The press chose to focus its attention on an alleged “diplomatic crisis” generated by First Lady Janja da Silva’s criticism of Elon Musk, while structural and urgent issues remain neglected. Musk, however, does not just represent a business figure. He uses his influence to spread disinformation, something that threatens not only democracy, but also public debate itself.
Janja did not make an empty attack, but expressed the indignation that millions of Brazilians feel. His speech directly criticized Musk’s stance, who often acts as a figure above any scrutiny. The billionaire’s reaction, when he mocked “They will lose the next election”, showed his disregard for criticism and the seriousness of the topic raised.
Musk also does not act in isolation. He promoted disinformation about the American electoral process, as admitted by his own artificial intelligence tool, Grok. His posts, which have accumulated billions of views on X, have fueled political polarization with false and misleading claims. Furthermore, Musk worked directly on Donald Trump’s campaign, positioning himself as a member of the future government. This conduct reflects how he uses his influence to benefit specific political interests.
Meanwhile, sectors of the Brazilian press transform legitimate criticism into superficial controversies. This approach diverts the focus from essential issues, such as the delivery of strategic data from Brazil to Musk’s companies, the advancement of technological monopolies and the environmental and social impact of his initiatives. Ignoring these discussions in favor of a sensationalist narrative reveals negligence and complacency with the dismantling of rights and national sovereignty.
The media preferred to label Janja’s speech as “diplomatic discomfort”, while at the same time treating Musk, a disseminator of disinformation, as a victim or untouchable figure. This behavior neglects the direct impact of disinformation on the democratic fabric, both in the United States and in Brazil.
Janja vocalized what many Brazilians want to say: legitimate criticism of the practices of figures like Musk, who prioritize their interests above the common good. She chose a strong response because reality requires strength. If this bothers you, the problem is not in Janja’s words, but in the convenience of a media that silences urgent issues while amplifying irrelevant controversies.
The real question is: who really causes discomfort? Those who defend a fairer future or those who perpetuate misinformation to guarantee their privileges? Janja’s response reflects the outrage of millions. And for those who prefer to ignore the essentials to cling to sensationalism, here is the message: F@da-se.
