For those who haven't stopped to reflect: The debate was a format created so that candidates, in the era of television and radio, could present their ideas and confront their opponents. This was before the internet era. Today, if you want to know a candidate's proposals, just follow their profile. There's Google, YouTube, podcasts, interviews, live streams, and thousands of tools available. The debate is no longer essential for voters to know a candidate. Proposals and positions are available all the time on social media. Whether or not to attend a debate does not prevent anyone from knowing ideas, proposals, or positions. In this sense, the format has become archaic. In my view, what Globo tried to do was not simply aimed at strengthening democracy or allowing people to get to know their candidates. It seemed much more like a little circus in favor of Flávio. What would Globo's interest be in protecting him? I don't know. But for me, there is something strange happening there. Those who wanted to know Lula's proposals went to Flow and had hours to hear what he thinks. However, Flávio did not offer that alternative at that moment because he canceled his participation in the debate after the decision involving Renan. So, we can't sell the idea that the big problem for democracy was Lula not being in the debate, while Flávio himself decided not to participate when the scenario became uncomfortable for him. And that's how the game is. (translated)
