In the Brazil election, Dilma Rousseff did not win solely against her opponent Aecio Neves but against the totality of the powerful Brazilian press, which, throughout these 12 years, has taken every opportunity to expose what in its opinion went wrong and hide what the government got right.

One example is the stand the press took in the run-up to the World Cup, claiming Brazil was a dangerous country to visit, that the airports were inefficient, that an explosion of dangerous violence was imminent and that the very holding of the football tournament was highly dubious.

This culminated in a report by Reuters – of all news agencies – about demonstrations being planned, accompanied by photos of citizens threatening violence. When international agencies write something about Brazil most of the time they quote as their source Agency Globo, which is notorious for its manipulation and lack of love for its country.

Another proof of the lack of transparency and authenticity is the court case known as “mensalao”. The allegation is that political parties in the alliance of the Lula government, back in 2004, were receiving monthly stipends to vote with the government. In 2007, the judges were examining whether there was really a basis for this accusation. A certain judge, by the name of Levandowski, was caught speaking on his mobile saying that “we are all being threatened by the press to decide that there was a basis for the accusation and we have to pinpoint a certain Dirceu, who was chief of Cabinet, as the architect of all this”.

The woman who overheard him happened to be a journalist of the Folha de Saõ Paulo and put it in print.

Considering all this, one can hardly speak of Rousseff’s victory – 52 against 48 – as a tight one! The Brazilian voter has shown that, today, s/he takes what is reported by their press with a pinch of salt.