Newsgroup: it.media.tv
Titolo: [OT] "Britain isn't Italy... yet"

http://observer.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,877619,00.html
BRITAIN ISN'T ITALY... YET 
We love the food, fashion and football, but are we ready for
Italian-style politics? 
Nick Cohen
Sunday January 19, 2003
The Observer 
A 'good story' in media slang is always bad news for someone. But it
needs more than misery. It must have elements of the bizarre and the
threatening, along with a connection to popular stereotypes, before 'it
has legs', as we hacks say. On these criteria, the reign of Il Cavalière,
Silvio Berlusconi, is the best story in Europe. He is undoubtedly bad
news for Italy. The Italian Prime Minister is also a frighteningly
bizarre figure. He controls virtually all the nation's television
channels which, in 1984 fashion, feed the proles with a mixture of
soft-porn and fantastically biased 'news'. His private media power has
brought him public power as Prime Minister. He looms over his country
like a grinning colossus. 'It's impossible to move without inadvertently
coming up against his influence,' writes Tobias Jones in his new account
of life in Italy. 'If you watch football matches, or television, try to
buy a house or a book or newspaper, rent a video or else simply shop in a
supermarket, the chances are you're somehow filling the coffers of Il
Cavalière (last estimated to be worth $14 billion).' 
The private affluence combines with public squalor. Berlusconi's
government insisted on what is known as the 'Cirami Law', which allows
the accused to object to an examining magistrate on the grounds that the
judge has a political bias. No sooner was it passed than Berlusconi
invoked its provisions against a magistrate in Milan hearing allegations
of corruption against him. The judicial system must be added to Jones's
list of the Berlusconi-saturated corners of what used to be called
Italian culture. 
As for connections to popular stereotypes, 1984 isn't the only reference
on offer. The combination of the moronic hedonism of his channels and the
patronage a solid majority in the Italian parliament delivers suggests an
Italy where The Truman Show meets The Godfather. 
The subliminal threat that it 'could happen to you' is the final
ingredient in every good story, from the lurid accounts of the careers of
serial killers to coverage of al-Qaeda outrages. Berlusconi's tale does
evoke a faint feeling that Britain is becoming over-influenced by Italian
fashions. I have to be careful because whenever they are faced with the
latest accusation of money-for-favours or cronyism, conventional pundits
bellow 'Britain isn't Italy', while displaying no stomach for the fight
to keep it that way. In one sense Britain is worse than Italy. Mr Mittal
gave money to New Labour. Tony Blair then lobbied the Romanian government
on behalf of Mr Mittal's steel company, which employed virtually no
Britons, paid no tax in Britain and was lobbying the American government
to keep British steel out of the United States. At least in Italy such an
interesting sequences of facts arouses considerably more independent
examination. 
Berlusconi has given an amnesty to tax evaders who hide their loot in
offshore tax havens. A clear majority of the millionaire donors to New
Labour and the Tories lawfully use tax havens to avoid tax, ensuring that
the British working and middle classes pay their tax bills for them. 
Anyone who doubts the Italianate style in modern British politics should
consider that Blair and Berlusconi embraced each other as brothers and
are allies in the common struggle against workers' rights in Europe. It
was as if Clement Attlee had hugged Benito Mussolini. 
Italian socialists were flabbergasted. But in Britain, Blair's warm
handshakes with Berlusconi marked him as a moral degenerate only among
the remnants of the Left - and they kind of knew that before. When Jörg
Haider won a small share of power in Austria and did nothing of note, the
European Union had the vapours and imposed sanctions. When
'post-fascists' took power in Italy along with a leader who threatened
the independence of the judiciary and opposition voices in the state
television channels he had not, until that moment, been able to boss
about, few cared. The Berlusconi story was legless. 
The conventional leftish explanation would be that the media are
controlled by fantastically rich men who aren't going to throw their
hands up in horror when another fantastically rich man turns Italy into a
corporate state. Such easy knowingness doesn't work because the best and
bravest accounts of the state of Italy have been published by the
Economist and Financial Times, neither of which will be insulted if I say
that they are not averse to stroking the careworn brows of executives. 
A better answer is that British journalists are tasting a little of the
fear of their Italian colleagues. If, like Robert Maxwell, you acquire a
reputation for always meeting critical stories with a writ, the British
media often back off. Even if journalists believe a piece is impeccably
sourced, lawyers warn about the enormous costs of an action and editors
wonder if the satisfaction of vindication is worth the risk. 
The chilling effect sets in. Just before the 2001 Italian election, the
Economist printed details of all the allegations of corruption against
Berlusconi and urged Italians not to support him. Berlusconi sued in the
Italian courts. Now London wigs flutter when his name is mentioned. Bill
Emmott, the editor of the Economist, explained that however sordid the
record of the British libel courts has been in giving solace to the likes
of Maxwell and Jeffrey Archer, at least British newspapers understand the
system. They don't have to pay for foreign lawyers and translations. A
libel action in a foreign jurisdiction is far more frightening because
the risk is all but unquantifiable. 
The chill has lasted for almost two years and shows no sign of thawing.
Berlusconi sued the Economist in 2001 and no one knows when the facts of
the case will have their first airing in a preliminary hearing. 
I'm not saying that the British media has been scared into complete
silence. The Observer and the Independent reported the latest allegations
that Berlusconi had links to the Mafia. Jones's work has been widely
noticed - it's reviewed on our book pages today. Rather there is an
incentive to hold back from a full description of Berlusconi's shameless
rule. 
Jones has noticed it. He's heard of two reviews which have been held back
by the lawyers. Virginia Ripa di Meana, an Italian libel lawyer, told me
that the few Italian publishers and broadcasters Berlusconi doesn't own
are bombarded with demands for damages. One recent book from a small
Italian left-wing publisher, on the early days of Forza Italia, received
eight and its publisher is wondering if his business can survive.
'Berlusconi doesn't need the money, of course,' she explained. 'It's just
he sees libel as, you know, a deterrent.' 
-- 
Trascritto da Lapalissiano
Icq 57269703


Egregio ... hai tutte le ragioni, ma fa' uno sforzo per quelli come me che
(e sono tanti) non capiscono le sfumature all'inglese. Un giorno o l'altro
per ripicca vi posto ''Tifoon'' di Conrad!
Salutoni
E. Delacroix
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://usenet.libero.it