There have been a number of stories recently - and some polling evidence - concerning Walter Veltroni’s leadership of the PD. I wouldn’t like to give an all-encompassing judgement, but he’s a short quote to show that on his favourite topics - cinema and communications - he was bang on the money. Speaking of Rai in a 1985 interview, he talks about
“the division of the telegiornali. Perhaps in the past it corresponded to a need for pluralism. But what sense does it have today? And how much does it cost? I’m not talking about abolishing Tg1, Tg2 and Tg3. But there are thirteen different bulletins which go on air more or less at the same time, and with the same news items. Why not differentiate them? Why not aim for greater specialization? By creating unitsdedicated to sport, or investigations, or local news, Rai would be acting like a real news group.
“la divisione dei Tg. Forse ha corrisposto, in passato, ad un bisogno di pluralismo. Ma oggi che senso ha? E quanto costa? Non dico di abolire il Tg1, il Tg2 e il Tg3. Ma di fatto ci sono tredici edizioni di telegiornali che vanno in onda più o meno tutte alla stessa ora, e tutte con lo stesso pacchetto di notizie. Perchè non differenziarli? Perchè non puntare alla specializzazione? Creare cioè settori dedicati allo sport, o alle inchieste, all’ informazione locale. Così si comporterebbe come un vero gruppo editoriale.” (IL PCI MINACCIA DI ABBANDONARE LA COMMISSIONE DI VIGILANZA RAI, Repubblica — 15 agosto 1985, p. 2)
This same suggestion - a single news team - has recently been suggested by Veltroni’s party colleague, Claudio Petruccioli. If the division of the TG did not correspond to a need for pluralism in 1985, how much less must it be worth now?
Comments 1
Probably pluralism is best protected by lowering barriers to entry in the TV industry. So, one would expect the PD to put pressure on Mr. Berlusconi to liberalize the market, instead of suggesting to reduce the number of existing bulletins.
Posted 02 Jun 2008 at 1259 ¶Post a Comment