SUMMER SCANDAL REVISITED:
IT WAS ALL UNFOUNDED
Sandro Magister rightly calls attention on his blog to this development - which is huge, in terms of what it says about how even a reputable newspaper editor has no second thoughts about playing unscrupulously to bring down a fellow editor, and three months later, he now says it was all a mistake and the victim was really not what he had made him out to be! I wonder how the rest of the Italian media will treat this!
Feltri bows to Boffo
and says he was given
false documents
Translated from
Dec. 4, 2009
Left, Vittorio Feltri; right, Dino Boffo.
More than three months since his attack on Dino Boffo and
Avvenire, the editor of
Il Giornale, Vittorio Feltri, has revisited the issue and says that for him, "The case is now closed".
Closed with his verification that the charges he levelled against Boffo last September were false.
Feltri writes that he "had a chance to see" the procedural documents about the court case that involved the former editor of Avvenire {forced to resign several days after the scandal provoked by Feltri's front-page charges against him]. And that "from these documents, Dino Boffo is not implicated in any homosexual incidents' nor is he referred to as 'homosexual'.
Consequently, Feltri yields the honors to Boffo both for being a 'prestigious and appreciated' journalist and for the "sober and dignified' attitude he took. Boffo, he says, "can only inspire admiration".
There is more, in Feltri's retraction [in the form of an answer to a woman reader who asks about the episode].
In effect, he says he looked into the charges made against Boffo not before he published his headline-grabbing accusations last August, but only afterwards, much later.
And claims that he published the accusatory documents he did, which he later verified to be false - only because they were "delivered by a reliable informant, one above suspicion".
Feltri does not give specifics. But the documents given to him were exactly the same that had been sent earlier that summer by mail, anonymously, to some 200 Italian bishops and prominent Italian Catholics.
It is thought they come from Catholic elements who were against Boffo, and who finally hit the mark, thanks to Feltri.
Well, Feltri's 'above suspicion' source can hardly crow now.
Marco Tarquinio has been named the new editor of
Avvenire, and Dino Boffo's real friends could not have wished for anyone better.
While Feltri remains at
Giornale nursing poisonous thoughts about the informant who misled him.
[He should have known better!]
Here is the text of Feltri's note from Page 1 of
Giornale today, Dec. 4, 2009, preceded by the reader's letter that gave him the occasion to make this retraction:
The case is closed:
On Boffo, I have had
a chance to see...
Translated from
Dec. 4, 2009
Dear Editor,
I read in your paper some considerations about Dino Boffo, the editor of Avvenire who resigned after having been implicated in a complicated episode of molestation.
I must say that I have always wondered why such a trivial matter became so huge as to cause a media fracas far beyond what it deserved.
As the one who lit the fuse, what do you have to say about this from a distance of three months?
Eva Cambra
Dear Madame,
When we published the news, which was not really new (it had already been revealed by Panorama although with little evidence), we were aware that it would not pass unnoticed. Not for the substance in itself, which is insignificant from the penal angle, but for its political effect.
It was a time of media pyrotechnics over the presumed amorous excesses of (Prime Minister) Berlusconi. La Repubblica, in particular, had daily reports about his female escorts and bedroom gossip. The so-called political debate had given way to gossip used as a weapon against the Prime Minister, on TV as well as in the national and international press.
Even Avvenire, usually calm and reflective, yielded to the temptation of setting off a couple of fireworks itself. Nothing exceptional, even, but given the source, the effect resonated.
Notwithstanding, I personally would not have concerned myself about Dino Boffo, a prestigious and appreciated journalist, if I had not been given by a reliable informant - above suspicion, I would say - a photocopy of the judicial form that prescribed a penalty against him for telephone molestations. With it, a note that [purported to] summarize(d) the reasons for the penalty.
The reconstruction of the 'facts' as described in the note, I can say today, do not correspond to the actual contents of the procedural documents [relating to the case and sentencing] .
At the time, we judged the case interesting to show that we all prefer not to speculate on the private affairs of others because even ours, if scrutinized, would never turn out to be perfect. [???? If he/they thought so, then why did Feltri proceed with his unequivocal Page 1 assault on Boffo's morals, having nothing but those two 'documents' to base it on????]
I could have finished there. However, the day after, pandemonium ensued because the newspapers and TV triggered an unjustified dust-up. [He's blaming the newspapers and TV???? He knew exactly the effect his Page 1 accusations would have!]
The 'thing', as you say, instead of remaining a small matter thus became blown up. [No editor considers a story 'small' when he places it on Page 1 with the literally blaring headline he gave it, and written by him, no less! Besides, Feltri wrote another strident Page 1 story later against Boffo that was definitely ad hominem and standing his ground!]
But perhaps, it might have remained 'small' if Boffo, in the midst of teh controversy (easy to say, now), instead of keeping the court file under wraps, had made it public himself, allowing verification that the case was really trivial and not a scandal.
In fact, from the court file, Dino Boffo is not implicated in any homosexual incidents, much less referred to as a 'known homosexual' [as the anonymous note had claimed].
This is the truth. Today, Boffo would still be at the top of Avvenire. Moreover, Boffo knew to be restrained, despite everything that had been said and written about him, keeping a sober and dignified attitude that can only evoke admiration.
VF
But this is outrageous. Magister was being too kind with Feltri.
This explanation/retraction does not even carry a single word of apology to Boffo for having put him - irresponsibly as it turns out, since Feltri never bothered to check the documents given him, as any greenfoot journalist would - in such a life-changing situation. Indeed, he even blames Boffo for not having disclosed the court files himself!
And worse, no apology to Avvenire, and the Italian bishops, and the Church itself, for the great scandal he, Feltri, caused. And no apology for conduct unbecoming a fair journalist, not to mention editor!
Should the Italian press associations not institute some formal censure of Feltri for abominable practices that practically ruined Boffo's reputation, if not his career?
As published widely in the Italian media at the time (and posted here), these are the documents on which Feltri based his original story:
Left, a copy of the court order penalizing Boffo with a fine for telephone molestation; right, the anonymous 'note' claiming that the case was about a homosexual situation that involved Boffo. What fair-minded journalist would have rushed to write a Page 1 story with a 72-point headline on the basis of documents that look as disreputable as the above, without verifying the allegations first? BTW, Feltri claimed in his original story that the anonymous note was a 'police information bulletin'.
Reaction from
(Translated)
SIR (Servizio Informazione Religiosa), the news agency of the Italian Bishops' Conference, and therefore a sister agency of Avvenire, has posted a note reacting to Feltri's retraction:
What editor Feltri wrote today in his newspaper, replying to a letter on 'the Boffo case', leads to some first considerations that, on the one hand, are consolatory because they confirm that truth finds a way to make itself known despite attempts to block it, but on the other hand, they bring back questions that arose from many quarters when this episode broke out, on the value and respect for professional ethics in the information media.
One must now seriously confront within the journalistic field the ultimate motivations in a profession that loses its way if it does not serve the truth, the common good, and the dignity of others: a frontier in which Dino Boffo always gave all he had.
The following statements were released by
(Translated)
In behalf of Dino Boffo
Mr. Boffo wishes to spend the day in reflection where he is these days, outside Italy. He wants to make it known that his thoughts today are particularly for the persons and families who were carelessly drawn into the accusations that were made to his detriment, and hopes that at least now, they will be left in peace.
Statement from Marco Tarquinio
New editor of
Avvenire
As far as I am concerned, the story published today on Page 1 of Il Giornale by Vittorio Feltri does not repair the damage that was done, not only to Boffo as a person, but to the idea itself about providing correct information, that must be verified before reporting it, and on how any journalistic battle should be fought. However, it does set the facts right.
I said at the time that with a gentleman like Dino Boffo, time, too, would be a gentleman to him. For once, we have waited far less than usual for this to happen.
A truth that had been turned upside down has been made right, and that matters. It is an important retraction because it could reflect the responsibility that journalists have towards our readers, towards a free press, and to ourselves.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 10/02/2010 00:12]