The episode of the 28 April of the broadcast of Hyenas of "Italia Uno" is much awaited in the squares of Italian navy ships, while in ground controls military and civilian personnel look forward to the interview. After the stormy recent media accusations, there is a desire to know the truth from Admiral De Giorgi's voice, but this did not go because of the cuts made by the editorial staff. Storm on the Navy? Shaken waters for the ship of the Chief of the Navy? The weather report, thanks to the work recently carried out by the Navy and its Commander, indicated calm sea and wind in its sails. But then who blows and stirs the waters? A crow? A mole? A time bomb?
Let's analyze how the facts went within the service broadcast by Italy one. At stake is an anonymous dossier sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office, to the newspapers and also to the editorial offices of the Hyenas in order to unleash a media lynching instead of a sound investigation aimed at the truth-based news. Or not? The role of the press is sometimes not always transparent. Are these crazy expenses that the Admiral De Giorgi would have incurred regarding canapés, almonds and champagne? Let's start from a general assumption let us ask ourselves if every authority, manager, entrepreneur, when he is called to celebrate an anniversary or an invitation between the duty of ceremonial and of etiquette must present the guests with food appropriate to the occasion. Or since we are in periods of economic restriction, four olives and a sandwich with mortadella are fine? This is already the first absurdity sustained by the media accusations and the first offense against the person and the position of Chief of Staff of the Navy which until proven guilty has the right to carry out an activity of representation adequate to the grade and the assignment, on penalty of its de-legitimization in the life of a relationship. But does this accusation question what people want to understand, that the Navy and its Chief are wasting alcoholic beverages and snacks? What is certain is that an essential component of the armed forces like the Navy also has its moments of conviviality and gratification when it brings to completion the demanding operations, even with some canapés two almonds and a little champagne.
The Navy was offended in its image of Armed Forces . The information has been diverted to give public opinion the image of a Chief of Staff dedicated to the good life and so with him all the armed force. Dealing with this topic of alleged waste of small conviviality expenses is offensive and misleading, making us believe that the military is wasting time in the kitchen, packing a picture of Admiral De Giorgi aboard a ship, which consumes wine, in support of the report. and appetizers while it is a seafaring custom to celebrate at the end of a good exercise.
The interview focuses on the design changes requested by the Am. De Giorgi at Fincantieri for some structural modifications considered essential for the liveability of the crew and the functionality of the ship, thanks to his experience that he contains numerous successes known to the national and international press but hidden in this service.
If Admiral De Giorgi had something to hide, would he have accepted the interview? The serenity of those who know they are at peace with their conscience, however, is a state that does not interest those who have to make an scoop designed to demolish the objective at all costs. The hyena in the interview aims to underline how the modifications of the ships under construction were reserved only to the canteen squares, contradicting then, when a sheet of the documents of which it is in possession is framed that clearly shows how the variants concern also the whole crew ( revision and change of squares and canteens). Does this mean that if a variant was made during construction, the need put in place by De Giorgi was really necessary? First and foremost, the Chief of Staff is responsible for the fleet and its men and also for the ways in which to arrange the vessels for conducting operations that are required for national and international security. From this responsibility ex lege also the possibility to technically intervene in the design if the benefits that lead to a better use of the naval vehicle that we do not forget is the house where the crew lives and works for long periods of life between sky and sea and where there are so many the components to be evaluated which, preserving and not compromising the well-being of the personnel, can then give efficiency to the unit in operational activity. This is a technical question that cannot be discussed in this way without knowing the implications of the person in charge. If changes could be made beforehand to save, it is a discourse addressed without considering the time span of design and the diversity of technical views of the various Chiefs of Staff that have followed. If today we realize that a technical or organizational innovation can improve the finished product that we do not make it? The risk is that we must accept a ship that is not updated or has organizational compromises that negatively affect the crew if they are not eliminated. In this case the entire investment is affected by technical obsolescence or organizational inefficiencies or inadequate human liveability, even before the contract is completed, thus reducing the market value of the ships compared to that actually paid by the State. And "pantalone", the tax payer, so he would have paid for a product that is worth less than his contribution! Who knows, perhaps if the hyenas had studied more they could also think that this waste has preserved the actual value of the ship and also finally improved the efficiency of the man / ship system, as it is an innovative and improving investment. What is certain is that the 14 million euros paid for 10 frigates, Admiral De Giorgi did not throw them into the sea because thanks to this expense today FREMM Frigates are a product of Italian shipbuilding of quality and excellence thanks to these changes and for this reason it is attractive in the world market of military ships.
The interview continues insistently pointing the finger at Admiral De Giorgi for having ordered Fincantieri to intervene even before the administrative procedures were approved. But if so had the hyenas been invited to enter the Navy command to do their job? It is very clear that the technical cuts on the video made by the hyena editors have artificially eliminated other contents, so as to make the interviewee appear in difficulty, motivating that in the end there was a confusion precisely because it is clear that what admiral claimed he was also misled here: "you must read the whole document"! Deepening a piece of news for a serious investigative journalist is like music to his ears, but this was not the case for hyenas thirsty for fragmented, incomplete and piloted news. For this reason it is better that these delicate subjects are dealt with with due skill and ethics and in this case it is better to let them lead to the competent judicial offices.
The inconsistency represented by the interview on the figure of the Navy Chief of Staff is absurd is untenable. The high official spent himself in the reorganization of the FA in a particular period of economic crisis, substantially reducing military expenses, implementing solutions of various kinds, including the autonomous maintenance of the infrastructures carried out in economy with substantial savings on the state budget, leaving unchanged the satisfaction of the technical need. It would be absurd if it were to waste public money in contrast with the policy adopted.
Hyenas repeatedly try to admit Admiral De Giorgi their truth, countering closed concepts of admission of guilt, as if to extort a confession on the basis of an internal document that outside the complete administrative context is illegible and insignificant, wanting to prove office abuse at all costs. But this is not the place, nor is the modus adopted in the interview professional going to heavily collide on the deontological and responsibility aspects of the journalistic profession, noting its social role as well. We are talking about the Italian Navy, national and international security actors who work incessantly at sea in multiple operational theaters. Not only Admiral De Giorgi with his role as Chief of the Navy is being brought up, but the whole Armed Force and the image of the country with the aggravating circumstance that in this last period the work done by the Navy A military man who has gained international acclaim now runs the risk of being denigrated by skirmishes put through by cannon shots. What is affected are the Navy soldiers, their work done in the service of the country, and not only, because even the workers of the yards who saved their daily bread would have to complain. The naval law as a whole has had an essential relevance for the national economy. Its consistency in terms of quantity and quality of new naval units, the required financial commitment and the involvement of Italian shipbuilding have made it a unique experience for our country and for international economic relations.
"But in the end why do we have to think about money spent and unspent money? We do as we normally do. Fuck it": So the hyena addressed to the leader of the Navy is thrown to the attack. And in the video appears the image of the admiral who toasts on board a naval unit and then even more offensively the image of the" Golden Nugget"(An American casino) literally" The golden nugget ", symbol of waste and good life. But it's not over. In a media context where De Giorgi is bombed and accused of being a lover of almonds and champagne as if they were a forbidden fruit, here is the lowest scene that takes on a provocative and offensive character: the interviewer offers a bottle and some almonds. The trap worked!
The media attitude is generally inadmissible. Doctrine and jurisprudence are in agreement: the notion of honor indicates the moral qualities of the person that concur to constitute the social value of the individual; while for prestige it must instead be understood that particular form of decorum pertaining to the dignity and respect from which the public function must be surrounded. But the most important element is the offense of others' reputation. Reputation is the evaluation that the public makes of the value of the individual and therefore the esteem that this enjoys among the associates: offending the reputation therefore means damaging the good opinion that a subject has created in others. Reputation includes all the qualities that contribute to determining the social value of a person. Furthermore, it is not possible to force oneself to admit one's truth when the interlocutor has the right to defend oneself and to support his thesis, which can be dismantled only with hand-written evidence read and interpreted by those who understand it in the subject under examination.
Without a shred of certain, objective and irrefutable evidence, you cannot shoot at zero. The evil injustice of the century that enveloped even the world of television cannot continue to prosper by sowing falsehoods, misrepresentations and machinations that leave innocent and misinformed on the ground. Hyenas from tearers of shred truths or artificially constructed false truths could end up torn to pieces by their own actions.
Valerio Arditi
