Over a decade ago, journalists Elaíze Farias and Kátia Brasil had an idea: a new investigative journalism agency with true editorial independence that focused on human rights and marginalized communities in the Amazon Rainforest. Today, with several similar news agencies operating in the Amazon and the nonprofit journalism model taking hold around the world, such a concept may not seem so bold. But back then, there were few if any examples to follow – particularly in the Amazon, where journalism is almost exclusively funded by corporations and politicians who exert influence over coverage.
Based in Manaus, the capital of Amazonas, Farias and Brasil launched their vision in 2013 under the brand Amazônia Real, publishing several in-depth investigations that helped them secure sustainable philanthropic funding.
In recent years, other independent outlets in the Amazon have followed Farias and Brasil’s example, but Amazônia Real remains the leading source of combative reporting that holds power to account and exposes human rights abuses across the Amazon rainforest. It has published exclusive and transformative reporting on violence against indigenous peoples, illegal deforestation and land invasions, and corruption and wrongdoing by public officials. Its workshops, trainings, and internships have also helped launch the careers of many of the Amazon’s most successful human rights journalists today.
Last month, I spoke with Farias for nearly two hours about the ideas, intentions, and strategies behind Amazônia Real and what she’s learned over the past 11 years. You can read a (significantly) abbreviated version of our conversation here.
Note: This conversation has been edited for brevity and clarity.
You and Kátia Brasil were reporters for traditional publications before starting Amazônia Real. What sets Amazônia Real apart from these publications and how would you describe the type of work Amazônia Real does?
We do journalism. For the sake of understanding, when people ask us, we usually say that we do socio-environmental journalism, or just independent and investigative journalism. Generally, because we are in the Amazon, people automatically associate us with environmental journalism, which is a very restrictive and confined description. That is not the case for us.
We revised many Western and ethnocentric concepts, with colonial roots, that journalism reproduced. Our main goal is to talk about the same subject in a different way, listening to all those people who often were not heard at all about issues that affected them.
The search to change the way we do journalism involves first decolonizing the way we produce and publish information that becomes news. It involves radical changes in the way we investigate. This makes a big difference.
Corporate journalism, journalism that aims to generate profit, does not allow for this. At some point there will be a barrier. Because it is also interfering with the interests of another group, usually powerful economic groups, the interests of politicians. In fact, in all cities in the Amazon region, there are journalism initiatives that become hostages to the government, city hall, some politician. They are the ones who provide financing - you have to do this. And at Amazônia Real we brought freedom. We do not allow our financiers, who are usually philanthropic organizations, to interfere in our reporting.
Many people discredit this type of journalism that seeks to center marginalized people by calling it “activism.” How do you see the difference between activism and your journalism, and do you think the division is necessary to maintain?
I don’t like the word “activism” to explain the journalism we do. I’m not against those who do activism, on the contrary. But we deal with facts. We investigate and tell stories in our reporting. We listen to all sides, naturally. Although in our reporting the main characters, the subjects of our stories, are the social groups that are usually erased in the big agendas of the corporate media or that do not hold the economic power of the big interests that try to interfere in decision-making.
With our journalism, we mobilize social groups, and it’s true, we mobilize citizens to generate change. But we do this with our work. When we hear of a fact, of a situation, we dig deeper to find out if it’s true. That’s why there is investigation, that’s why there is fact-checking, you dig deeper and show what’s going on. So that’s what journalism is. Many people try to belittle this journalism by saying that it is activism, as if this practice were also inferior.
I am a journalist who likes to listen to and tell stories. We need to humanize and tell the version of those who do not appear in any official data, in any institutional record, often. That is why these people are often erased. I know of several stories like this, forgotten, as if they never existed. There are even cases in which official data, all those documents, tells lies and commits serious injustice. I am a journalist who will always not conform with injustice.
Personally, and it could not be otherwise, I have social values of defending human rights and democracy. And that could be called activism, although I prefer the word “militancy”, which has become very stigmatized in recent times. Many times, due to this position, my work merges with my professional trajectory. This is not a choice that I didn’t make all of a sudden. It is a long-standing one, since the time I was in college, or in social movements, and it has accompanied me throughout these long years of my career.
I will not side [with] agribusiness or groups that attack human rights. Nor will I be a spokesperson for mining companies who are only looking for profit or for companies that present market solutions to pretend they are saving the planet, when in fact they are causing destruction and collapse.
One of the biggest challenges that all media outlets face today, but especially independent media outlets, is maintaining an audience. Who reads Amazônia Real and how do you measure its impact?
We want to be read by all audiences. We don't choose segments, as we are often asked. The Amazônia Real website receives millions of views per year. We would like to be read more in the Amazon. This is also our challenge. Sometimes we are read much more in São Paulo. But depending on the subject, our reports are widely read in the Amazon region. This leads me to several reflections. We need to realize that not all places in the Amazon have access to the internet. We have a brutal digital inequality. There are cities where access does not exist or works poorly. How will the population read our reporting?
Regardless of barriers like this, our goal is to bring about change. What is this change? A regular reader who is reading about a story will understand what is happening. They will be better informed. Or a change in a decision-maker. Public institutions like the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office, for example, filing a legal action regarding the situation we revealed in our reporting. It could also be simple visibility, taking that group out of the silence. You arrive at an Indigenous land for the first time and the person says, 'look, this is the first time a reporting team has come here.' So I think there are several indicators, and the indicator cannot be measured only with metrics or other numerical engagements.
You’ve emphasized that the funding of Amazônia Real does not affect its editorial independence. How is Amazônia Real funded and how does it protect itself from the influence of these funding sources?
After a year [of existence], we began receiving funds from the Ford Foundation, which is our main source of funding to this day. I hope it continues, but we know it is an ongoing challenge to maintain sustainability because the demands are imense. Philanthropic funds come and go. We have partnered with large and small funding sources. The small ones are usually for specific coverage, such as elections, droughts, etc. And for specific periods.
We give up many possibilities because we know that it makes no sense to receive funding, for example, from companies that are violating human and territorial rights of local populations. Or that are practicing greenwashing to captivate and deceive society using the media. Or from politicians or government agencies. If we accepted, we would be hostages to the pressure of those who finance us.
We have never been influenced or interfered with by any of the institutions that support us. We are adamant about this position. And we are very transparent, so much so that all of our sources of funding appear on the Amazônia Real website.
But we would like to vary our financial supporters. One practice that we would like to see work is donations from readers. Donations are not yet common in Brazil, but we hope that this will change. We have just started a financing campaign towards readers, asking for donations for coverage of COP30, to expand our reporting on the climate crisis and also to have resources so we can combat harassment and lawsuits.
We also believe it is important to have resources to ensure the safety of our team during our reporting, especially high-risk reporting. We have created a safety protocol for reporters, which includes protecting them during their work.
What tips do you have for interacting with sources, particularly indigenous groups and other marginalized communities who may not have much experience with the media?
First of all, it is necessary to be genuinely committed to the population or social group you want to engage with. It is important to have allies in these communities, to gain their trust and to understand their ideas and language. You must always be transparent about your intentions, the objective of your reporting and what benefits can come from it. Don't go for vanity, likes or awards, and don't try to impose your planning and schedule without first hearing from the local populations.
We must build relationships before attempting to make initial contact. We will not always be welcomed with open arms. To avoid being mistrusted, we must work on ongoing connection.
We also need to learn how to work. That vision of the adventurous journalist, thinking he is exploring a “lost time of the past”, full of Western imagery, of arriving unannounced, does not work; it is outdated. And it is even disrespectful.
Another thing is that we cannot enter and leave having heard from only one voice talking about that community or that subject that we are investigating. Let alone one official voice, or a Western voice, the ‘expert on that subject’. It is important to give space to sources that are often excluded in reporting, whether reporting in the field or remotely. One of the guidelines we always give to reporters: talk to women. Try to talk to women in that community. Don’t just include men.
Have a critical eye, study, research, be humble and remember that we are always learning. We are not experts in anything. Avoid the common perceptions about the Amazon. Do you want to talk about the Amazon and its populations? Study the history of the region. Learn how it fits into Brazilian historiography. You will understand why the Amazon is a territory in permanent dispute and confirm that the colonizing model of the past is updated, with new practices of colonization, exploitation, conflicts and inequality.
Looking back at the 11 years of Amazônia Real, what has changed? What are some moments that stand out for you?
When Amazônia Real started in 2013, we already started our journalism project in a professional way. We opened a CNPJ, a micro-company – later we created an association. We did “drawer” reports, with more timeless approaches, we called columnists who were our allies. At the beginning we had voluntary support from a network of friends. We were just journalists, we came from newsrooms. We had no experience in entrepreneurship. We never intended to make a profit or become rich. This is not possible in the journalism we wanted to do. But we knew at that moment that we were doing something new, pioneering. We just didn't have much idea of the scale of this new thing. Naturally, according to the journalistic principles we defined at that time, we did not have external financial resources. The first decision was not to receive public money. Everything we did was with our personal finances. We tried getting resources from advertising. We weren’t able to. Later, we obtained philanthropic financing, which is our main source of sustainability, but it is worth highlighting that even in this aspect we are also careful. I'm here summarizing this period of just over a decade.
At that very early stage, in December 2013, we did some very remarkable work, Kátia and I, which was coverage of the attack of an entire population, practically, of a city called Humaitá, in the south of Amazonas, on the Tenharim indigenous people. The coverage of this case was prejudiced, which stigmatized indigenous people. It involved the suspected deaths of three non-Indigenous men. But no one listened to the Tenharim. So we listened, and that was a great moment in our coverage, which had significant repercussions. We did interviews over the phone, we called the village pay phone. Kátia and I spent Christmas and New Year’s 2013 working.
In the following years, we covered a huge range of topics. Since the beginning, we have been reporting on mining in the Yanomami Indigenous Land. This has never been a new topic for us. Reporting on death threats to human rights defenders, isolated indigenous peoples, impacts of mining and agribusiness, deforestation, fires, gender-based violence, etc.
The Covid-19 pandemic came and we had to make some changes to our planning and our schedule. We started writing articles almost daily. And, at a time when social groups such as indigenous people and quilombolas were completely erased in the media. It was intense coverage. The difference is that we couldn't leave the house, access to communities was closed, and part of our team had to dedicate themselves to care, because we lived in a city that was one of the global epicenters of the pandemic, which was Manaus.
Over the years, we have held events, exhibitions, lectures, workshops for indigenous communicators, and encouraged other colleagues to create similar initiatives. We’ve received a lot of recognition, with awards and honors. Personally, I'm really happy when an indigenous person or a woman from a river community comes to me and says: “that reporting you did helped to show our struggle.”
Amazônia Real turned 11 years old in October 2024. It's been 11 years showing that it is possible to take a stance in favor of erased, stigmatized or silenced Amazonian populations, and this also allowed us to break paradigms of colonial journalism. An immense longevity, which I could never have imagined.
Reporting the Understory