Mais um exemplo de pseudo jornalismo e como seria se fosse um verdadeiro jornalismo/Another example of pseudo journalism and what it would be like if it were true journalism

 "Mulheres negras são vítimas desproporcionais de estupro no Brasil"

PONTO.

Uma notícia que circulou durante um tempo na mídia brasileira. 

Pois se trata de um pseudo jornalismo, forjado partir de uma narrativa ideológica, baseada em uma falácia de evidência suprimida, se não diz qual é o grupo que mais estupra mulheres, incluindo as mulheres negras, por ser "politicamente incorreto"...

Agora, como seria o jornalismo verdadeiro nesse caso

"Mulheres negras são vítimas desproporcionais de estupro no Brasil... E são os homens negros os que mais estupram mulheres negras" (dedução lógica com base no padrão de relacionamentos em que os intrarraciais tendem a ser mais comuns que os interraciais, e potencialmente confirmável pelas estatísticas).

Aí sim, temos a informação completa, os fatos mais relevantes informados, sem distorções ou falácias ideologicamente induzidas, tal como essa, mostrada acima e que visa transmitir ou reforçar uma ideia de vitimização de mulheres negras e omissão do papel de protagonismo dos homens negros nesse processo de vitimização. 

Isso não é racismo ou preconceito, ainda que possa ser usado para se fazer generalizações de causalidade entre raça e comportamento (conceito mais objetivo para o racismo). Até porque não significa que todos os casos de estupro de mulheres negras no Brasil têm como perpetrador um homem negro ou que todos os homens negros são estupradores em potencial. 

"Black women are disproportionate victims of rape in Brazil"

POINT.

A piece of news that circulated for a while in the Brazilian media.

Because it is pseudo journalism, forged from an ideological narrative, based on a fallacy of suppressed evidence, if it does not say which group rapes women the most, including black women, because it is "politically incorrect"...

Now, what would true journalism look like in this case?

"Black women are disproportionate victims of rape in Brazil... And it is black men who rape black women the most" (logical deduction based on the pattern of relationships in which intraracial relationships tend to be more common than interracial relationships, and potentially confirmable by statistics).

So yes, we have complete information, the most relevant facts informed, without ideologically induced distortions or fallacies, such as the one shown above and which aims to convey or reinforce an idea of ​​victimization of black women and omission of the leading role of black men in this victimization process.

This is not racism or prejudice, although it can be used to make generalizations about causality between race and behavior (a more objective concept for racism). Because it does not mean that all cases of rape of black women in Brazil have a black man as the perpetrator or that all black men are potential rapists.

Sistemas de cotas é um novo Q.I (quem indica)/Quota systems are a new ''nepotism''

 E que chega a ser até pior que o velho Q.I, porque, além de também ser um meio anti meritório de avaliação e seleção, coloca o critério anti meritório totalmente acima do mérito genuíno, isto é, sempre como o mais provável de ser escolhido ou usado como parâmetro "avaliativo' e seletivo, enquanto que, mesmo o velho "Quem Indica" nem sempre prioriza o anti mérito ou o critério subjetivo sobre o objetivo. Por exemplo, como nos casos de gênios, especialmente no mundo das artes, que só conseguiram se iniciar em seus ofícios por indicação de terceiros ou por apadrinhamento. 

And it is even worse than the old nepotism, because, in addition to also being an anti-meritorious means of evaluation and selection, it places the anti-meritorious criterion totally above genuine merit, that is, always as the most likely to be chosen or used as an "evaluative" and selective parameter, while even the old "nepotism'' does not always prioritize anti-merit or subjective criteria over the objective. For example, as in the cases of geniuses, especially in the world of arts, which only managed to get started in their professions through recommendation from third ones or through sponsorship.

About the perversity of lying to avoid offending and its consequences

What does it mean to be really good??

There's a film, "Florence: Who's That Woman?", from 2016, that I've never seen and it looks very interesting. Starring the legendary actress Meryl Streep, it tells the real story of an American granddaughter named Florence Foster Jenkins who, despite having no talent for operatic singing, believed in the opposite and, precisely for that reason, came to invest in an artistic career and present themselves publicly. She was even "successful" in her presentations or... gratuitous humiliations, as there were many people willing to pay to see her playing out of tune live. For this story can give us a lesson about kindness and truth, if it is about a woman who had a great delusion about herself and whose belief was further reinforced by others, not just those who wanted to see her humiliate herself and, perhaps, without any awareness of the role she was playing, but also by those who, feeling sorry for her apparent innocence, supported her dream (and without forgetting to talk about the possibility that she may have "wet the hand" of some to help her in your endeavor).

Realize that even this modern and popular idea that "empathy", as a synonym for kindness, is expressed particularly through the act of lying to avoid offending or to please, has its limits. Take the case of Florence, where those who lied to her, supporting her career, were no better or kinder than those who took pleasure in seeing her humiliating herself, if the right thing to do is to tell the truth, especially if necessary, because there are situations in which frankness may be optional. But, when it comes to intelligence, talent or competence, it is best to always tell the truth, no matter how harsh it may be. Here, it is still necessary to differentiate between subjective truth or what one thinks and feels and objective truth or what one perceives objectively.

To make matters worse, this habit of always lying to avoid offending is definitely no longer limited to the personal sphere, entering the world of politics, as it has been adopted by so-called "progressive" or "left-wing" parties and in relation to their "politically protected" groups " or, "relevant" to their power projects: historically or socially 'marginalized' groups. So, from the dictatorship of political correctness in the main institutions of most Western countries, based on an alignment of related ideologies: from egalitarianism to cultural relativism, it began to condemn any idea or thought that confirms potentially innate differences in cognitive performance and behavior between individuals and groups, even more so if it is about these "protected" groups. As a result, we have been living in a scenario similar to of Florence's story, in which most people have been emotionally coerced into believing that, for example, cognitive differences between men and women or between racial groups are due exclusively to cultural and social factors, and not because, perhaps, they are reflections of the intrinsic differences between them: lying so as not to "offend", it seems nicer to "blame" the environment than to endorse a more deterministic thought that justifies rather than problematizes certain differences in representation, for example, the disproportion of men working in the world of science and technology. And, in addition to discursive imposition, these groups or political parties have also created laws based on these beliefs, such as establishing quota systems for their "politically relevant" groups. But, if their differences are deeper, if they are not just products of privileges of one group over another, then individuals below the required competence are being hired, mainly because they are of the race or ethnicity covered (or another category). Therefore, we have a definitely anti-meritocratic or unfair situation that can still have serious consequences in the medium and long term, precisely because we are assigning important functions to people who are less capable or ideal for the position...

Empathy, the act of putting yourself in someone else's shoes, is an indisputable quality. However, it either seems to have been excessively valued and/or superficially understood, as I commented in this other text: "Pathological altruism or underdeveloped empathy?". Because, even if it is respectful to avoid saying certain truths or to avoid sincerity, not every situation will be the most correct habit, as seems to be the case with capacity or intelligence, since a complex society depends on these competence filters to function in a minimally adequate manner.