Italian journalism has long been characterised by a relatively high degree of politicisation. Because of the long-established tradition of party press and because of the intrusiveness of politics in the appointment and promotion of journalists, it is often the case that reporters are associated to a particular political side. Politicians benefit from this as they have a safe microphone for their views. Journalists also gain as they know that they can be compensated for their loyalty when elections give a favourable result. The big loser has been the public, which hardly sees the consolidation of a class of independent umpires whose career only depends on the service done to the readers and viewers.

In recent years, the creation of a “bipolar” system of news has consolidated. As Massimo Giannini, a deputy editor of la Repubblica, told us in an interview, “I am no longer judged for what I write but for the political preferences people think I have. I can write about changes happening in the financial world and someone will immediately write an article discrediting what I say not on the basis of the evidence, but of the political position of my newspaper”. This is part of a more generalised tendency towards a certain relativism, which has consolidated in Italy during the Berlusconi era: what matters is first who says something and, only secondly, what is being said.

Luca Zaia, the popular Northern League Minister for Agriculture and almost certainly future Governor of the Veneto region, wants to institutionalise this bipolarism of journalists. Italian talk shows are traditionally expected to invite politicians from both sides of the political spectrum, while one-to-one interviews often cause outcries for being “obviously biased”. During the run-up to elections, they have to invite members from all the competing parties. Mr Zaia wants to extend this tradition to journalists. “If I invite three left-leaning journalists to a talk show – Mr Zaia said in an interview published on today’s Repubblica - I will have some legitimate opinions. However, they represent the views of only one political culture. To make sure that in a certain program there is the right balance, it is important to ensure the presence of commentators from both political sides”.

This would not be significantly new, as most talk shows already do this, leading to a multiplication of guests which can significantly reduce clarity. However, it is a significant step as it would institutionalise the death of the impartiality of a journalist: by declaring their views before going to a talk show, journalists would now have to take an informal political oath and become an appendix of politics.

Mr Zaia would argue that this is precisely what happens already and that his proposal is only a remedy to an illness. However, as it often happens when one simply accepts a problematic status quo, this takes us one step further from the world of Utopia. This is a world in which there is no need for ten guests to balance each other as there is one journalist who always asks questions and expects answers to be given.