This year's Reuters Memorial Lecture, organised in collaboration with the research network Italian Studies at Oxford, was given by Carlo De Benedetti, one of the most interesting characters in the world of Italian media. Trained as an engineer, De Benedetti has been a successful entrepreneur, with interests in the IT, energy and publishing sectors. A man whose ideas have typically been on the left of the political spectrum, De Benedetti has been a fierce opposer of Silvio Berlusconi. The two engaged in some important takeover battles throughout the 1980s, which are still hotly debated both within and outside of tribunals' courts. 

The lecture received substantial attention, and this was hardly surprising. Although De Benedetti's ideas on the relation between media and democracy in Italy are far from being unknown, the occasions on which he speaks so openly about them are rare. His lecture offered an extremely interesting synthesis of his thought on the future of media in Italy and on the future of the Italian democracy. In the second half of the lecture, De Benedetti was not afraid of bringing these two topics together, outlining in a lucid way the reasons behind the criticisms him and his group have moved to the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi. 

This was perhaps the most engaging part of his talk, the one the audience displayed the greatest interest for. To De Benedetti the Italian case is anomalous for at least two reasons. The first one is structural: in Italy "46.5% of the population [...] have exposure to a single media instrument on which they depend for all items of information and opinions on public affair", while Italy is also "the only democratic country in the world where a single individual [...] to all extent and purposes dominates the national television universe". It is the combination of these two factors, De Benedetti argued, to make the Italian case worrying

The second reason is more connected to the events of the latest few weeks. The attacks moved by Berlusconi on La Repubblica, which, he then clarified, are of commercial and psychological nature and therefore very different from the ones which take place in Putin's Russia, made by the Prime Minister's TV and newspapers have "never happened before in the Western World". Because of these attacks, De Benedetti argued, journalists may be limited in the free exercise of their criticism.

To De Benedetti, the response to this anomaly should come from the opposition but, as he made clear in the question time, the opposition has been particularly weak. The fact that the Prodi government did not pass a law on the conflict of interests was for him "incomprehensible". In the absence of this opposition, his newspaper and their "certain idea of Italy", he said quoting Piero Gobetti, were natually seen as a reference point for anyone opposing Berlusconi. This happened although they certainly do not want to become a party. 

The importance attached to role of the newspaper, however, is something which De Benedetti does not see as applying only to Italy. The chairman of Repubblica is convinced that there are few better ways to make citizens "illuminated", i.e. people who are aware precisely because they are informed. The internet, De Benedetti argued, is where one should find what happened, while the newspaper should provide why it happened. 

This last argument proved to be the most controversial. Prof. Timothy Garton Ash, one of the discussants of De Benedetti's talk, said that he did not think this distinction applied so strongly. He could not see why the internet should not allow one to understand why things have happened. It is the serendipity of turning the pages of one's newspaper, more than anything else, to constitute its uniqueness. 

Uniqueness was also a theme emphasised by Paolo Mancini, the other discussant in the panel. To Mancini, Berlusconi is certainly unique, but, at the same time, should be put in the contexts of both the history of the Italian media and of the new relation between media and democracy which is developing in the world. 

The contributions of the two scholars, and the insightful questions asked by the audience, completed an evening which was uniquely engaging. De Benedetti is a man of one side of the political spectrum and his views should be complemented with the ones coming from the other part. However, they remain a fundamental starting point for anyone interested in understanding the relation between media and democracy in Italy and, indeed, in the rest of the world.