Good morning and welcome to PORTUGAL DECODED. Carlos Paredes, the legendary Portuguese guitar player who would have turned 100 this Sunday, deserves a place on your playlist - especially today.
I am now on my music streaming service listenting to Carlos Paredes. Amazing, timeless, and inspiring... and I am only three songs in. Thank you for always bringing not just news, politics, and events to the briefings, but also culture. There is so much to learn and love about Portugal and you introduce me to something new every week. Obrigado.
A small correction. Where it says "At just 14, he began performing alongside his father in a weekly program on public broadcaster RTP." , RTP should be replaced by Emissora Nacional, as RTP did not yet exist.
Your headline reporting on corruption is disingenuous - we already know a) that the corruption index is compiled by experts, so inserting a "however" doesn't change anything, and b) that Portugal is hopelessly corrupt and getting more so, because nothing is ever enforced across the board. If the public were asked for their perception of corruption in Portugal, they would say it was worse than Spain, Italy, and indeed almost everywhere else in the enitre developed world.
I knew this would stir up some controversy—let me explain. Initially, I had written: Portugal drops dramatically in the index, corruption is rampant, end of story (as many media outlets did). However, I later realized that the index isn’t based on surveyed public perceptions (something I hadn't known) and that there are significant issues with its methodology. This article provides an interesting perspective: (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0038012118301411). I felt it was important to inform readers about the index’s limitations—essentially, to highlight that this story should be taken with a grain of salt. The title was never meant to comment on corruption in Portugal (a complex topic I plan to cover in a future DECODER) but rather to critique the index itself. Could I have phrased it better? Absolutely. But there was no intent to mislead. I appreciate your feedback and engagement—thanks for reading! PD
I am now on my music streaming service listenting to Carlos Paredes. Amazing, timeless, and inspiring... and I am only three songs in. Thank you for always bringing not just news, politics, and events to the briefings, but also culture. There is so much to learn and love about Portugal and you introduce me to something new every week. Obrigado.
Obrigado
A small correction. Where it says "At just 14, he began performing alongside his father in a weekly program on public broadcaster RTP." , RTP should be replaced by Emissora Nacional, as RTP did not yet exist.
Thank you
Your headline reporting on corruption is disingenuous - we already know a) that the corruption index is compiled by experts, so inserting a "however" doesn't change anything, and b) that Portugal is hopelessly corrupt and getting more so, because nothing is ever enforced across the board. If the public were asked for their perception of corruption in Portugal, they would say it was worse than Spain, Italy, and indeed almost everywhere else in the enitre developed world.
I knew this would stir up some controversy—let me explain. Initially, I had written: Portugal drops dramatically in the index, corruption is rampant, end of story (as many media outlets did). However, I later realized that the index isn’t based on surveyed public perceptions (something I hadn't known) and that there are significant issues with its methodology. This article provides an interesting perspective: (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0038012118301411). I felt it was important to inform readers about the index’s limitations—essentially, to highlight that this story should be taken with a grain of salt. The title was never meant to comment on corruption in Portugal (a complex topic I plan to cover in a future DECODER) but rather to critique the index itself. Could I have phrased it better? Absolutely. But there was no intent to mislead. I appreciate your feedback and engagement—thanks for reading! PD
You have a point. I apologise for the rudeness of my initial comment. I will read the article you've linked.
I tried. That's a lot of maths. I admit defeat and concede as gracefully as I can manage.