(of M. D'Elia) Francesco Specchia di Libero made an interesting editorial on the affair involving the proposal of Undersecretary M5S Vito Crimi to want to abolish the order of journalists with a decree between September and October. Crimi announced that the institution considered useless by decree could be abolished, because it is a "body inadequate to the changes and dynamism of a rapidly evolving profession". The abolition of the Order, specchia di Libero points out, is a fixation of the M5S, and even before that of the Radicals who tried it in '97, without ever reaching the necessary quorum. The Grillini, on the other hand, attempted its repeal for the first time in 2013, through the signatures of 53 senators; but the project was unsuccessful due to the Inpgi legislation (that of the Institute of Welfare of Journalists) and that of the Mise publishing department. The point of view is different and acceptable. That the Italian publishing needs a refreshed nobody would have any veto. But abolishing a system established in 1963 whose task is the "function of supervision and protection of the work of members" is another question. As evidenced, rightly, Specchia, what has ruined the order is the management of internal affairs, often approximate and dictated by sentiment. But this is the story of all the Italian bodies and associations, so let's close them all if this should be the ratio. The fact is that, if a reporter makes a mistake, in addition to his own conscience he is subject, like everyone, to the penal code and the civil code. The Order, established only in 1963 with the so-called “Gonella law”, therefore stands as a parallel body to the judicial one. Then it seems "just" to have an organ that records the professionals of the profession and that guides their training and updating. It would be detrimental to information not to have a Register containing who can practice the profession, or who is "entitled" to be able to follow and write with "formal and intellectual honesty" facts and events to be reported to public opinion. Access to and registration with the Order of Journalists is not easy and obvious. In addition to having "ab initio" the "clean" criminal record, it is necessary to have attended training courses, passed exams or have written about 100 "paid" articles in newspapers for at least two years. In short, a sort of minimal "selection". If in 1963 there was the need to establish the Order, today more than ever, perhaps revisiting some internal norms, it is a moral obligation to have a reference to "certify" print professionals. In a world where fake news are intertwined with right & real news, public opinion often "bewildered" must have the right and at least the veiled illusion that there is a professional behind the article. Beyond the guarantee of the newspaper, knowing that there is an organ that "skims" the plethora of improvised columnists is a minimal need to preserve.
What happens in other countries?
In Sweden everyone has the card (if they prove to write in the newspapers), in the United Kingdom there is absolute liberalism on the profession and in the United States there are the shield laws, the shield laws that defend the single reporter (accredited as such by his newspaper) , in France the situation changes. There, the carte de presse, the card, is assigned by a government body (even worse!); and in Ireland the whole profession passes through a very powerful self-regulatory body. While in Switzerland there is a war of press cards between three different trade unions that produce them at prices - read: competitive membership fees.
So reforms to improve are welcome, but abolishing the order would be a wrong for many professionals and especially for the Italians. Maybe then a Rosseau method would also come out for the "press", a method that has a certain sense for political adhesion but would fail for information. Crimi, think again…!
If this is the principle that makes sense to have the newspapers registered in the Court? A simple Blog would be enough.