Sen. PDL Alessio Butti, a member of the Supervisory Committee Rai, has the thankless task of being the speaker of that ' note address on pluralism Rai that already has sparked much controversy. In the previous draft version of the much coveted by the PDL, presented a month and a half ago, had exposed Butti the famous proposal block a week for each topic on a talk-show, so that if for example on Monday would address the Vespa Rubygate others to do so could have been Floris but not the next day but the following Tuesday . The new wording of the measure yesterday that Butterfield has developed and presented specifically designed to correct the pitch after the controversy DISCOUNT rained from all sides and after the incredulous question marks that the proposal has received on how it intends to ensure freedom and pluralism of 'information Rai. The problem however is that to go beyond the one-week study than those of the PDL have devised a system even more surreal: explaining the draft, the senator said Butti with an explicit reference and directed that the wave always go on Tuesdays and Thursdays in primetime in his view constitutes an annuity in favor of some wires (Floris and Santoro, if you need to specify ..). Thus, according to Butterfield and the philosophy of the address, as report Republic, to avoid the occurrence " a clear dominance by some media workers than other ", Rai should " experiment with the opening of other information spaces assigned to other conductors, to be placed on the same days at the same time on same networks and with the same existing resources according to a balanced alternating weekly . "In essence be born talk-show a number plate, so as he described the MP Fli Flavia Perina. Apart from the total and ill-concealed bad faith of those who explicitly refers to Santoro and Floris forgetting the equally biased and Minzolini Vespa - the latter a very serious case of bias and violation of pluralism as it leads a talk show but not a news show, one of the flagship network - can not but raise doubts atrocious the many absurdities inherent in such an outlandish idea: for example, who will license the "political" to the various journalists-conductors? That who will decide who is right and who's left? And on what basis ? And if a journalist is the third largest those who came to oppose the next week? And who will draw the border with which they will determine which programs will be subject to such rules and what not?
Assuming that by chance you find the answers to these questions, it is clear that if such a rule was never approved and came into force in our public service broadcaster, we would be faced with a unique case in the world. A real joke that would betray the only child "revenge" against the part of berluscones public service on which does not yet were able to put their hands. Those programs as their adverse effects. So obviously biased - yes, because there is little to say about the fact that they are partisan. Both factions that make you assume the role of the opposition that the opposition does not. The conductors which are clearly of the left, or simply antiberlusconiani post-communist until death. Yes partisan. But clearly, and without pretending to be the institutional voice, tank, equidistant and correct information of the public service. I'm not sure Annozero, Report and Ballarò who betray the viewers, whose money would be allocated to the fee according to some an excuse for a level playing field surgical is to betray them before all Tg1 by amplifying the trend of almost all the national news , and as documented Agcom the same, so that evoked a level playing field in the last two and a half years did not hardly ever met. And not just . But this is not relevant , and the long-awaited act of pluralism will not affect in any way address the mechanisms so well oiled machine minzoliniana.
The act instead in any way and must absolutely rule the iron rule obtuse fifty-fifty when we talk about politics and not just opinions occur, a rule that is supposed to represent and guarantee all the Italians who are charged fee, but that does not really reflect the obtuse stubbornness with which the party is the step in making arrabbatta glad his master - which in this period obviously some rubbish in primetime just do not go down - and especially that of the subdivision would produce the heaviest history of Rai, who also has lived in several fierce subdivisions or subdivision of the listings. She had never come about.
Among other things, whether the standard talk show run alternating came into force in Rai, in assigning spaces to run equally among political forces, priority status as a discriminating policy guidance of conductor to his skill, ability , experience. And in doing so, thus organizing the schedules, it would eventually sink quickly some of the most successful programs (listening and thus advertising revenue) Rai, contributing to that process of destruction of the Viale Mazzini already in place for some time. Yeah, because in the end the remote have it still in the hands of viewers, who prefer a more genuinely subversive quality to a fair mediocrity or a bias imposed by law, for example ..... I wonder how many plays would Annozero Santoro led by a Thursday and a Comparison Annozero conducted by another on Thursday.
And beyond that the remote control, always Italians have a more mouse to find out, indeed, to find a quality of information up to its expectations. The act of pluralism weblog address on PDL would then only to direct users elsewhere, and Rai to the ultimate failure, following a subdivision of the voices and opinions whose spirit is absolutely opposed to that enjoyed in the flash of genuine common sense flashed like a bolt from the blue in the final evening of Sanremo, thanks to the sudden outburst of Luca Bizzarri, perhaps he and his colleague of the victim's heavy atmosphere that hangs on public television, and masked by a politically correct and obtusely surgically bipartisan, so as to become suspicious (in clips from minute 01:10).
0 comments:
Post a Comment