The case of Banco Master has dominated the public debate. they make the topic take on an air of speculation, creating expectations in certain groups that political opponents may be involved and exposed. In an election year, this is enough for the topic to gain centrality and create a soap opera effect, in which people wait attentively for the next episodes.
Real-time monitoring of more than 100,000 public groups shows that peaks in engagement coincide with the entry of political figures and institutional disputes. Among the messages that express explicit value judgments, around 72% are critical of minister Alexandre de Moraes. appears with 63% of negative mentions, despite not being a direct actor in the case. In the case of , approximately 58% of messages defend it. appears mostly in a negative way: 68% of criticisms, almost always as a symbolic representative of what users call “high echelon”.
The centrality of in the debate stems from the . From a formal point of view, there is no recognition of illegality or impediment. Still, the episode gained symbolic weight. In the monitored groups, there is rarely a discussion about the nature of the services provided or the legal limits of the role of family members of judges. What circulates is the association between the Judiciary, concentrated power and private relations, highlighting the distance between strict legality and public perception of legitimacy.
This mechanism is deepened with the incorporation of external characters into the case. In data from , sectors of the right began to involve the name of in the discussion about . Prioli appears episodically, often accompanied by denials, without direct accusation or consistent factual support. His name does not sustain its own waves of engagement, but is mobilized as an example to question the credibility of influencers and reinforce the idea of manipulation of the public debate. This is less of a personal attack and more of an attempt to expand the conflict into the media field.
The same associative pattern appears in the episode of , which works in the defense of those under investigation linked to the bank. In monitored groups, the topic appears with a high referral rate. The messages are standardized and establish a suggested temporal relationship between the trip and subsequent decisions in , without any debate about legal foundations or rules of jurisdiction. What propagates is not analysis, but association.
Only 11% of messages contain explicit political actors, but these are precisely the ones that spread the most. Politicization does not dominate the total volume of conversation, but it dominates its circulation. The content that goes viral is not that which explains how the system works, but rather that which attributes intentions, guilt and alignments to known characters.
The case exposes a recurring feature of the Brazilian public debate, which is the replacement of technical analysis by moral and associative narratives. When this happens, the opportunity to strengthen the institutional mechanisms that should prevent its repetition is lost. This type of construction leads to an even greater rejection of the status quo, opening space for candidacies that are classified as being “outside the system” to gain relevance.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
