"As long as the moralists speculate about what happens under the covers of others, we pry (turandocelo) under them." So writes Victor Felts, director of Il Giornale. You know, Victor Felts, that not all sheets are the same, and those of public figures - Bill Clinton, the Kennedy brothers, down down to Silvio Berlusconi - are much less equal than others?
Anyone who has studied a minimum of information law - and a journalist, was also the editor of Il Giornale, has done it for sure, because you are asking the state exam - know that protection of the right to privacy can not be hard for a politician and severe as it is for an ordinary person. For one simple reason: a politician plays a public role and is called to make decisions vital to the entire community, which can not be polluted by the facts unclear regarding his private life . If among the friends of a politician accustomed to shady characters include traffic unclear - corruption, money laundering, mafia, mafia, etc (add at will, nda) - I should know, and I can not be silenced with the refrain "respects the privacy of President of the Council. " If a politician who holds an important constitutional position is wrong, then this is not to be covered with sensitive data secret is information that citizens need to be, because they have a right to know if the candidate they choose and that they government can take care of the business community. And again: If a politician is publicly Roseanne with the Church, go to Family Day and then sbertuccia homosexuals, in fact, separate a man that goes with hundreds of women and helps in career squandering public resources (it happens when sent to work in when RAI or - even worse - put them on the list for the municipal councils, provincial and regional authorities, the Chamber 's Euro MPs) - I should know. I must know in which conditions working my Prime Minister, as the administering public affairs, and that end is to make money that I pay my fine by paying taxes .
So I do not care if the director of the bishops' newspaper prefers men to women - is clear to me, of course, the hypocrisy, but I do not care now - and I do not care if the director of Republic buy houses in white. What I want is that my Prime Minister - because yes, by God, it is also my - meets at 10, 20, 100 journalists' questions. I deserve a head of government that respects the sovereign people (see Constitution of the Republic, Article 1) respecting first printing.
POSTSCRIPT. If Mr. B. had not addressed the Court against the Republic of 10 questions - guilty, according to him, to defame him - perhaps his henchman attempt to shift the focus more on the cry of "who is without sin cast the first stone" would succeed. But pointing the finger at the 10 questions was able to remind everyone that in over four months of articles, investigations and revelations did not reply to any of the few, simple, legitimate questions that have been placed. In short, he returned to the protagonist. Just can not do it, not to be under the spotlight.
0 comments:
Post a Comment