Right-wing politicians and activists who have spent the last few years what they consider, especially on the part of (), now defend or remain silent about the Atlas/Bloomberg decision that showed the senator (-RJ) retreat in the presidential race.
A Sheet sought out 14 of these personalities who have already criticized freedom of expression on the part of the Judiciary, mainly after decisions by the minister who removed content from social networks judged as false or undemocratic.
The report asked what they think about the decision of the president of the (Superior Electoral Court), minister, who made the Atlas survey on Monday (8). The determination is provisional and made by the other ministers.
Only four responded. Three defended the court decision: federal deputies Bia Kicis (PL-DF) and Rosana Valle (PL-SP) and councilor Adrilles Jorge (União Brasil-SP). Only former deputy Fabio Ostermann (Novo-RS) was against it, stating that it is “mistaken” and “flirts with authoritarianism”.
Ostermann says that this is “another sad episode in a long series of excesses committed by the Judiciary, especially since the unacceptable fake news inquiry, which opened the door to censorship in the name of open concepts such as ‘defending democracy’ and ‘combating disinformation'”.
Another nine were silent: Helio Beltrão, president of the Mises institute board; the federal deputies, Caroline de Toni (PL-SC), Zucco (PL-RS), Marcel van Hattem (Novo-RS), Filipe Barros (PL-PR), Julia Zanatta (PL-SC) and Marco Feliciano (PL-SP); and former deputy Coronel Tadeu (PL-SP).
A Sheet was unable to locate the federal deputy, who was in Bahrain and the United States last month in the company of the former deputy (PL-SP).
With the exception of Zanatta, the others did not mention the subject on social media.
Kicis states that Nunes Marques’ decision is not censorship and that “research cannot be used as an instrument of disguised political propaganda”.
“I have always criticized judicial decisions that restrict freedom of expression. But it is one thing to censor someone for expressing an idea; another, completely different, is to question the legality and methodology of material presented to the public as research,” he stated.
It had been released on May 19th. The survey showed that Flávio had dropped six points in the second round scenario against, after the release of audios in which he asked the former banker, from Banco Master, for money to finance the film “Dark Horse”, an ode to the biography of his father, the former president.
That the survey questionnaire was “structured in such a way as to seriously induce a negative perception” about him.
Federal deputy Rosana Valle (PL-SP) argues that there was no censorship and that “questioning a method” and “demanding explanations” are “legitimate and compatible” actions with the Constitution.
“One thing is freedom of expression. Another, quite different, is the need to ensure that information with an impact on public debate is produced correctly and transparently,” he said.
Councilor Adrilles Jorge (União-SP), a Bolsonaro supporter who four years ago participated in demonstrations against grants granted by the TSE to Lula (PT) on Jovem Pan, also defended Nunes Marques’ decision.
“If a survey made based on lies and questions that condition the voter’s response is used as a piece of positive political propaganda for a candidate, or negative for another candidate, and eventually the Court prohibits this biased survey, it is clear that it is not a question of freedom of expression. It is a freedom of electoral manipulation”, he said.
On social media, few Bolsonarists commented on the suspension of the research. News about the judicial determination was shared by Flávio himself, Eduardo, federal deputies Carlos Jordy (PL-RJ), Sóstenes Cavalcante (PL-RJ) and Julia Zanatta (PL-SC) and state deputy Gil Diniz (PL-SP).
“Kassio Nunes’ decision was technical, correct and there was no big deal. In fact, we have to congratulate the legal team behind Flávio’s campaign,” said Eduardo in a video published on X. “Now, the damage has already been done, it’s gone everywhere.”
In response to an Instagram user who mocked the right’s defense of freedom of expression, Sóstenes, leader of the PL in the Chamber of Deputies, replied: “The research was leading one way and it wasn’t Flávio’s.”
The senator’s team stated, when requesting the suspension of the publication of the research, that the arrangement of the questions and themes and the “use of associations” between Flávio, Vorcaro and Master “contaminate and induce the answers of the interviewees”.
According to the questionnaire made available by AtlasIntel to the TSE, the content of an audio from Bolsonaro’s son to Vorcaro was shown to respondents, but as the last item in the survey.
In a statement, the institute defended the scientific rigor of the survey and said that the collection of voting intentions took place without the audio being played during the questionnaire. The company also argued that the material was only presented to users at a later stage — without the possibility of returning to questions or changing answers already recorded.
