
nem mexer na Net
(e,claro, não lêem
«o tempo das cerejas»)
No «Público» de hoje, em entrevista a João Ferreira, Helena Pereira e Graça Franco (R.R.) perguntam a dado passo ao entrevistado: «Reconhece-se nos valores de Maduro, que coloca na prisão opositores, não deixa haver uma imprensa livre ?»
Assim sendo, não tenho outro remédio do que republicar o que já aqui publiquei sobre televisões e jornais venezuelanos, deixando apenas uma pergunta : por mais apoiantes de Guaidó que sejam, não há um ou uma que seja capaz de honestamente reconhecer que, ao menos nesta matéria, mentem com quantos dentes têm na boca ?
http://globovision.com/TOP 10 Jornais do Venezuela
06 março 2019
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)