The cofounder of the Brazilian fact-checker #AosFatos, #TaiNalon, is quoted in an article written on #UOL as stating:
“In democracies still not totally consolidated as is #Brazil, which is going through a moment of high polarization and of institutional fragility, there is a strong lack of trust in institutions and in authorities. [...] We won't be able to be a well-informed society for as long as those in positions of total or partial authority (judges, scientists, teachers, the press) are attacked because of their political agendas.”
In other words, she implies that judges, scientists, teachers, and the press are unfairly distrusted (“attacked”) because they have a political agenda. She implies that they should be believed just because of their titles, not their ideological position.
Now, who will the people believe in if there is not a consensus among judges, scientists, teachers, and the press? Who's going to decide which group of judges, scientists, teachers, and of the press we should believe in?