The first live debate ahead of presidential elections in Brazil saw the candidates indulging in extremely heated and offensive oratory, but at one point the populist President Jair Bolsonaro crossed all possible redlines while answering a question from one journalist. “I think you go to sleep thinking about me. You have a crush on me,” Bolsonaro told Vera Magalhães after she asked him about Brazil’s COVID-19 vaccination rate. “You are a disgrace to journalism in Brazil,” he continued acidly.
Magalhães,
a columnist working for Jornal O Globo, in contrast, reacted in a rather somber
and professional tone, stating that Bolsonaro’s attitude was “absolutely out of
control, unnecessary, and… harmful to himself.” She said she believed Bolsonaro
“doesn’t like to be questioned by women.” Bolsonaro’s insulting comments to
Magalhães come after he has faced ample criticism over his attitude toward
women in general. The far-right populist disagrees of course, pointing to his
government’s support for laws in favor of women’s rights and claiming that “a
large part of women in Brazil love me” because he opposes legalizing drugs.
The
episode outlined above sounds quite familiar, echoing a similar incident on
August 27 when, addressing a gathering in Jhelum, former prime minister Imran
Khan also snobbishly lashed out at all journalists who dared criticize him or
ask “difficult” questions. He referred to all those journalists as “lifafay and
zameer farosh” (corrupt and conscious sellers) who were advising him to
temporarily pause his protest campaign because of the ongoing humanitarian
catastrophe caused by devastating floods in Pakistan. Even further back, it
resembles the notorious incident of Donald Trump raging against CNN’s Jim
Acosta, when Trump’s morning post-midterms presser devolved into an historic
White House fracas when Acosta poked the presidential bear with his line of questioning
about Trump’s caravan invasion rally rhetoric. “That’s enough! Put down the
mic!” Trump shouted. “CNN should be ashamed of itself having you working for
them. You are a rude, terrible person. You should not be working for CNN. The
way you treat Sarah Huckabee is horrible. The way you treat other people is
horrible!” Trump hissed at Acosta.
In
recent years, a long line of populist leaders has suddenly popped up on the
global political radar – Donald Trump, Imran Khan, Boris Johnson, Narendra
Modi, Emmanuel Macron, and Viktor Orban to name a few. All of them share a lot
in common, particularly their theatrical demeanor and extreme disdain for the
legacy media and professional journalists. This wave of radicalized populism
has produced numerous such episodes where the populist politicians have
directly and aggressively bullied and slighted journalists – and particularly
female journalists – who happen to ask them any pricking questions or challenge
their preferred narratives. This aggressive anti-journalist trend, arising out
of their intrinsic fear of being exposed and challenged publicly, is a
relatively new phenomenon that traces its roots to the introduction of social
media as an overwhelmingly powerful propaganda tool in this new era of emerging
technologies.
The
level to which journalism is being challenged and threatened is certainly
unprecedented throughout the history of the profession. The content and
authority of traditional news outlets are both being questioned, and their
former monopoly on people’s attention is being increasingly diluted due to
social media platforms.
The
emergence of populist politics is yet another momentous challenge, manifested
in some cases by players openly hostile to journalists and even to the idea of
press freedom in general.
By
exploiting the electoral mandate to undermine core institutions like the courts
or news media, populism creates a political tribalism and cultism that inflames
divisions, blunts civil discourse, and eschews political compromise. Populism mostly
mobilizes people who have not been politically involved. At the same time, the
relationship between populist communicators and the media has typically been
thorny and strained. Populist leaders
mostly receive massive coverage in the mainstream press, and the news media
outlets are typically portrayed by populist actors as part of a “corrupt”
elite; yet ironically, on the other hand, these populist actors are also
addicted to the “steroids of publicity” that these outlets can provide
The
populist impulse affects a big chunk of the public, which makes it quite
difficult for the legacy media to provide balanced coverage amid mounting
pressure from populist leaders. Yet some populist actors have systematically
targeted the media as fake, lying, or unfair. That’s a challenge for
journalists. There’s reason to think that journalist-bashing by politicians has
very negative effects on the followers of these populist leaders, who have at
times resorted to using violence against dissenting journalists.
Populist
politicians don’t trust the media. They believe that the press is prejudiced
and not a true representation of society. What populist leaders like Donald
Trump, Bolsonaro, and Imran Khan either don’t comprehend, or don’t care about,
is that their own offensive actions against a journalist directly encourages
their “fanatic devotees” to take it a step further. One day a political leader
attacks the media, and the next day journalists are not merely the target of
critiques, but death threats. A disproportionate number of those threats are
aimed at female journalists, who experience sexualized abuse, gender-related
threats, and gutter-talk behavior. The
general public appears to have little understanding of populism, and might see
it as a fresh development or something that is entirely benign. But make no
mistake: the rise of populist politics poses very serious challenges to
journalists, legacy media, and democracy in general.
***The
views expressed in this article belong to the authors alone and do not necessarily
reflect those of Geopoliticalmonitor.com