The scandal market and fake news

The modern and sociological concept of scandal is tied to public opinion, linked to the emergence of the press and of the means of social communication. In the contemporary world, scandal is a parameter of the functioning of institutions and of the market itself.

In this sense, the concept of scandal adopted by John Brookshire Thompson presupposes transgressions revealed by the media that impact public opinion and damage the reputation of the transgressors.

These are transgressions that come to be displayed by the media and that generate a kind of public outcry, since previously they were secret deviations.

At the same time, they shake the reputation of the alleged wrongdoers. As a consequence, or even an integral part of the concept of scandal, there is an intrinsic public response, which is indignation itself, revulsion, the stigmatization of those involved.

For Thompson, we are not passive recipients of the media, but builders of the social environment in which we live.

Currently, judicial proceedings constitute, especially when publicized, a kind of autonomous penalty, insofar as they damage the reputation of persons, natural or legal.

A free press, new technologies and citizens’ growing vigilance over transgressions have considerably widened the spectrum of scandals in the 21st century. There is talk of certain outlets betting on mobilizing collective feelings and social upheaval, including the results of polarization, to boost mass consumption.

The mobilization of emotions is fundamental, a central characteristic of our time. Freedom of expression of thought remains one of the pillars of contemporary democracies, and I do not believe in restricting it as a remedy to curb deviations, but rather in the principle of responsibility and in the plurality of information sources.

The control of corruption and poor public management, in turn, acquires growing importance in social debates and in the global agendas of investors and in the evolution of civilizations.

Companies caught up in scandals lose billions in a short time on the stock market . Candidates in electoral contests bury their political careers because of accusations filed in court. Ministers are not appointed because they are respondents in labor lawsuits , even though the law does not so require, as a result of an arbitrary exercise of power.

There are hits and misses in these controls, which are not always properly overseen by the very outlets that inform and shape public opinion.

How can these mechanisms of institutional action be improved and abuses curbed? It seems to me that the print and audiovisual press could take on a higher-quality leading role in producing consistent news, checking reports and playing an increasingly transformative and republican role in our society.

It is not enough to replicate what State bodies say; it is necessary to remember that there are high rates of punitive proceedings dismissed as unfounded because of investigative failures.

The press could work more with statistics. Shouldn't the instrument of plea bargaining be improved? Are there any statistics on its results?

Many criminal or improbity actions are still brought on the basis of slight evidence, justified by the principle of “in dubio pro societate.” Is this standard of requirement correct? For what reason did the Public Prosecution Service fight so hard to affirm its investigative power in the Federal Constitution?

If an investigation does not exhaust the evidentiary material, it will certainly be unfeasible to proceed in court. Punitive proceedings should have plausible chances of success in order to proceed in the Courts, since they spend taxpayers' money and serve to destroy people's reputations and make the Judiciary even slower. It is time for us to move forward, yes, but with self-criticism and humility, so that institutions improve as a whole.

Fábio Medina Osório

Lawyer, was chief minister of the Office of the Attorney General of the Union (2016, Temer government)