Brazil is a country internationally recognized as having one of the most advanced voting systems in the world. Electronic urns, available in all voting stations, allow for a fast count of votes and the release of results just a few hours after the end of voting. For example, this past Sunday, the 5th of October, nearly 128 million Brazilians voted for mayors in cities throughout the country. The results of these elections were available less than six hours after the voting ended.
But there is a darker side to this modern voting system: censorship is widespread in political campaigns, especially when it comes to the use of the internet. While freedom of speech is a guaranteed constitutional right, there are many restrictions on the ways candidates and parties can communicate with voters. National legislation prohibits electronic media to disseminate opinions in favor or against candidates. This means that the creation of sites, blogs, and communities for or against candidates is punishable by law. Printed newspapers and magazines are not subject to any censorship, creating an even greater confusion: for example, an article against a candidate published in a magazine cannot be posted in a blog or even on that newspaper’s website.
These restrictions create a barrier in communication and restrict valuable information to voters. With no widespread political discussion in interactive media, voters are less aware of what each politician really stands for and are thus less conscientious and informed. This is especially true when compared to other countries where not only the internet, but also mobile phones, are widely used in political campaigns as a tool to better inform voters.
[via Folha Online]
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
I totally disagree with your article.
Democracy is built through press. Newspapers and magazines are an unbiased source of information. You read, you think, you develop YOURS ideas and you act. Blogging is not journalism, but merely someone´s opinions over a fact. The problem is that today people read blogger´s opinions and take them as FACTS, instead of developing their own. They are not thinking, they are just repeting other people´s opinions.
Also, you´re wrong when you say that the creation of sites, blogs, and communities for or against candidates is punishable by law. All blogs below are political blogs and some are even candidate´s blogs (current political race in SP), that allows for a 2-way conversation between electors and candidates and the free flow of information.
I have no idea where you got all this information, but you should know ALL the facts before stating such a strong point of view about another country´s political system and federal laws.
http://oglobo.globo.com/pais/noblat/
http://www.kassab25.com.br/blog/
http://www.marta13.can.br/blog.php
http://www.paulomaluf11.can.br/site/blog/
http://www.orkut.com/Main#Community.aspx?cmm=659469
http://www.orkut.com/Main#Community.aspx?cmm=71250993
October 8th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Dear Ms. Siqueira,
Thanks for your comment on our recent post “Brazil: Advanced Voting Technology Mixed with Political Censorship”. Below I am referring you to some official sources which will attest to the validity of our post and further clarify any misunderstanding you may be having regarding Brazilian legislation on electronic media.
1) With regards to your first link (NOBLAT’S BLOG) – Noblat is a respected journalist in Brazil who is not vouching for one candidate or another on his blog; he is merely relaying the ins and outs of the political process and the latest political gossip in the country, as any journalist could and would. No political propaganda here so no law being broken.
2) With regards to the homepages of the 3 political candidates you included in your reply, please refer to the link below:
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/brasil/ult96u387573.shtml – This link is a reference to Resolution 22.718 of Brazilian Electoral Law that states that a candidate’s advertising can only appear on his campaign homepage, as is the case for 3 of the links you sent. So no harm done here neither. Read the information on this link VERY carefully because it clearly and unequivocally lays out Brazilian Law in the exact same way we did on our post.
3) With regards to the links you sent from ORKUT, a social network widespread in Brazil, where you included fan pages of two political candidates, please refer to the link below:
http://blog.orkut.com/2008/09/poltica-no-brasil-e-no-orkut.html – This internal ORKUT regulatory clause clearly lays out what is permissible and what is not in its virtual communities and one of the things that is PROHIBITED is to display the candidate’s ballot number anywhere, something that one of your links (SONINHA-23) is actually guilty of – making that particular site I-L-L-E-G-A-L. It’s just a matter of time before Orkut administrators remove this site from the air, in the same way they do with illegal child porn sites when they are posted. The other Orkut link (KASSAB) you included also walks a very fine line between what is legal and illegal but it is careful in highlighting right at the top that the page is a forum for political discussion around a specific candidate’s initiatives over the past 4 years, since the site was first created, something that Brazilian Law does actually provision for. No “in your face” political propaganda to be observed here neither.
The post therefore stands as is.
Nonetheless, thank you for bringing this discussion up. Your apparent outrage, if I may call it such, re-enforces just how preposterously-backward Brazilian legislation is when it comes to electronic media. There is, however, reason to believe that things will soon change, and rest assured that when they do, as proud Brazilians, we’ll be the first to relay it to PSFK readers.
Many thanks.
LB on behalf of PSFK // Mandalah Brazil
http://www.mandalah.com
October 9th, 2008 at 12:21 am