By SANDRA BITENCOURT*

From digital hate to teen pastors: how the controversies of Janja, Virgínia Fonseca and Miguel Oliveira reveal the crisis of authority in the age of algorithms

1.

The events that have generated the most controversy, clicks and controversies in the digital world in recent weeks feature different characters and different purposes, but at the same time they unify the certainty of an unstoppable change in the way of producing opinion, influencing, informing and entertaining through bytes.

We know that today's digital showcase has largely replaced authority with influence. Format, language and style are capable of mobilizing, dictating behavior, selling and producing trends faster and with more zeros in advertising dollars than traditional corporate media and its referents in various areas.

This is true for the political, corporate, scientific and even institutional environments. The number of followers, although not a parameter of competence or credibility, is a metric of success and can be decisive for the occupation of spaces, be that space the pulpit of a church, a political leader or the top of digital game advertising.

The opposite is also true. Those who hold the record for repulsion end up standing out in the digital showcase, but obviously do not accumulate in a positive way for their causes and representations. If we look at the scenario of digital discussion in the country today, spontaneous or directed and manufactured, we will see how some public “personas” are more affected.

This is the case of Brazil's First Lady, Janja da Silva. We could approach the issue from the perspective of institutionality and the convenience of her agendas and appearances. Could she be a new figure breaking with the classic frameworks of sexist politics and, therefore, becoming a target for the media critical of the government, which, when it deems it appropriate, resorts to misogyny and sexism?

In this same vein, she ends up being raw material for the most hateful and violent production of the far right. Or is there in fact an exaggeration in her performance as an unelected representative, a spokesperson for issues that she has no authority or mandate to interfere in? Are the limits of her private status as Lula's wife clear versus her public position as a companion/representative of the president with her own agendas and opinions (and let's not kid ourselves, mistakes) that could compromise representations and negotiations for the country?

The approach proposed here is not to discuss what the redefinition of the role of the First Lady has meant in practice, whatever that may be, since in my opinion it is an outdated role that should not even exist. But to observe how much this digital presence opens up weaknesses and works to undermine the image of a government that, despite the achievements and rescues it has made, finds itself surrounded by misinformation and questions that interfere with its popularity.

2.

Put simply and directly, how much Janja da Silva's presence and the use — often dishonest — of his appearances opens the way to disrupt successful government agendas. It happened at the G-20, and it happened again during the historic visit to China.

The numbers show that this is a path taken strongly by the opposition and the bandits who promote it. fake news. Data from the monitoring company Palver shows that, in the last week, at least two narratives — false, distorted or unproven — went viral like an avalanche, especially on Whatsapp and Telegram, associating Janja da Silva with corruption scandals as a way of affecting the credibility of the president and the federal government.

Such attacks are promoted and supported by former president and defendant Jair Bolsonaro. This led the AGU to officially call on open social networks (not apps) operating in the country to try to contain disinformation.

A newsletter Ebulição reveals that the problem is that the volume of anti-Janja conversation has skyrocketed. It is difficult to contain. As of yesterday, posts against the First Lady had accumulated more than 250 thousand interactions on Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter). On WhatsApp and Telegram, they had already landed in more than 234 public groups, reaching 730 thousand people across the country. Therefore, it is an avalanche of messages that is practically impossible to stop.

Since marrying Lula in 2022, Janja da Silva has been a recurring target of digital attacks. But according to the analysis of this monitoring, the current wave of criticism and misinformation against her stands out for combining two unusual elements. The first is the already known questioning of her participation in Lula's official travel entourage.

Janja da Silva has already been the target of attacks when he went to Japan, France and Italy. Now, with his trip to Russia and China, the fake news has gained new momentum. The second ingredient that stands out is the attempt to also link Janja to two political scandals in the country — one very current and ongoing and another that is over twelve years old.

“An analysis of the more than 905 unique messages published about Janja in the last week shows that she is being openly compared to Rosemary Noronha, who was Lula's advisor in São Paulo in 2013. In addition to this line of attack, Lula's opponents are also trying to implicate Janja in the recent INSS allegations,” warns the analysis of newsletter Ebulição.

Hundreds of messages analyzed by Boiling They claim, without presenting any evidence, that the First Lady traveled to Asia to actually transport suitcases of money – amounts allegedly diverted from retirees and pensioners with the help of unions. They are trying to paint Janja da Silva as a central figure in corruption schemes and, in addition, to affect the president.

3.

It is a fact that stories against the First Lady are gaining traction and becoming a kind of Achilles heel. In addition to the fabrication of fake news, other aspects also contribute to the worrying performance: transparency of government actions and travel expenses, influence – legitimate or not – of the president's partner in political decisions, silencing of critics of the government itself who find no space to try to correct a situation that, fair or unfair, erodes credibility and drains efforts that should be at the service of positive publicity.

It is known that during her visit to Russia, Janja da Silva fulfilled a public agenda focused on culture, education and international cooperation. The accusations are unfounded. In China, the president claims that Janja's statement about TikTok was provoked by him. Would the solution be to prevent her from traveling and having her agenda?

No, but planning considering possible attacks and their strategic use, anticipating public statements, disclosing costs, and following protocols, rituals, and ceremonies would be highly recommended. The digital offensive against the First Lady is part of a larger strategy to delegitimize the government through disinformation, with an appetizing ingredient on the social media menu: misogyny.

4.

In the same week as the hysteria surrounding Janja da Silva's international appearance, another figure who reigns supreme at the top of digital influence mocked the Brazilian parliament and increased her own engagement. Virgínia Fonseca showed aplomb in the role of a naive girl who would not be aware of her power to influence thousands in exchange for huge sums.

Her appearance in meticulously designed attire at the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into Bets not only served symbolically to exempt her from responsibility, but also produced extra notoriety for her famous profile. In addition, it reduced the position of some parliamentarians to that of circus assistants.

That's right. A circus, the climax of which consisted of her sucking on the microphone and speaking through the straw of her Stanley cup. Lots of references to Tik Tok and her followers eager for entertainment. An image of innocence: a mischievous girl who certainly doesn't know the perverse consequences of the world of games and bets that she promotes. That was the image she was aiming for.

This clear manipulative action once again leads us to the need to regulate digital influence, which monetizes recommendations of products, services and behaviors as if they were something spontaneous and which in fact moves millions of dollars. Holding people accountable for harm is a discussion that needs to be addressed, in a more in-depth way than a short Tik Tok video.

5.

Finally, let's look at the most surprising celebrity of recent times: the project of a con artist, the boy pastor who speaks in heavenly tongues, lies, performs fake miracles and has become an Internet phenomenon. Miguel Oliveira, just 14 years old, became one of the best-known child missionaries in the country and was banned from social media when he already had a million followers on Instagram and dozens of viral videos.

The parents say the boy is the victim of a public lynching after he was banned from preaching, accused of exploiting the faith of others for financial gain. The young man caused so much damage, and had such courage to tell bizarre miracles (such as the supposed cure of his own congenital deafness), that in the highly competitive market of faith, older pastors became uncomfortable.

The parents promise to sue for the offensive and “sensationalist” content against the boy, but the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Guardianship Council have acted to remove him from this scenario. Miguel has already received support from some public figures on the far right, such as influencer Pablo Marçal, who transparently said of his interest: if everyone is beating him up, I need to pay attention to what he did right.

The “false prophet” teen” received threats and sparked a discussion about the limits between being religiously intolerant and criticizing the political use of religion. He will be the author of “Of the King the power” a promise in the religious scene or just another figure who knows how to use prophetic language and false revelations to activate emotions that keep people connected?

In the history of human emotions, there are several ways to study different perspectives: it is possible to examine how the names of emotions have changed over time and how the words to describe them have changed in meaning. There are different ways to explore the understanding of emotions within their time and cultures.

But some entries remain active for researchers in this field, which is the case of emotional regimes, which are expected behaviors, imposed by the society in which we live.[I] (FIRTH-GODBEHERE, 2022). These regimes define how emotions are expressed in a given set of circumstances. Emotional labor, a term coined by sociologist Arlie Hochschild, originally emerged in Marxist thought as the need to induce or suppress feelings in order to maintain an outward appearance that produces the appropriate mental state in others.

Because it is so exhausting, it is difficult to remain faithful to an emotional regime. That is why we seek refuge and change our way of containing emotions imposed from above. The digital environment seems to be a territory where we allow ourselves to choose and act according to our feelings, without necessarily obeying emotional communities or what culture wants to impose. Although there is no scientific consensus that emotions are universal, some experiments list six basic emotions: happiness, anger, sadness, disgust, surprise and fear.

Do these feelings remain in the status quo What is the emotional world of today? Does each culture and each individual have their own way of feeling? Or is the emotional world static and unchanging? Perhaps one of the feelings described as universal is the key to understanding the engagement of followers and that contaminates the social media environment so much: repulsion, a feeling that unifies and helps in polarization, causing severe reactions.

We still have a long way to go to understand human beings who are hyper-connected and influenced by sophisticated manipulations, activating atavistic feelings. It even seems like a prophecy, one of those that 14-year-old boys or women dressed as teenagers tell and make money. It's a tough game.

* Sandra Bitencourt is a journalist, PhD in communication and information from UFRGS, director of communication at Instituto Novos Paradigmas (INP).

Note

[I] FIRTH-GODBEHRE, ​​Richard. A History of Human Emotions: How Our Feelings Shaped the World We Know. Rio de Janeiro: Best Seller, 2022.

the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE