For A2345exxx,
I'm surprised this hasn't been talked about yet (maybe it has and I missed it). Looks like Brazil hasn't progressed as much as someone claims it has. My note: if the US deported every journalist who criticized George W Bush, there would be no journalists left.
Japan Today and many, many other sources:
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=298162
Brazil gets flak for expelling New York Times reporter
Thursday, May 13, 2004 at 01:00 JST
BRASILIA — President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva came under criticism Wednesday for deciding to expel a New York Times correspondent who had written a story saying the Brazilian leader was a heavy drinker.
The newspaper protested the order against correspondent Larry Rohter and said it "would take appropriate action to defend his rights."
Rohter's visa was canceled and he was given eight days to leave the country — the first expulsion of a journalist since the 20-year military dictatorship ended in 1984. The last time a foreign journalist was expelled was in the 1970s.
"It's a political mistake. The government managed to transform a victory into a defeat — it went from victim to villain. There is no precedent for this during democracy," said Sen Jefferson Peres of the left-leaning Democratic Labor Party.
"The article was badly done, but that doesn't justify the government's decision, which is authoritarian," he said.
The article in Sunday's Times, titled "Brazilian Leader's Tippling Becomes National Concern," recapped rumors that had long been circulating among journalists in Brasilia, the capital.
Former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso said in Sao Paulo that both the article and the president's reaction were off-base.
"I have known Lula for 30 years and I can attest to the fact that he is a social drinker only," Cardoso said, using Silva's nickname. "Expelling the reporter who wrote the article, however, is an overreaction. By retaliating, they are keeping the article alive longer than it merits."
Rio de Janeiro Sen Sergio Cabral appealed the expulsion to Brazil's Supreme Court, and a court spokeswoman said a number of judges believed the decision was unconstitutional.
Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said via email that after consultations with legal counsel in Brazil, "we believe there is no basis for revocation of Mr Rohter's visa and would take appropriate action to defend his rights."
Times Executive Editor Bill Keller said if Brazil "intends to expel a journalist for writing an article that offended the president, that would raise serious questions about Brazil's professed commitment to freedom of expression and a free press."
In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher criticized Brazil's revoking of Rohter's visa.
"First, I'd point out that we do have good relations with President Lula and his government. Obviously, the article in The New York Times did not represent the views of the U.S. government," he said.
But he said Brazil's cancellation of Rohter's visa "is not in keeping with Brazil's strong commitment to freedom of the press."
Foreign Minister Celso Amorim denied it was an attack on press freedom.
"This is not about freedom of speech. It's about a story that is libelous, injurious and false," Amorim said. "We never acted against anyone who criticized Brazil's internal or foreign policy, but it is another thing to offend the honor of the chief of state."
Members of the president's usually cohesive Workers' Party attacked the decision.
"The government's decision was a wrong and dangerous measure from a democratic point of view, because it is an authoritarian gesture," said Sen Cristovam Buarque. "It sets a dangerous precedent."
The Foreign Press Association said "this drastic attitude is a warning to foreign correspondents in the sense that to work in Brazil, your duty is to write articles that please the government."
Rohter's whereabouts were not immediately known. His office said he was out of the country.
If so, he won't be allowed to re-enter, said Roberto Busato, president of the Brazilian Bar Association.
"If the government had one gram of sense, it would reverse this decision," Busato said. "This decision hurts Brazil's image even more than The New York Times article." (Wire reports)
I'm surprised this hasn't been talked about yet (maybe it has and I missed it). Looks like Brazil hasn't progressed as much as someone claims it has. My note: if the US deported every journalist who criticized George W Bush, there would be no journalists left.
Japan Today and many, many other sources:
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=8&id=298162
Brazil gets flak for expelling New York Times reporter
Thursday, May 13, 2004 at 01:00 JST
BRASILIA — President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva came under criticism Wednesday for deciding to expel a New York Times correspondent who had written a story saying the Brazilian leader was a heavy drinker.
The newspaper protested the order against correspondent Larry Rohter and said it "would take appropriate action to defend his rights."
Rohter's visa was canceled and he was given eight days to leave the country — the first expulsion of a journalist since the 20-year military dictatorship ended in 1984. The last time a foreign journalist was expelled was in the 1970s.
"It's a political mistake. The government managed to transform a victory into a defeat — it went from victim to villain. There is no precedent for this during democracy," said Sen Jefferson Peres of the left-leaning Democratic Labor Party.
"The article was badly done, but that doesn't justify the government's decision, which is authoritarian," he said.
The article in Sunday's Times, titled "Brazilian Leader's Tippling Becomes National Concern," recapped rumors that had long been circulating among journalists in Brasilia, the capital.
Former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso said in Sao Paulo that both the article and the president's reaction were off-base.
"I have known Lula for 30 years and I can attest to the fact that he is a social drinker only," Cardoso said, using Silva's nickname. "Expelling the reporter who wrote the article, however, is an overreaction. By retaliating, they are keeping the article alive longer than it merits."
Rio de Janeiro Sen Sergio Cabral appealed the expulsion to Brazil's Supreme Court, and a court spokeswoman said a number of judges believed the decision was unconstitutional.
Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said via email that after consultations with legal counsel in Brazil, "we believe there is no basis for revocation of Mr Rohter's visa and would take appropriate action to defend his rights."
Times Executive Editor Bill Keller said if Brazil "intends to expel a journalist for writing an article that offended the president, that would raise serious questions about Brazil's professed commitment to freedom of expression and a free press."
In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher criticized Brazil's revoking of Rohter's visa.
"First, I'd point out that we do have good relations with President Lula and his government. Obviously, the article in The New York Times did not represent the views of the U.S. government," he said.
But he said Brazil's cancellation of Rohter's visa "is not in keeping with Brazil's strong commitment to freedom of the press."
Foreign Minister Celso Amorim denied it was an attack on press freedom.
"This is not about freedom of speech. It's about a story that is libelous, injurious and false," Amorim said. "We never acted against anyone who criticized Brazil's internal or foreign policy, but it is another thing to offend the honor of the chief of state."
Members of the president's usually cohesive Workers' Party attacked the decision.
"The government's decision was a wrong and dangerous measure from a democratic point of view, because it is an authoritarian gesture," said Sen Cristovam Buarque. "It sets a dangerous precedent."
The Foreign Press Association said "this drastic attitude is a warning to foreign correspondents in the sense that to work in Brazil, your duty is to write articles that please the government."
Rohter's whereabouts were not immediately known. His office said he was out of the country.
If so, he won't be allowed to re-enter, said Roberto Busato, president of the Brazilian Bar Association.
"If the government had one gram of sense, it would reverse this decision," Busato said. "This decision hurts Brazil's image even more than The New York Times article." (Wire reports)
