
Well, fair enough that the task of the President of the Republic is to mediate between political parties. Fair enough that the President is supposed to be equidistant. Fair enough that in Italy there was often plenty of stupid controversy. But in this particular case what's the reason of Napolitano's invitation to "have a truce in the polemics" for a major international event (the G8 All'Aquila)?
"Polemic" is supposed to be an elegant euphemism for saying "everything that Berlusconi has done." The meaning is: do not wash our dirty linen before the world. The meaning is to say nothing for a while of the scandals involving the prime minister because in this case, Berlusconi is still the representative of Italy. But apart from the fact that now the horse has bolted long ago, because throughout the world newspapers follow the events of the moment with a lot of interest, the point is that the news cannot be eliminated.
We cannot pretend that there is the sun when rain is pouring down. It is not the fault of journalists if Berlusconi has frequent and varied meetings with young women, and the fact is attracting attention in Italy and worldwide. The same thing would happen in any other country, and nobody would think of "putting aside the polemic" i.e. be silent when there is some big international event. If we don't have a premier in a position to make a good impression in the eyes of the world is not the fault of journalists.
We cannot pretend that there is the sun when rain is pouring down. It is not the fault of journalists if Berlusconi has frequent and varied meetings with young women, and the fact is attracting attention in Italy and worldwide. The same thing would happen in any other country, and nobody would think of "putting aside the polemic" i.e. be silent when there is some big international event. If we don't have a premier in a position to make a good impression in the eyes of the world is not the fault of journalists.
In any other democratic country in fact such a premier would have resigned long ago among the furor of the people (and his voters too). In any other democratic country where there are presidents or Kings with a task of constitutional guarantee and of supreme moral authority probably it would have never been allowed the appointment of a premier who controls the information. This obviously is not the fault of Napolitano and even not so much of the previous presidents, because in our constitutional system is virtually impossible for the President of the Republic to oppose the election of a President of the Council. But now that Berlusconi controls most of Italy media does not seem that Napolitano has reason to worry. The vast majority of television news and many newspapers will not do any polemics, they will continue to defend our beloved premier in the face of any evidence or, if necessary, they will hide the evidence. Less polemical than that ..
Francesco Defferrari
{sharethis}
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
































Comments