It sounds like it was an interesting collection of people...Did Morabito have anything to say about the fact that it is only in (very?) recent years that the international press has been more and more amazed at what happens in Italy? He sounds like a fascinating person.

Posted by Rachele on October 23, 2009 - 4:50 PM

Rachele - thanks for asking - I'd start with the obvious consideration that the combination of sex stories, scandals of all sorts, and outrageously un-PC behaviour would have made internationally recognisable the Prime Minister of even the most unknown country, let alone a guy that regularly strolls on the G8 stage.

You should also throw into the mix how it all resonates with the most trite clichés about Italian "machos". Articles confirming the readers' preconceptions are always a sure-fire sell.

For all the most obvious reasons then, journalists are drawn to Berlusconi like bears to honey. How much is Silvio simply playing for that crowd, is anybody's guess.

Finally, this being the United Kingdom, it's of course "no sex please we're english" and all that. There is a long history in this country of selling more papers by taking advantage of salacious stories and made-up indignation, with the underlying goal of being able to write about sex in "family newspapers" (see "Rumour Is Utterly Unfounded" by Jenny Diski, London Review of Books, 8 October 2009).

Posted by Maurizio Morabito on October 24, 2009 - 12:18 AM

It seems to me that the recent scandals on Mr. Berlusconi's private life are not the only reason why foreign media have intensified their interest in Italian affairs.

For a 'guy that regularly strolls on the G8 stage' his behaviour at important international summits has been eccentric; this has resulted in foreign media reporting on the incidents (see "Silvio Berlusconi plays 'cuckoo' prank on Angela Merkel", The Times, November 18, 2008, for example) and posing questions on his conduct. So, while it is true that sex scandals always represent an easy sell for journalists as Mr. Morabito wrote, it is also true that Mr. Berlusconi has lent himself to criticism on other, unrelated circumstances.

Mr. Berlusconi's total refusal to answer the questions posed by La Repubblica has also been pivotal in the various critical articles that have appeared throughout the world. To me the main problem there does not lie with the accidents which prompted the questions, but with the staunch resolution that Mr. Berlusconi showed in rebutting them altogether, arguing that his private life should have no impact on an assessment of his fitness to govern the country. This position is untenable for someone who sent a pamphlet on 'his life' ("Una Storia Italiana") to every Italian family in the eve of the 2001 elections. Furthermore, the sequence of contradicting statements that Berlusconi brought forward in an attempt to avoid too many questions have only exacerbated the interest in this scandal (see "Incoerenze di un caso politico: dieci domande a Berlusconi", La Repubblica, May 15, 2009).

Interest by international media has also been heightened by Mr. Berlusconi's refusal to even contemplate the idea of resigning over such an issue. In fairness, this is an Italian prerogative, as shown by other politicians (of both the left and right). In other countries the situation is a little different: take as an example Jacqui Smith who resigned over the expenses row which brought to light the fact that she had used her official expenses to pay for two adult movies (see "Home secretary Jacqui Smith embarassed by new expenses row", The Guardian, March 29, 2009). True, the main issue in this case is the indiscriminate use of public money, but it is undeniable that the way in which the money was used played a crucial part in her resignation.

Mr. Berlusconi's lawsuits have also helped journalists develop an interest in Italian matters. The recent decision by the constitutional court to declare the latest immunity law (known as Lodo Alfano, taking its name from the Justice Minister Alfano) unconstitutional has sparked fury in the ranks of the government, with Mr. Berlusconi openly accusing the court and the President of the Republic, Mr. Napolitano (see "Berlusconi attacca la corte e Napolitano", Corriere della Sera online, October 7, 2009). The 'curious' case of Mr. Berlusconi has been eagerly followed by foreign journalists as his repeated attempts to put himself above the law have failed.

To me the above reasons indicate that there is a bit more than prudish attitudes in the British public or the myth of the Italian 'macho' in the heightened attention of the foreign media in the Berlusconi era.

Posted by Daniele on October 24, 2009 - 8:25 PM

Maurizio,

thanks for taking the time to reply. Unfortunately I was not thinking just about the UK with my comment - for example, right now I am living in the US and I hear plenty of criticism and people laughing at us here, too, as do friends and family who are in touch with people in other European countries such as Spain and Germany. During the Bush years, people were often embarassed to say they were Americans. I feel the same way now about being Italian - the first reaction is always a comment about our Prime Minister. Italy has many things to be proud about, and Berlusconi is making people forget about the good, and just focus on the bad.

Posted by Rachele on October 26, 2009 - 3:11 PM

The issue shouldn't be reduced to Berlusconi's personal 'foibles' nor to the commercial or cultural aspects of press interest in them, which no doubt exist. More fundamental is the quality of Italian democracy. Of course, discontent or disaffection in the 'advanced industrial democracies' is widespread. But Italy is different. Fifteen years ago its governing elite disintegrated and the political system remains polarised: major political forces deny each others' legitimacy and there is no constitutional consensus. Prime Minister Berlusconi has recnetly reaffirmed his intention to rewrite the constitution, by simple majority vote 'if necessary'.
The cumulation of media and governmental power in contemporary Italy is a particular concern and recently attention has focused on La Repubblica's challenge to Berlusconi to answer 10 questions about his behaviour and his health. The Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard, together with the Joan Shorenstein Centre on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, has just formally cited the editor of La Repubblica for courageously insisting that "government must be accountable to the citizens and that the role of the press is to demand accountability", expressing "the hope and belief that the fight for press freedom in Italy will prevail". The awardees are neither communists, nor prurient sensation seekers.
Regarding Italy's ranking in terms of press freedom. These rankings must be taken with a pinch of salt, but Italy's being ranked as only "partially free" already before 2009, in 2004-06, as identified by Maurizio, was well within the period in which Berlusconi has dominated Italian politics. How did Italy rank/rate before 1994? I don't have access to the data. Do you, Maurizio - or anyone else?
Finally, writing on contemporary Italy's attempts to advance its status and self-interst in the international arena, Chris Hill has just written that its ability to do this depends to a very significant extent on internal reforms, including finding some improvement in the condition of its democracy (Hill, C. 'Politica estera e nevrosi nazionali', Affari internazionali at:
http://www.affarinternazionali.it/articolo.asp?ID=1283

He is not wrong. And many liberals and conservatives, as well as leftists, are of this opionion.

Mark

Posted by Mark Donovan on October 28, 2009 - 11:10 AM

@Daniele: Yes, Berlusconi is not just (in)famous for sex scandals. That's why I mentioned "outrageously un-PC behaviour". To me (as a person with more than a general interest in media studies), Silvio simply looks like the source of incredibly good copy.

This also to reply to Rachele: I am afraid that as things stand now, the journalistic narrative the world over has Berlusconi as a figure of fun, the one example to point at whenever anybody needs to declare themselves "better". Pity the hack that writes outside their paper's narrative!

Also, as a lot of US citizens had to put up with 8 years of relentless "Idiot Dubya" jokes and remarks, I wouldn't worry too much if they feel the urge to pump themselves back up. If in trouble, just say "Monica", "chad" and "pretzel"...didn't they kill Sacco and Vanzetti _exactly_ in spite and because of international pressure to do otherwise?

Why doesn't "media master" and image-conscious Berlusconi do anything about this? Of course we can only guess. Could it be that the Italian society and Government are too close-minded to understand what is happening? Or could it be that international opprobrium may actually be a vote-winner with parts of the Italian electorate, just like the stirring up of nationalistic feelings has always been, even in the strongest democracies?

@Mark Donovan: thank you for the AI lik. As I suggested in Oxford, the Berlusconi/Repubblica story goes back a long way, and every question and every remark has a different meaning when seen within their long "relationship".

In a sense, the "courageous awardees" are indeed "communists" (in Berlusconi's vocabulary, whoever tries to manipulate public opinion with gratuitous accusations againast Berlusconi) and "prurient sensation seekers" (in Berlusconi's vocabulary, whoever tries to make use of sex-related stories to make gratuitous accusations against Berlusconi). Of course there are other ways of looking at that same thing.

Take for example Tony Blair making an announcement about "exporting democracy". A naive onlooker with no knowledge of what happened in 2002-2003 may still take that as a sign of statemanship by a person interested in liberating the peoples of the world.

Everybody else will get a very different meaning and brace for a new war.

Likewise, any Repubblica article about Berlusconi (and any Berlusconi remark about La Repubblica) cannot be fully understood by limiting ourselves to its "face value".

Finally: I'll try to dig the pre-1994 rankings. The problem is compounded by FH changing the scoring rules every once in a while. Anyway, if I remember correctly Italy's press was very free, and indeed it was as it is customary in times of democratic upheavals.

A better comparison IMHO should be done with the freedom of the Italian press in 1984, 1974, 1964. Perhaps there are studies about that, even if there was no FH or RSF ranking being compiled at the time...I would be very surprised if today's situation would not consistently appear as the better one. Look up "Dario Fo" and "Canzonissima" if in doubt.

Posted by Maurizio Morabito on October 28, 2009 - 12:49 PM