Post by velloOn Feb 3, 12:52 pm, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
Post by Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.Post by velloPost by The Black MonkPost by velloPost by The Black MonkWhile there is much talk of post-Soviet Russia adopting a Chinese
model, it is probably more likely to adopt a more civilized Japanese
political model which allows for much more individual rights. Japan
if you recall, despite having free elections has basically been
governed by the same political party for 50 years, which is interwoven
with a handful of huge industrial conglomorates beholden to the state.
regards,
BM
how much I know "Japanese model" is democracy with no "power party",
"national leader", "national Japanese democracy" and other things.
Yes, one party dominated there for a long time but no records they
keep power by controlling media and manipulating law and justice. And
just in 2009 they lost their position pretty democratically collecting
less votes then opposition so today's Japanese govt and prime are for
another party.
By Freedom index, despite not in top group, Japan is on row with
Italy, Latvia and Greece, so no doubt it is democratic. Japan is/was
not governed by some "father of Nation" but by Japanese people.
So if Russia follows the Japanese model, in 40 years it will have a
government other than that of United Russia or whatever version Putin
and his heirs create, and will then be as democratic as Greece or
Italy.
no way I'm professional about political system of Japan, but how much
I know there was no "strongman" in Japan after ww2 or later, no govt
controlled media, "governors" set by govt, not elected locally etc
etc. With "help" of US they got a modern democratic constitution after
ww2 and it is arguable was Japan 40 years ago less democratic then
today. So for Russia taking "Japan way" would mean end with the power
of mikado (and some gas shoguns) and start with the pover of people.
Vello, I know that your own media has brainwashed you into thinking
that Putin's control over the top three Russian TV networks is
something that can never happen in any democratic country, but
certainly Italy under the rule of President Berlusconi is much worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_Italy
Most-viewed channels
The Auditel measures television ratings in Italy. The channels with a
viewing share of >= 1.0% according to Auditel's measurements in
September 2008 are: [14]
Rai Uno 21.80%
Canale 5 20.33%
Rai Due 10.60%
Italia 1 10.83%
Rai Tre 9.07%
Rete 4 8.28%
Rai Uno, Rai Due and Rai Tre belong to the government directly.
Canale 5 is an Italian private television network of Mediaset, the
media branch of Fininvest. Fininvest is a financial holding company
controlled by Silvio Berlusconi's family and managed by Silvio
Berlusconi's oldest daughter Marina Berlusconi.
Italia 1 is an Italian commercial television station on the Mediaset
network, the media branch of Fininvest. Fininvest is a financial
holding company controlled by Silvio Berlusconi's family and managed
by Silvio Berlusconi's oldest daughter Marina Berlusconi. It is
oriented especially at young people.
Rete 4 (pronounced Retequattro) is an Italian television station
belonging to the Mediaset network, the media branch of Fininvest.
Fininvest is a financial holding company controlled by Silvio
Berlusconi's family and managed by Silvio Berlusconi's oldest daughter
Marina Berlusconi.. It is an Italian private commercial TV channel.
In fact, there is only one private network in Italy not owned by
Silvio Berlusconi - La7 - and it is miniscule, owning only a 3.08%
market share.
Any questions?
Karla, I replied without reading deeply into your post - do you count
state channels as Berlusconi ones? They don't belong to any particular
party but to Italy as whole. Rai Uno is expecially critical on
Berlusconi coz Berlusconi's Canale 5 is Rai Uno's first competition.
Of course. Just as the top Russian channels don't belong to any
particular party but to Russia as whole. :-)
Only boobs, brainwashed by the Western mass media, don't know that
Italy doesn't have a free press, and has less freedom of the press
than more than 70 other countries, including Namibia and, btw, S.
Korea.
Even Nauru, the tiny South pacific country famous for recently
recognising S. Ossetian independence, has much more freedom of the
press than Italy.
Berlusconi controls 90% of all Italian national TV media, which is
more than Putin's control of Russian media.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040927133724/http://www.ifj-europe.org/default.asp?index=2451&Language=EN
European Federation of Journalists
Journalists In New Protest as Berlusconi’s Grip on Italian Media
Becomes A Stranglehold
30/04/2004
The International Federation of Journalists today accused Italian
legislators of sacrificing pluralism and democracy to strengthen Prime
Minister Silvio Berlusconi's hold over the media.
“This decision further reinforces Mr Berlusconi's control over 90% of
television – in the private and public sector,” said White. “Even
worse, it permits him to acquire more newspapers and radio stations
and strengthens his grip on the country’s media landscape.”
Berlusconi owns three private television stations and exercises
considerable influence over the state broadcaster. He also has assets
in the publishing industry and controls newspapers. “Now the man who
is already Italy's biggest media magnate will be able to increase his
monopoly,” said White.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi
Influence on the media
Berlusconi's extensive control over the media has been widely
criticised by both analysts[59] and press freedom organisations, who
allege Italy's media has limited freedom of expression. The Freedom of
the Press 2004 Global Survey, an annual study issued by the American
organization Freedom House, downgraded Italy's ranking from 'Free' to
'Partly Free' [60] due to Berlusconi's influence over RAI, a ranking
which, in "Western Europe" was shared only with Turkey (as of
2005[update]). Reporters Without Borders states that in 2004, "The
conflict of interests involving prime minister Silvio Berlusconi and
his vast media empire was still not resolved and continued to threaten
news diversity".[61] In April 2004, the International Federation of
Journalists joined the criticism, objecting to the passage of a law
vetoed by Carlo Azeglio Ciampi in 2003, which critics believe is
designed to protect Berlusconi's reported 90% control of the Italian
national media.[62]
Berlusconi's influence over RAI became evident when in Sofia, Bulgaria
he expressed his views on journalists Enzo Biagi and Michele Santoro,
[63] and comedian Daniele Luttazzi. Berlusconi said that they "use
television as a criminal means of communication". They lost their jobs
as a result.[64]
This statement was called by critics "Editto Bulgaro". English
translation: "They use Biagi - what's the name of the other one?
Santoro, but the other one... Luttazzi - have made of public
television, paid with everyone's money, is criminal. I believe that it
is a precise duty of the new management [of RAI] to prevent this from
happening again."
http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=7850
Videocracy' ads can't air on Italy state TV
2009 09 03
From: google.com
Thursday, Aug. 27, 2009.
Italy's state broadcaster RAI has refused to air ads promoting
"Videocracy," a Swedish documentary examining the influence of
television on Italian culture over the last 30 years, because it says
the spots are an offense to Premier Silvio Berlusconi.