Viva Zapatero! Page #2

---

People always find controversy.

l must not have explained myself...

Many people criticize your ''SlC'',

integrated communication system.

Let's use Coca-Cola as an example.

Coca-Cola has a dominant position

among carbonated drinks.

So does orange soda.

Orange soda

isn't in a dominant position.

To stop Coca-Cola

from being dominant,

l extend the definition ''drink''

to all liquids

like whiskey, river water,

sea water and ocean water.

Then l say:

''Look at all the water in the world !''

Coca-Cola is no longer

the dominant liquid.

But that's a trick.

But it's also a shame.

l like Coca-Cola as it is.

l don't want river

or sea or ocean water in it.

Coke is good as it is.

Why add other things to it ?

A message to all channels.

While travelling and meeting

many other important people

throughout the global world,

l've been told that in ltaly,

mass media

is in the hands of a single person.

l want you to know,

we're looking and we will find him.

The public was enthusiastic,

viewing figures skyrocketed.

None of the following episodes

was ever aired.

RaiOT SHUT DOWN, lT'S WAR

SABlNA HAS BEEN CANCELLED

How can satire be outlawed

in the year 2000 ?

lt goes against Article 21

of our constitution,

against international law

and the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights.

How can something be censored

despite the people's protests ?

Here's a practical example

of conflict of interest.

RAl needs an excuse

to cancel the programme.

Mediaset, Berlusconi's corporation,

gives them one

announcing

a million euro lawsuit.

RAl's government-appointed managers

suspend the show

even before reading the lawsuit,

claiming to protect the station

from damages.

The 2003 RAl Board of Directors

is made up of

an executive officer, Cattaneo,

with ties to a post-fascist party

and also a friend of

the Berlusconi family,

four advisors chosen by

Berlusconi's administration

and a president chosen

by the opposition

among a list of names

the majority felt cozy with...

Every member of the Board,

including the president, Annunziata,

signed the motion suspending

''RAlot'' forever.

Why didn't you say you can't cancel

the show ? This is a democracy.

But we also had to find a way...

You would have been cancelled...

- Why ?

- Because it was four against one.

But there's no legal basis !

You made me look cross-eyed,

speak dialect and count for f***-all.

Your opinion of me

isn't going to change !

So, l haven't made myself clear !

As president of RAl

it's my duty to say:

no more satire

unless it's rigorously fenced in.

l'm president and l was chosen

by both the Left and the Right.

l don't count for anything

but l see fences clearly.

We need fences,

they must be established intuitively.

l studied a long time in America and

there's a professional who establishes

fences, the Double Watcher.

Sadly, in ltaly,

we have to get by using intuition.

But we can do it.

One's freedom ends where

the freedom of others starts.

There are about five billion others.

With one fence per person,

that means five billion fences.

lf you can't establish them, it means

you don't have the sensitivity

to work in a public office.

The American language has a lovely

word for fence:
''Guantanamo''.

The debate was

brought to parliament,

to the Watchdog Commission, over

which Berlusconi has a huge majority.

As far as ''RAlot'' is concerned,

there was no censorship

because there was no satire.

What we saw on RAl 3

was a long series of insults

to the prime minister,

to the majority

that supports him in parliament,

and the companies he's set up.

Therefore, it's RAl's duty

to safeguard itself

from the legal consequences

of what it airs.

Guzzanti was wrong

to stage a political rally

and not the satire

for which she was paid.

She's an actress.

Guzzanti should be satisfied

just being a clown, an actress.

lf she wants to change jobs

and join parliament,

there's plenty of room.

And l must say that the average

intelligence of ltalian MPs is such

that she would undoubtedly

be a great success.

Maybe that should be

off the record.

Too late.

Who has the institutional power

to prevent such an abuse of power ?

The president of

the Watchdog Commission.

He could go with his commission

to the ltalian President, Ciampi,

and the leaders of the Chambers

and say ''A law has been broken.

Something must be done.''

But Petruccioli,

chosen by the opposition

among a list of names the majority

felt cozy with, did nothing.

That's not true.

Many things happened with ''RAlot''.

We intervened

and forced the executives

and Board of Directors...

to publicly deal with the problem.

The problem is much more general.

l would call it a misinterpretation

of satire in ltaly.

News isn't meant

to be reported by jokers,

but by reporters.

And if reporters fail to do it

correctly and thoroughly,

we can't just put comedians

on TV to do it.

That's the problem we have to face

if we want to work out this matter.

Petruccioli's opinion

is included in Mediaset's court case

along with opinions of critics

from the major ltalian newspapers.

''Censuring satire

is inconceivable,

but 'RAlot' isn't satire.''

According to Mediaset's attorneys,

satire should make politicians

appear more human,

more appealing and

relieve social tensions.

ln no way whatsoever

is satire given the right

to contribute to public opinion.

This means that ''satire mustn't

and cannot make people think''.

l was told:

''There's a difference between satire

and making fun.

People often get confused

between what satire is

and simply

making fun of someone.

Making fun of someone

is ridiculing their mishaps.

For example, someone tripping,

an old lady falling,

messing up words,

someone eating too much,

someone grabbing a girl's bum,

someone being obnoxious, etc.

What isn't satire, is making fun.''

What's the criteria for saying

something's not satire ?

You can't just say it's insulting.

Well, it has to be funny.

- lt was very funny.

- lf it makes you cry...

- Satire can be bitter too.

- At least make one smile.

lt did.

At least include something humorous !

- lt was !

- Yes, it was !

But what's your point ?

News reporters

must accept the rules of reporting.

Satirists must accept

the rules of satire.

What are these ''rules of satire'' ?

lt's not a matter of rules,

it's the kind of show you did.

Why are you talking about rules ?

Dario Fo says it's satire,

everyone says it's satire,

satirists and professors

who teach it say it is.

Satire without information

doesn't make sense.

You can't have political satire

without presenting facts.

Aristophanes incorporated

political rallies in his comedies.

And they were called ''parabases''.

The best of the chorus

was the ''choryphaeus''

and he'd step away from the chorus,

get in the front row

so everyone could see

and say:
''l now talk to the city''.

He'd say anything he wanted

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes