Santoro and surrounding areas. The information in Newfoundland I take the cue offered by the never ending story between the leadership of Michele Santoro and RAI to reflect aloud on the information on television. Very topical subject, in fact a real evergreen that recurs in a serial shift regardless of the journalist: Luttazzi, Santoro or Biagi, it does not matter.
I admit my guilt, before proceeding further, saying that it is not an avid viewer of television dedicated lounges and in-depth information. Television, media and frequent often for work that motivated and sincere interest, I prefer other genres. I confess, moreover, does not believe in 'good' and 'bad' journalism, in this easy and very misleading dichotomy. Rather I believe in 'good' and 'bad' faith Who does it really journalism. Also, try to remember that informing means 'shape' and that even if there are facts are facts and the interpretations of the reconstructions offered to give shape and substance to journalism, whether on TV, the web or in print.
Having said this, one can easily observe that for some time information on TV has become more 'spectacular', a new form of entertainment very often violent: not by chance you go by the name of structuring a new kind of curious infotainment , that blends information and entertainment. The fights, screams, insults, even the barrel (as many silences guilty), are there for all to see and do not need to be commented. I agree with those, Santoro included, believe that journalism on television is degraded (and degrading): spectacle and spectacular, in fact, have taken the place of argument and deepening, have replaced the word slogans (often aggressive and violent).
I feel, however, added that, as the Gospel tells us, "cast the first stone who is without sin."
I also remember that some years ago, the political scientist Giovanni Sartori Florentine in his famous book ( Homo Videns , Laterza, 1997) ha fortemente sostenuto la tesi che la televisione sta distruggendo la nostra capacità critica e di giudizio affermando che, all’ homo sapiens , quello in grado di riflettere, rielaborare e quindi comprendere le cose del mondo, si sta sostituendo l’ homo videns : una nuova specie legata alle immagini e quindi alla superficie (e conseguentemente alla superficialità) nonché alla scarsa capacità di rielaborazione critica.
Forse la televisione, nonostante le sempre più frequenti edizioni dei telegiornali, le più or not having programs and discussed in-depth, from Annozero a Porta a Porta, through Report, Matrix, the Infidel, and OTTOEMEZZO Earth (and all others who do not remember or do not know), it is the best place for the 'information and especially for the study. But luckily, as we know, television is not the only medium in which this information, nor the most influential.
But let us return to Santoro. From his pulpit cathode, among many things said during his last live TV trying to defend the quality of public service, said: "You [the audience, and that potentially we All] You have the right not to see your brains reduced to one television jam "in reference to other programs and other broadcasts. Great applause followed this announcement.
Something in that sentence I was deeply disturbed. The word 'right' (always used in an instrumental) offered me an opportunity to review the 'thing' is often forgotten that the service contract, and that the contract is signed between the Ministry of Economic Development and RAI. A substantial text which speaks, among other things, what should be the guiding principles of journalism (at least in public) including 'Objectivity, integrity, impartiality and fairness of information "(draft three-year period 2010-2012). Many of the viewers are the rights enshrined in that text. Absent a responsibility as ours, that of the public. Responsibility exercised in different forms that is the real guarantee of freedom of information.
So I'm reminded of another injury, an ancient and deeply rooted in the world of Italian intellectuals. To say always, at all costs, even without knowing that television 'sucks', and that the television audience is not able to understand things by myself. "If you're with me, you will have the information and investigation, against me prepared to become jam. "
violence seems to me this beautiful and good. I can also biased and not very respectful of his audience (someone should remind himself to be a television journalist!)
So I suggest to those who are lost between the various disciplinary actions, suspensions, arbitration and internal appeals to the ordinary courts, those who are rebuilding this matter step by step, the declaration after declaration, we have another fundamental right. That, trivially, to turn off the TV or change channels. An inherent right related to the responsibilities of our viewers, the people, to free men and women, the face of those who, on the one side, still want to tell us what we think.
FC
