Big scandal. Again. Even the newspaper that bites its tail, yet again, debate about the form rather than substance.
of political mistakes, the demonstration in Rome against the laws of shame, I see that not only document the "offenses" against Carfagna, or at least not all. Because she is the odffesa, deliberate, conscious and burning, against all those who may have thought that it was entitled to a serious government. What then is whether the concubine Berlusconi does not matter. What is certain is that it is a living symbol of the unequal opportunities and that is why it occupies that place.
do not need to quote Dante to know that a pope can 'go to hell. Matter of opinion. And they are all valid, since it is a fantasy world. I think any pope, to his death becomes Santa Claus. For the rest
outrage in journalism and, of course, politics, would have no reason to exist in a normal world. They all pretend not to understand, because they know that readers do not understand seriously and will follow the analysis of elevated columnists. To say that Napolitano does his duty, when signing a racist law that contradicts the constitution is not to criticize the authority of the office. On the contrary. E 'claim that a man who is impersonating the office do its duty, namely, that honors the institution entrusted to him. And to think that slumbers, call Morpheus, is a delicacy, not bad language. To think otherwise is to think exactly like Berlusconi, which the Democratic Party proves that you can do very well: it means that man Napolitano, once in charge, can be judged by his being there and not for what he does.
I am convinced they know it all, even the public who write angry editorials against bad language. But everyone has to defend its interests, of course, if you attack as natural, and Berlusconi who, shamefully, has allowed his political success, one can not 'claim to have good press. As you can not 'claim, in Italy, that the press respect their readers or their intelligence. Maybe because they realized, after years of marketing that their intelligence is limited and you can 'talk only two emotions, the low instinct (Il Foglio, a newspaper) or the meek bigotry (Republic, Courier), preferably mixed ( free).
Guzzanti, Grillo Travaglio, in ascending order of ability, have understood perfectly. Not reached the general public - which is not that of the square yesterday - in the media world of the Great and Maria de Filippi Brother, that for these two channels. Excluded for ideological reasons, cultural and communication medium bigotry and respectability, are the instincts. The laughter, the jargon of every day (I am convinced that even a columnist for the Courier is shocked to hear the word "bird", was also one of our Premier, in everyday conversation), based on charges, but not always proven explained, as the medium, with comic timing, does not allow digressions too large, otherwise the lack of interest of an audience, let's face it, very least.
Berlusconi does the same thing. In a winning way, supported by the media because, as we know: when he speaks to the fear, the instinct of preservation and identity, to small interests, with topics less tested and which ones of the most trivial of any "comedian", his message, & to be multiplied in thousands of images, summaries, even critical, however, fail to use the channel to which the instinct its telenovelas, its reality, its trash 80 years we have become accustomed.
If the only way to speak to the masses is by instinct, to criticize those who do so in an equal and opposite to Berlusconi is a contradiction. We have absorbed its ways for years, with taxes paid abbbiamo he soubrettes, the League and the fascists. But when it comes to using its resources against him, (and to a much finer and more informed) no, it's bad language, is public outrage.
E ', in other words, bigotry. The last resort of a left stammering and without ideas. Which, by history, skills and voters, is not even able to use this medium. A pale right. The bad couple of abortion.
Accept that this is the level of communication is, for me, a defeat, because it is obvious that some distinctions are absorbed in the simplification that would lead to ridicule and, consequently, for the attention. But it is a defeat for some time already consumed. And after that in Italy the Roma camps have burned, mourning for this loss should be consumed. The retreat into the ivory tower, turning the Cayman or write treatises on political philosophy will not prevent others from using the most effective means for their own ends. If you do not want to use them ourselves, at least not criticize those who do it for a good cause and a successful public that "we" can never have.
PS. The only sensible comment on the issue found ch eho:
http://temi.repubblica.it/micromega-online/gianni-vattimo-scandalizzato-dallo-scandalo-audio/
0 comments:
Post a Comment