When the Paris Review asked Carlos Fuentes if it was possible to write a history of the influence of publishers on the literature of the Hispanic world, as was possible in the literature of England and the United States, the Mexican writer sarcastically replied: “Impossible. .. If you tried to edit someone’s text in Latin America, even if it was a hack, I would immediately resign and accuse you of censorship or libel.
I was reminded of those words following the death of legendary American publisher Robert Gottlieb last week. The Associated Press obituary listed some of Gottlieb’s accomplishments, including changing the title of Joseph Heller’s novel from “Catch 18” to “Catch 22” and dropping nearly 300,000 words from what was already over a million words, “The Power Broker ‘, the extraordinary Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of New York construction titan Robert Moses, making his 1,200-page tome an instant classic.
Such feats would be unimaginable in Latin America, where many authors still regard their words as sacred and their opinions as sacred, impeding a more productive collaboration between editors and authors, of which readers should be the primary beneficiaries. I know this because I’ve seen it many times in my years as Opinion Director for the New York Times en Español. And since then I’ve been convinced that resistance to editing is one of the factors that most influence the poor quality of opinions published by our media. This is all the more true in the field of opinion journalism.
Opinion journalism is still firmly anchored in the 20th century in its editorial approaches and practices. Part of the responsibility lies with the authors. The media will have to take care of the rest.
I declare. Most recently, as a Fellow at the Wilson Center and with the support of Luminate, I led research on “The State of Opinion Journalism in Latin America” to explore why gender continues to take a backseat while Latin American news journalism has experienced a great creative explosion. One of the main results was that Latin American opinion columns lack an independent editorial line with their own interests and topics. There are exceptions, but it’s a common fact among the 207 media outlets and 552 articles from 12 countries I analyzed. Opinion journalism based on impressions or speculation rather than verifiable information and data also predominates. Many opinion pieces remain tied to the signatures of authors too accustomed to publishing without prior editorial dialogue to fill in gaps or counter-arguments. Added to this is a lack of editorial vision that limits the publication of perspectives that are at odds with the editorial line of the medium.
Another worrying pattern that narrows and impoverishes spheres of opinion is that authors across Latin America are overwhelmingly male. The ratio ranges from 68% at best to 90% at worst. This raises the question of whether issues particularly relevant to women, such as domestic and sexual violence, equal pay in the workplace and reproductive rights, are adequately addressed.
All of this has historical reasons. Spheres of opinion in Latin America are reactive: they were created in male-dominated media as appendages of newsrooms to respond to political dynamics and economic shocks. Their application often ends with articles with polarizing partisan views and weakly reasoned arguments. In many countries, editorial opinion is also a sounding board for the political position of media owners.
In contrast, your own editorial vision should be the result of a conversation that guides the opinion section to explore reality through a range of issues and perspectives, and provides guidance on how to counter it.
Is it possible to abandon the emotional and anachronistic perspective cited by Fuentes and close the great gap that separates it from the most current and innovative news journalism?
To keep opinion from this mediocre drift, the media needs to think about what their approach to opinion should be and strategize it based on the thematic agendas they want to present to readers. This inevitably implies the publication of better opinion articles, that is, articles with original and fully reasoned arguments, since readers need these elements for reflection. These opinions must be supported by evidence and verifiable information and conform to current standards that guarantee the quality and accuracy of an argument. None of the above is incompatible with opinions expressing their own voice or an original, authoritarian point of view.
But none of this is accomplished without bold professional editors and knowledgeable and experienced writers working together to back opinion pieces with intelligent and provocative ideas.
American newspapers realized a few years ago that opinion journalism was losing readers because it had become conventional and predictable. He had distanced himself from his readers. Some publishers opted for vigorous renewal with good results. Something similar is happening with the Latin American opinion press: it sins for lack of imagination to satisfy the curiosity of increasingly cosmopolitan and informed readers. And that’s not just limited to the thematic approach. Many Latin American media also do not use the enormous potential that digitization offers for opinion-forming.
While each country faces unique challenges in developing strong and solid opinion groups – starting no doubt with the diversity of authors and viewpoints – it is important to renew them across the region, especially at a time when our democracies are being challenged by the Threatened are Bukele, the Maduro, the Kast and the Milei on duty.
One way to strengthen public discourse is to develop opinion journalism that is reader-centric, not the politico-economic establishment or the harassment of polarization.
In an environment intoxicated by fake news and misinformation, it is equally important to adopt editorial verification and referencing practices that enhance and strengthen the quality of articles. At the same time, opinion sections should use digital tools to improve the reader experience.
There is no perfect antidote to misinformation, toxic language, and the scourge of authoritarian populism, but providing readers with more creative, diverse, and pluralistic opinion journalism will not only help bridge the gap between two essential journalism genres, but also the Freedom of journalism to strengthen expression and independent critical thinking. To achieve this, we must also reestablish our editorial tradition and enable what Carlos Fuentes thought was unattainable. This reflection invites you to do so. It is not too late yet.
Boris Munoz (@borismunoz) is a freelance chronicler and editor. He was a member of the Nieman Foundation and the Wilson Center. He founded and ran the Spanish opinion section of The New York Times.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits