THE CIVIL uneducative - PART ONE - The emotional return to the caves Antonella Randazzo
How
many know, the group does not base its current hegemonic power only on monitoring economic, political and financial, but also create a seriously convoluted reality, which undermines the necessary respect between human beings and the civic sense. It's about creating a climate of "miseducation civil, in which prevails the insult to the dialogue, gossip el'insinuazione on information about the truth.
methods to create this reality are many. For example, for some years has been promoted a policy-performance, based not on valid opinions or content analysis, but sull'impeto to enhance or denigrate the candidates and to capture emotionally. This is made possible by the control over mass media, which act as primary channels for dissemination and acceptance of these methods. As observed by the former editor of The New Yorker, James Wolcott: "The method of Fox News and conservatives is not so much in the statement of its reasons, as nell'infangare both sides, a tie amounts to a victory because it also prevents all ' opponent to win. "
This will create a reality of decay, in which all are held up as greedy, traitorous, disingenuous, false, etc.. It encourages an image of wretched human beings, as if it could exist sincerity, honesty and integrity. The candidates of the current political parties also have the function to propagate questa immagine della realtà umana e della politica. Infatti, tutti i politici promettono “cambiamenti” ma poi tutto rimane come prima (o peggiora), e i cittadini si ricorderanno del fango che durante la campagna elettorale si gettavano gli uni contro gli altri, e si convinceranno che non possa esistere una realtà diversa da quella.
L’effetto sarà quello di scoraggiare il senso di rispetto e di provocare disillusione, frustrazione e alienazione, in un contesto in cui mancheranno le minime regole atte a creare un giusto assetto politico e civile.
Uno dei casi più eclatanti di diseducazione civile è stato quello dell’enorme propaganda che si ebbe riguardo al tradimento sessuale di Bill Clinton, to which the U.S. mass media gave so much emphasis on one theme to create special channels, such as the one titled "All about Monica day and night."
note that Clinton was ever put in the pillory for real crimes, but for a private sexual fact, that was supposed to affect only his wife. Being able to make the accusation of perjury, Clinton was prompted to answer very personal questions, which, for obvious reasons, he could not answer truthfully. He had every right to avoid such questions, because it concerned his duties as president, but only his private life, yet he was raised a sensational court case, and the media gave a lot to do to inflate beyond measure. This is a sign of very serious civil miseducation, which leads one to believe that a political process is legitimate, not for the life that has broken but because he has publicly denied a sexual betrayal.
We must remember that at that time also all our newspapers vied to give news about the Lewinsky affair, ignoring much more serious and important news.
News "trash", is also given by newspapers considered reliable and serious, and dealing in these main pages, create confusion about what should be the true information in regard to trash the media.
The method of the sex scandal has been used several times by the dominant group U.S. to take out people deemed "dangerous" or to intimidate. Even Martin Luther King was spied on for a long time, until they were able to document a sexual betrayal. The scandal broke out, apparently because the character was considered so "dangerous" to induce you to plan a very different treatment. At the time, was the FBI director, the notorious Edgar Hoover to keep a tape which documented the sexual betrayal of the black leader. The fact was revealed only twenty years later (the recording dates back to 1964), in an investigation that documented all the "marketing" made against Martin Luther King. The method
is essentially to control the person to find something that may help to keep it under control, so as to affect its behavior. If there is or could be considered the character too harmful to the system, other techniques will be used or, in some cases, the physical elimination.
From the recent victim was the former governor of New York Eliot Spitzer, who was tested for a long time and finally identified as a frequenter of a ring.
Spitzer has long had a character quite inconvenient for the power elite. He had even taken to court in 2003, the then president of the New York Stock Exchange, Richard Grasso, accusing him of taking money is not owed by a remuneration committee of the New York Stock Exchange, headed by stegocrati on Wall Street. In 2005, Spitzer will be other legal battles against the leaders of Merrill Lynch, the mutual fund, and several large insurance companies. Will also investigate the Carlyle Group and other big banks, like Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Lehman Brothers. Through its investigations, Spizter brought out that the financial system had characteristics "fundamentally corrupt" and demanded urgent "structural reforms". The banks Merrill Lynch and Citigroup were sentenced to pay fines of $ 400 million (illegal profits had more than 15 billion dollars).
Grasso tries to take revenge publicly accused Spitzer of "wanting to do the campaign on his skin," but Spitzer will manage to win elections in 2006. The stegocrati but they had an ace up its sleeve in the use of sex scandal.
When the media gave the news of the "scandal" did not put in evidence the investigation of Spitzer made in previous years, is indigestible to the bankers. Only non-official sources (ie not controlled by bankers) will say that the government had been deliberately removed from the policy because it had become clear threat to the economic and financial system and because he had found evidence che collegavano l'attentato alle Torri Gemelle agli ambienti economici statunitensi di alto livello.
In sintesi, gli scandali sessuali sortiscono l’effetto voluto e dunque risultano utili a proteggere il sistema. Essi nascondono dietro il facile moralismo intrallazzi e crimini ben più gravi.
Senza dubbio, non è un comportamento moralmente irreprensibile tradire la moglie o andare a prostitute, tuttavia, occorre mettere in chiaro che, nonostante le critiche che si possono sollevare, tali comportamenti non sono gravi quanto impoverire i popoli, massacrare bambini, organizzare guerre, torturare o far morire di fame milioni di persone.
Dunque, occorrerebbe capire che sollevare questioni morali per creare uno scandalo e mettere fuori scena chi sta facendo qualcosa per smascherare i criminali, è comunque inaccettabile. Mettendo in piazza i fatti sessuali dei politici, si distoglie l’attenzione da cose ben più gravi, oppure si mette fuori gioco un avversario o un personaggio che cerca di sfuggire alle regole di regime.
I cittadini dovrebbero cercare di capire quando lo scandalo è creato apposta per spodestare chi sta sollevando gli altarini al gruppo di potere, e anziché unirsi al coro che solleva il chiacchiericcio, dovrebbero identificare i veri motivi del fatto. Ovvero occorre andare oltre la cultura di massa e saper vedere quello che i media cercano di nascondere. Ciò risulta difficile perché richiede impegno.
Anche i media italiani spesso Hot news damage to distract the public, diverting attention to particular non-hazardous for the system. For example, from time to time we hear news about the sexual performance of Berlusconi, and there was also the case with the letter insistence of his wife. These reports are emphasized by the major newspapers, as were information, implying that the media have become a spectacle, entertainment, gossip province, rather than serious information.
The current government is a prime example of a major civil miseducation. In it are people who make the "format" low-grade their specialty. For example, there is the minister who in the face of reasonable protests against cuts in school, already sorely tried, says, "are making political use of the school." The "bad", instead of the corrupt ministers, become school teachers and all those who protest and demand respect for human rights. The
phrases, labels, television showing coarse, the provocative gesture, and many other things, are part of the plan devolves to the company, so that it becomes insensitive, ignorant and deaf to his rights.
The insinuation, the phrase and mischievous ways to communicate that would be fine at the bar angle in a chat between customers, they rise to the news, assuming the dignity of "Information". With everything that comes in terms of confusion between what is important to know and what, instead, misinformation and harmful. Create content
quarrels on trivial, distracting attention from those contained dangerous for the system, and leads us to remain with the visceral aspects of life.
also strengthen the policy as a gossip show or used to create paradoxical reality, in which the interests of all events fall into oblivion in favor of hot, betrayal or private facts that nothing got to do with the political tasks.
The method of the staff is now promoted by the system in each field. For example, when many U.S. citizens raised the question of the illegality of their income tax (introduced in 1913 by bankers and tax unconstitutional because no law), the authorities began to slander and insult the people asking to see the law that forced them to pay the fee.
Not knowing how to justify himself, the authorities use methods defamatory, convoluted, which sought to discredit and intimidate the person, so that it was induced to abandon the battle or to lower self-esteem. Those who raised the question could be seen sticking labels like "tassifascisti" or "fanatics" that were intended to shift attention to the "character" people to avoid the real issue. Taking the issue to become "emotional", which is based on absurd behavior, like hitting the individual, we wanted to escape from addressing the issue rationally.
These same methods are used against those who raise issues threatening the regime. For instance, actor Charlie Sheen in 2006, said on television that the official September 11 was absurd and was reviewed by a truly independent commission. The actor was prepared that would be adopted techniques to infamy, rather than responding rationally to the concerns raised, and said: "I love my country and my children so much to do that. " After a while the news media began reporting that they put him in a bad light, and it seemed like every bad thing was due to him. He was labeled as a "clown" and accused of being arrogant. For fear of persecution many famous people (actors, politicians or journalists) do not raise doubts even on important issues such as war and terrorism.
The problem is that many people are not aware of the use of media disinformation and negative educational impact and how important issues can be covered up or not adequately considered through techniques and methods practiced widely. This "ignorance" makes these methods are effective, and trasforma una persona coraggiosa e onesta in una vittima del sistema mediatico. Questo funge da deterrente per coloro che vorrebbero denunciare i crimini delle autorità.
L’uso delle parole come etichette è molto efficace per impedire ulteriori approfondimenti o per denigrare una persona o un gruppo. Ad esempio i prefissi “anti” o “contro” creano un senso di negatività e dunque vengono utilizzati spesso per indicare persone o gruppi che cercano di far emergere i crimini del sistema. Troviamo la parola “antiamericano”, “controinformazione”, “antiglobalizzazione”,
Le etichette servono anche a dare l’impressione di aver capito tutto e di non aver need to deepen. The words used as labels have enormous power of propaganda, and can not say anything to besmirch the victim. Scholars point out Anthony R. Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson, "The words we use and the labels that come to define and create our social world. This definition of reality directs our thoughts, our feelings and our imagination, and thus influence our behavior. "(1)
According to many experts, an effective persuasion technique is to circulate and to recover from Average false opponent. Sometimes these are allegations made by the "projective technique", that accuses the other of things that actually about their own candidate. For example, during the last campaign of Bush junior, the operators sought to portray John Kerry as unwilling to fight for their country, while Bush was in fact to have escaped even the military.
Another example of "projective technique" is the accusation made to Iran of wanting to wage a nuclear war, when in fact the authorities of the State of Israel, backed by Washington, to prepare a nuclear war, adding to their already large arsenal of other nuclear warheads. It accuses the one who wants to put the game out of wanting to do what is in fact designed by those who accuse.
Even in politics "petty" si può ricorrere all’accusa proiettiva, lanciando accuse che in realtà riguardano l’accusatore.
Chi ha maggiore potere mediatico ha più potere di infamare o mettere in cattiva luce chi ne ha meno o non ne ha. Questo spiega perché i gruppi minoritari o dissidenti, come le associazioni per i diritti umani o i no-global appaiono negativamente a chi non ha approfondito le questioni trattate da queste persone, mentre le “forze dell’ordine” o le autorità che si sono macchiate di delitti come la repressione e la partecipazione a guerre in paesi esteri appaiono come autorevoli.
Oggi non esistono media di massa che possano esprimere il punto di vista della dissidenza o di chi contrasta l’attuale sistema denouncing the crimes. From this it can be inferred by the media who appear best and worst people, regardless of the actual crimes or merits.
In other words, even if there is freedom of the press and opinion, if one has control over the ownership of television networks and many newspapers and the other has nothing, freedom is an advantage only to those with media power and the other, in fact, it is as if he had not.
The media could be used in a positive way, for example, by proposing models prosocial and constructive, but this can not happen today because this is not convenient to those in power. A system based on war and oppression do not può insegnare empatia, solidarietà e condivisione ma potenzierà la violenza e i modelli antisociali per impedire empatia e fiducia nella soluzione pacifica dei conflitti. Attraverso i programmi televisivi si potenzia il razzismo, l’aggressività e la diffidenza sociale.
Un altro metodo per infamare le persone è quello di attribuire loro caratteristiche del sistema stesso, come la “censura”, la disinformazione, la faziosità o l’avidità. I gatekeepers del sistema talvolta creano confusione fra “moderazione” e “censura” facendo apparire la prima uguale alla seconda. Ma la differenza fra i due concetti è molto netta: mentre la moderazione serve a tenere “pulito” the site from the garbage of insults or post irrelevant, the complaint is intended to keep hidden some hot topics that the system has an interest in not treated. For example, on sites and Grillo Travaglio are censored topics as seigniorage or crimes of the State of Israel, which will never be excluded from the independent blogs, but moderate. In other words, the complaint can be recognized because it affects the content is not acceptable to the power group. Moderation is to protect the site (or blog) while the complaint is to protect the system. Confusing the two concepts is typical of the gatekeeper, and put paid to do it all with the same brush, in order to hide the heavy censorship implemented by the power group.
Under the current system who thinks with his head projectively is accused of being "ideological" or "politics" of being "biased" or to be paid by someone. Viviane Forrester says the writer: "There is more subversive activities. Most feared ... more vilified (the mere fact) to think ... From here the fight insidious, more effective, conducted today, as never before, against the thought. Against the ability to think. "(2)
Another way to discredit the system for malicious content or groped to devalue what is said in a totally independent and isolated from power, is to leave Comments on videos posted on YouTube or on sites that host such content. Usually, these comments can be recognized because they aim at destabilizing emotional means, without posing a serious criticism.
For example, these people usually write, "This person is a charlatan," without explaining why, or accuse the person of the same things that it is denounced. If you are denouncing Freemasonry is accused of being a Mason, if she reports the media is accused of being a dishonest uninformed, if you are denunciado censorship is accused of attacking, if she reports the illegal gains is accused of being paid by someone, etc..
Obviously, the allegations are not supported by facts, meaningful analysis or criticism, and this is what characterizes the "sniper", whose task is to belittle, mock and discredit the truths that circulate on the Internet.
This is made possible by anonymity and the "game" of multiple identities of the Internet. In fact, they can register with a pseudonym or false name and to acquire many identities can act in a disturbing, ambiguous or misleading, to prevent confusion and reveal the truth about what is being discussed.
Certainly, not all emotional and senseless comments are made by those who are hired by the regime, but only a part. This attention to discredit what circulates on the Internet against the system does not seem strange when you consider what those who dominate today are interested in controlling the minds of citizens, and how much they spend to keep out of reach for most people some knowledge.
gatekeepers of defamatory comments may appear "normal" because we are used by the "culture" of mass irrational behavior, emotional and foolish.
In a sense, the Internet also expressed equally strong among those who have power and who does not have it. In fact, the average speed you can not interact and leave comments and criticism, while on the Internet, the only place where ordinary citizens can write, the system can write through his "henchmen" in disparaging and despising those who dishonestly seek only to bring out the truth not told by the mass media.
The main purpose is to isolate those who are exhibiting freedom of thought, to prevent others to do the same, bringing down a system that is based on the "massification" or the inability to think for themselves.
As often in the media, these people intend to sow suspicion, division and distrust of those who have the sole intention to distance himself from a criminal system, and to gain strength to improve themselves. Who wants to besmirch
using fraudulent methods usually makes use of drama, acting as if he had important news on his victim. He will leverage the fact that, in mass societies, people are accustomed to these methods and usually they fall into traps as not to fall would be free from the conditioning media and try to think independently and to verify directly, without using labels or believe easy to insinuations.
Who's integrity and honesty in assessing people and events should, in view of these cases, asking "why all this fuss is raised against this person?", "What is the reason why this person may be 'uncomfortable? "" Who has an interest in this person is put in a bad light? "," the accusations are real or manufactured "to oc?
Another way to control and deny free thought is to bring factions, in order to stimulate a choice that will affect the dogmatic thinking or behavior. We are told by the media regime that no longer exist ideologies, yet we are compelled to negotiate or to take sides for one and another. Thus many are induced to make irrational choices, for example, if the right does not associate itself with the initiatives promoted by the left, and vice versa. The aim is to sow divisions irrational, even on important subjects that will be profitable for everyone. E 'enough say that an initiative or a battle is "right" to drive away those who call themselves "left" and vice versa, without thinking themselves about what is being proposed in order to decide rationally rather than dictated by forces.
now much in the news space is devoted to his interviews with politicians, and very little to the real issues would be discussed. The questions are posed in "The left and right say this argues that", as if in real life could not exist a path in favor of all and had to divert attention on contrasts rather than on routes that could improve the country. For example, now many have noticed the power granted by banks to determine economic growth or decline, and that an important issue for economic growth is the supply of energy. So, the real politicians should discuss ways to revolutionize the financial industry and seek new sources of renewable energy and low cost. If current politicians do not is because they are in the service of the bankers and big oil companies and economic, which would lose power if you were to call into question the current financial and energy parameters. Consequently, techniques are used to confuse the uncivilized people, and to believe that politics is an area "dirty", which does not There are more than quarrels, intrigues, slanders, evil and controversy.
In this context we speak of "ideology of the news" to mean "a pervasive feature of the communication so overwhelmed by the distinction between the popular press and print quality." (3)
A typical mechanism of the ideology of the news is "dictatorship of the desk", or a rigid preconceived mold that provides the basic technical and expressive adopted by journalists. The dictatorship of the desk was created to propaganda and commercial needs, which require the production of an effect, which can range from convincing the viewer that a particular country or person is "the enemy", to persuade that technological objects new are fascinating and necessary. Ideology of the news there is a need to influence the viewer, to exert emotional pressure on him a strong, effective, so that he learns from the outside what must be considered with regard to a fact or a crime. To achieve this you can also make use of "gatekeeping" or some logical criteria and a piece of news that will benefit and will hide another. The gatekeeping
exclude what might reveal unpleasant aspects of the system or in a bad light on the party system or power, on which the current regime. In this context, of course, takes a backseat to the need to give correct information or news on an actual importanti, per questo motivo oggi l'informazione non può dirsi tale. Addirittura non ci sarebbe più bisogno degli inviati, come spiega il giornalista Enrico Morresi:
"Molto spesso i corrispondenti o gli inviati si autocensurano per poter continuare a lavorare in condizioni difficili... La rinuncia all'inviato (o al corrispondente) non è mai senza conseguenze, in quanto sposta il punto di equilibrio dalla parte del desk, lasciando prevalere il gioco di specchi in cui la redazione spesso si rinchiude e impedendo di spezzare il cerchio delle idee preconcette".(4)
Grazie a queste caratteristiche il giornalismo attuale è un "guardiano del potere", ovvero sostiene il potere nel non far trapelare verità scomode e using techniques to prevent a real awareness of citizens about the financial reality, political, economic and media. It even tries to soften this by becoming an information show attractive, exciting or creepy, but always emotionally "strong", and spectacular as possible. The main objectives are disinformation, distraction and the conditioning necessary to integrate the system. Explain the journalist Ignacio Ramonet: (The news) "is designed to distract, not inform ... the succession of headlines and fragmented has a dual effect of sovrinformazione and disinformation: too much information and too short ... I think I learn without effort close to the myth of the illusion that more publicity for civic engagement. "(5)
addition to defame, to keep the system must" sell "fear, and therefore there are also sellers of fear, or those who see the future catastrophic, full of problems, and do not offer anything out of this situation, as if the catastrophe was inevitable and there was no specific charge. Through the fear condition occurs in the system, making believe that the current authorities want to protect the population.
Fear is also used to make us feel insecure and suspicious, to come to believe that our neighbor is an enemy, only because he professes another religion or a another color of skin. Submit, through the media, immigrants as murderers, rapists and thieves is to create a "Wild West" where all are enemies of all, without understanding the causes of or the motivations of our authorities to make us racists. Other methods of civil
involution are those that leverage on guilt. It is believed that the political disasters, environmental and financial responsibilities are for everyone, but instead were created by a group of power, and the sole responsibility of the people is to ignore that and believe that it could not overthrow the current power unfairly.
The system aims to elicit emotional responses through the projection of criminal offenses relating to the administration of power. The media, often in an indirect way, they tend to blame all, with such titles as "Italians are last in Europe", "Italy behind in Europe," The EU accuses Italy ... ".
We are given information on the state of pollution, degradation and economic decline, as if this were the sole responsibility of the Italians. Of course, this propaganda does not say that our country is militarily occupied by the hegemonic power, and is forced to a gradual depletion of the power of a group of bankers, which require the recognition of a value to pieces of paper on which printing symbols and numbers. Not are told that the characters who populate the media are subject to the system, and misrepresent the reality of making us believe that our torturers are respectable. It is not said that for years our country has industries that have led to serious environmental degradation and which today are left without clean up the environment and without giving adequate compensation to victims.
The method of guilt to believe that the troubles of a country depend exclusively from the operations of its citizens, covering up the power of a group of people because of their level of wealth have resulted in problems which we try to assign responsibility others.
Having achieved a high power and political control of the media, gli stegocrati fanno in modo che non appaiano le loro responsabilità per i crimini commessi.
I problemi da loro creati appaiono senza alcun responsabile, oppure sembra che la responsabilità debba essere di tutti. I media talvolta parlano dei problemi ambientali come dovuti alla "responsabilità dell'essere umano". Ma in realtà nessuno di noi ha scelto liberamente di creare un sistema basato quasi esclusivamente sulle energie inquinanti e nessuno di noi ha mai creato industrie chimiche altamente inquinanti e mortifere. Allora chi è stato? I media faranno in modo che tutti si sentano responsabili e intimamente in colpa per ciò che di negativo succede, e i veri responsabili vengono tenuti nascosti.
I nostri stessi carnefici, attraverso i media cercano di abbassare l’autostima degli italiani, potenziando il senso di impotenza. Osservano Anthony R. Pratkanis e Elliot Aronson: “Una volta sopraffatti dalla colpa, i nostri pensieri e il nostro comportamento sono finalizzati a sbarazzarci di tale sentimento. Il risultato finale è, nel caso migliore, la manipolazione del nostro comportamento e, nel caso peggiore, un danno permanente alla stima che abbiamo per noi stessi o persino la perdita della nostra libertà”.(6)
La diseducazione civile e le diverse tecniche di spettacolarizzazione della sofferenza mirano a generare cinismo e indifferenza.
La pseudo-cultura di massa ha interesse ad alimentare cinismo e indifferenza verso la sofferenza. Quando c’è frustration and anger due to the many evil aspects of the system, the media make sure they are irrationally directed towards the most vulnerable (the poor, Roma, immigrants, etc..), which have no political power and media to defend himself.
Since the current group in power wants to produce a degree of suffering and fear, he also takes care to indicate the scapegoats against whom they rushed to their victims. To create this reality should produce moral degradation, ignorance and distance between people, which thus is not perceived as such, but as potential enemies. Paradoxically, the victims of the system are directed against each other, keeping well hidden reasons for the injustices and their perpetrators.
The media context, therefore, produces not only fear but also racism, and sometimes indifference and cynicism.
Many scholars have found that in cases of overexposure or information where the information given stimulate the acceptance of very serious criminal acts, persons in order to maintain psychological balance, begin to feed the indifference and sometimes even cynicism. Note the writer Viviane Forrester:
"Indifference is fierce. It is the most active part, undoubtedly the most powerful ... is, indeed, the indifference that allows the massive adhesions in certain regimes, if they know the consequences Careless ... ... disinterest, lack of observation obtained without a doubt strategies through quiet, tough, that have slowly crept their Trojans and they knew so well based on what they spread - the lack of any supervision -... So efficient that the political landscape, economic, could change the skin under the eyes of everyone without having awakened the attention, much less anxiety ... The new planetary scheme was able to invade and dominate our lives without being considered, if not by the economic powers that wanted to ... The very meaning of any protest has been emptied ... our passivity leaves us prisoners in the mesh of a policy network that covers the global landscape in full. "(7)
Or there is the suffering to show. The emotional experiences of people become spectacle, the woman who has an abortion because they do not have a job, the man in the wheelchair, the terminally ill, the woman who suffers violence, and so on. become TV personalities, thus achieving two important goals who controls the TV: to save the money they would ask the television professionals and attract the audience emotionally. Furthermore, bringing in the TV unemployed or precarious serves to obscure the fact that institutions exist to protect the rights of citizens, and should not be necessary to go on TV to inspire compassion in order to be helped.
usurp the power of public institutions also means this: bring up the rights dei cittadini come “optional”, e fare in modo che essi vadano a piangere disperati in TV, piuttosto che rivendicarli con la giusta protesta e ribellione.
Fanno parte della diseducazione civile anche quelle trasmissioni televisive che mirano a seminare dubbi e a non informare correttamente. Ad esempio, programmi Rai come “Cominciamo bene” o “L’Italia sul due” spesso trattano argomenti come la contraffazione alimentare o il caro vita. Tuttavia, le questioni vengono trattate in modo non corretto: ad esempio viene formulata la domanda “I cibi che compriamo sono genuini?” ponendo la questione in modo “aperto”. In altre parole, non si fa capire che almeno l’80% degli alimenti venduti nei supermercati contiene sostanze potenzialmente nocive, e si lascia nel dubbio per evitare che le persone capiscano come stanno veramente le cose. In queste trasmissioni non appare mai nessun responsabile dei problemi, e sembra che anche la realtà più paradossale debba essere considerata ambivalente e, tutto sommato, da accettare. Questo accade perché i nostri media non sono a servizio dei cittadini, ma hanno la funzione di proteggere il sistema e di tutelare gli interessi delle grandi corporation e delle banche.
(CONTINUA – PARTE SECONDA)
Copyright © 2008 - all rights reserved.
