“These are facts”: Mainardi on the fictitious bribe-stuffed bank accounts of government officials, on Globo’s “The Brazilian David Letterman” show. Veja preferred not to conclude that the dossier on the alleged existence of these accounts was a gabbling forgery. It’s all a matter of postmodern biblical hermeneutics and Nietzschean-Sartrean leaps of faith with these gabbling nonsense-peddlers.
Comunique-se‘s Sérgio Matsuura on Mainardi v. Nassif.
On which see also
O colunista Diogo Mainardi, da Veja, sempre afirmou que “questões de imprensa devem ser resolvidas no âmbito da imprensa. É a regra número um do meu código de ética profissional”. Entretanto, ele entrou com um processo por danos morais contra o Ig e o jornalista Luis Nassif.
Columnist Diogo Mainardi of Veja magazine (Editora Abril) has always said that “the controversies of the press should be resolved in the press. This is Rule No. 1 of my professional code of ethics.”
Diogo Mainardi has a professional code of ethics.
In a related story, the emperor is fully dressed.
Nevertheless, he has filed a libel suit against iG and journalist Luis Nassif.
“Eu não estou processando um jornalista. Estou processando um caluniador a serviço do Governo”, disse Mainardi.
“I am not suing a journalist. I am suing a slanderer in the service of the Government,” Mainardi said.
Diogo Mainardi is a martyr to political persecution. That’s his story and he’s sticking to it like rancid bubblegum to an asphalt basketball court in late August.
A ação se refere a artigos publicados no blog Luis Nassif Online mantido pelo portal Ig. De acordo com a acusação, as matérias “ofenderam intencionalmente o bom nome e a moral do autor (Mainardi), colocando em xeque o jornalismo por ele desenvolvido”.
… according to the complaint, the articles “intentionally offended against the good name and reputation of the plaintiff …”
Frequent comment in the comment thread on Matsuura’s article: “Diogo Mainardi has a good name to protect? News to me!”
Os advogados de Mainardi pedem a retirada das informações do blog, indenização por danos morais e a publicação da eventual sentença condenatória no portal Ig.
Mainardi’s attorneys are demanding that the information be taken down from the blog, and asking damages be paid and any eventual condemnation be published on the iG Internet portal.
O valor da indenização não foi definido, mas, de acordo com Mainardi, “será menos do que o Nassif recebeu do BNDES”.
The value of the damages sought was not specified, but according to Mainardi, “it will be less than Nassif got from the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES).”
Mainardi has characterized a loan refinancing for Nassif’s company — Agência Dinheiro Vivo — from the state-owned bank as a quid pro quo for defending the government’s policies (which actually he does not uniformly do, I think you could establish pretty easily.)
But then again, Mainardi is a serially convicted publisher of nasty, factually challenged, gabbling nonsense.
Nassif defended the transaction as perfectly regular, normal and unremarkable. More than I really wanted to know about the business side of the guy’s life, mind you. I read him for his useful and informative commentaries on economics, politics, journalism and Brazilian country music, mostly.
Nassif conta que está “absolutamente tranqüilo” em relação ao processo e afirma que todas as matérias contestadas pelo colunista de Veja possuem um fundo jornalístico.
Nassif says he is “perfectly calm” about the lawsuit,saying that all the articles contested by the Veja columnist are journalistically well-founded.
Em seu blog, Nassif comenta o processo movido por Mainardi, afirmando que a Veja busca “calar os críticos entupindo-os de injúrias e processos”.
On his blog, Nassif commented on the lawsuit by saying that Veja is trying to “silence its critics by bogging them down in smear campaigns and lawsuits.”
Após a Operação Satiagraha da Polícia Federal, os dois jornalistas trocaram acusações. Em seu blog, Nassif publicou artigos sobre a inclusão do nome de Mainardi no relatório da PF. Por sua vez, Mainardi publicou coluna chamando Nassif de “banana”.
After the federal police operation Satyagraha, the two journalists traded accusations. On his blog, Nassif published articles about the appearance of Mainardi’s name in the police report. For his part, Mainardi published a column calling Nassif a “banana.”
A Nazi banana, actually. See
Nassif não é o único jornalista com disputas judiciais com Mainardi. Na última quarta-feira (06/08), o Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo condenou o colunista da Veja e a editora Abril a pagar R$ 207.500 a Paulo Henrique Amorim.
Nassif is not the only journalist involved in legal disputes with Mainardi. Last Wednesday, the São Paulo state high court ordered the Veja columnist and his employer to pay R$207,500 to Paulo Henrique Amorim.
The following comment on the Matsuura article gibes with my general impression, too:
Não sei como ainda existem remanescentes colegas que ainda defendem Mainardi e a Veja. Conheço uma penca de jornalistas que são anti-petistas, anti-lulistas e que já se convenceram que há muito tempo Mário Sabino, Diogo Mainardi e a Veja deixaram de fazer jornalismo.
I don’t know how there can still be colleagues who defend Mainardi and Veja. I know a ton of journalists who are anti-PT, anti-Lula and yet have been convinced for some time now that Sabino, Mainardi and Veja stopped doing journalism a long time ago now.
Hear, hear.
Seriously, if you are a student of contemporary Brazilian public opinion, there are many other sources of opinion and information written from an avowedly conservative perspective that manage to pass the smell test — they don’t claim the right to be entitled to their own factoids and they don’t run gabbling, filthy rumors as if they were established facts.
You are better off spending your money on those, I find.
Filed under: Brazil, Media Tagged: | diogo mainardi, disinformation, editora abril, ethics, Internet, Journalism, luis nassif, magazines, Publishing, quality of service, SLAPP suits, veja
