On Sunday 4 December it aired on public TV, an unworthy and indecent show. In our opinion, the mark has been crossed with a communication that we believe detrimental not only to the dignity of many citizens, but harmful to the RAI company itself and to the category, already quite deflated, of journalists in general.
Sand there will be no distance from this type of verbal violence, the risk of seeing such unfortunate events repeat themselves will grow and, in our opinion, will also risk generating future possible moments of social tension, as well as sanctioning a clear drift, by of an Institution of the State, of acceptance and promulgation of verbal aggression as well as of the use of anti-democratic and violent ideas aimed at part of the Italian population.
Please watch the video below and if you deem it appropriate, join us in asking for explanations from both the RAI President Marcello Foa and the President of the National Council of Journalists Carlo Verna. You can copy the text you find below or attach the press release that you will find at the bottom of the article and send everything to the following emails:
To the kind attention of the RAI President Marcello Foa and the President of the National Council of the Order of Journalists Carlo Verna
We hereby publicly denounce an event that occurred on the RAI networks that we consider worthy of your attention.
Sunday 4 December, during the episode ½ hour more (half an hour more) 1 conducted by the journalist Lucia Annunziata, heavy words were uttered which, in our opinion, are unworthy of public TV.
We premise that we do not want to enter here into the merits of the discussion on mandatory vaccination, but on the use of precise terminology used by a host who is an employee / collaborator of the television public service.
Specifically, about 1 hour and 11 minutes from the start of the broadcast, the Annunziata asked the coordinator of the Scientific Technical Committee, Dr. Agostino Miozzo a question, on the possibility in case of poor adherence to the Covid19 vaccination campaign, that placed an obligation on the vaccine. We literally quote the words of the presenter: "The crafty vaccine will be even worse than the crafty mask ... I think that sooner or later the state will have to decide to take people by the neck and have them vaccinated ". Miozzo replies: "If there should be an obligation, it could be for high-risk categories such as healthcare workers. For others, like a simple pensioner, the conviction is worth more than the obligation". The Annunziata, probably dissatisfied with the answer and perhaps considering it too soft, has increased the dose by closing with a "It starts with the campaign and ends with the obligation".
Please pay particular attention to the use of words; on the intrinsic semantics in storytelling intentionally and forcibly instilled by the presenter since, we remind ourselves, we are faced with a public service controlled by the State - and in fact mandatory and charged to bills - in a time slot open to a large public and which suggests and incites violence towards those who can pose legitimate doubts about a medical practice. We are truly baffled by this.
We want to remind the code of ethics that the RAI company reserves for its stakeholders,2 which in the introduction summarizes the priority objectives, namely the recognition of state TV information "a high quality level of information programming characterized by a European and international vision, by pluralism, by completeness, from impartiality, from objectivity, from respect for human dignity, from professional ethics, from the guarantee of adequate, effective and fair adversarial procedures in order to guarantee information, learning and development of the critical, civil and ethical sense of the national community, in compliance with the right / duty to report, the truth of the facts and the right of citizens to be informed.
Here we focus on the lack of respect for human dignity by reminding those who read us that Article 32 of the Italian Constitution provides that:3 "The Republic protects health as a fundamental right of the individual and in the interest of the community, and guarantees free medical care to the indigent".
Nobody can be obliged to a specific health treatment except by law. The law cannot in any case violate the limits imposed by respect for the human person".
Compliance with all current primary and secondary regulations is always part of the RAI code of ethics, also applied in the case of "violence, threats, publication of defamatory or discriminatory content, and more hate speech, denial, minimization, approval or justification of genocide or other crimes against humanity, dissemination of child pornography or false content, terrorist propaganda, cyberbullying, infringement of the rights of third parties, etc."
Just by focusing onhate speech, according to the recommendations of the Council of Europe in 1997,4 those "expressions that spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other forms of threat based on intolerance, discrimination and on hostility towards minors, migrants and people of foreign origin ”. Regardless of the forms taken and the legal significance (possible "hate crimes") of the hate speech, the present case recognizes its gravity precisely for the medium on which it was broadcast.
We believe that the event that has occurred is harmful not only to the dignity of many citizens, but harmful to the RAI company itself and to the already fairly deflated category of journalists in general: if we do not distance ourselves from this type of verbal violence, the risk of seeing such unfortunate events repeat themselves will grow and, in our opinion, will also risk generating future possible moments of social tension, as well as sanctioning a clear drift, by of a State Institution, of acceptance and promulgation of verbal aggression as well as of the use of anti-democratic and violent ideas aimed at part of the Italian population.
With best regards