Yesterday, Lula ostensibly became the first person since Brazil's return to democracy to win a fourth term in office. This is just three weeks after the country elected its most right wing legislature ever. It was the first time a candidate has lost the first round and gone on to win the presidency, and the first time that turnout in the second round has exceeded turnout in the first. Also unprecedented was the Supreme Court's last minute extension of voting hours. That decision was made by key Lula ally Alexandre de Moraes, who has now seized the passport of Lula's opponent after imprisoning his predecessor. British media's response to all of this? Bovine silence. Brazil is a famously corrupt country. Honesty should not be the expectation. It may be that Lula's victory was legitimate: it is certainly not obvious that it was. How will we know if nobody asks the questions? Remember this disinterest the next time that you hear a British journalist tell you about the importance of their role in 'protecting democracy' and 'speaking truth to power'. They have zero interest in either objective, and we should take zero notice of their words.