Letters
the letters •
Why the careers of “Report” and Ranucci can be distinguished from one another
Who wrote to the editor, Claudio Cerasa
18 AUG 26
Translated by AI
Sigfrido Ranucci at the Galleria Alberto Sordi, Rome, 26 May 2026. ANSA / GIUSEPPE LAMI
To the Editor – A song has been popping into my head these past few days. A track for group dancing – and what a group! In a familiar-sounding Spanish, it goes something like this, to be read with a smooth reggaeton rhythm. Bomba, a sensual move, a muy sexy move, bomba, And here comes the African with a dance that’s a bomba, to dance to this is a bomba, to enjoy this is a bomba, all the women dance to it, bomba, all the men dance to it, bomba, all the radio stations play it, bomba, the nightclubs play it, bomba, everyone dances to it, bomba.
Giuseppe De Filippi
Fingers down, down, down. Fingers up, up, up. Fingers down, down, down. Fingers up, up, up. Boom!
To the Editor – The bitter disillusionment that follows coming into contact with one’s idols was sketched out by Flaubert in almost definitive terms: “Il ne faut pas toucher aux idoles: la dorure en reste aux mains”. And yet, within the Italian left, the ceaseless search for a knight-errant still seems to fulfil an almost inescapable need – perhaps because it embodies the ideal of a solitary rebellion against an established system of power, or more simply because it allows one to sidestep the need to examine more deeply current social, economic and technological realities, as well as the total loss of contact with the working classes and the world of the marginalised. It remains to be seen, however, how we could have moved from the military prowess of a Che Guevara or the moral composure attributed to Berlinguer to the ‘discreet charm’ of the prosecuting magistrates, and even ended up with Sigfrido’s television bluster, deceptively peddled to the masses as modern investigative journalism. With the risk that, in this instance, what is left unpleasantly on one’s hands is not merely a superficial veneer.
Francesco Compagna
It should be noted that when "Il Foglio" reported on the expenditure of "Report", it was Ranucci who intervened, attempting to refute figures that could not be refuted. Now that Il Tempo has done the same, reporting similar figures, it is the Report collective that has responded, perhaps implying through this choice that Ranucci can no longer be relied upon to defend the programme, nor can he act as its guarantor – as if to suggest that careers, at least in this context, can be kept separate.
To the Editor – As always, I read with interest the lengthy article by Stefania Craxi, now leader of the Forza Italia group in the Senate, on the subject of end-of-life issues. I have two comments on this matter. Firstly, has Forza Italia realised that the parliamentary term is now drawing to a close and that it has been in government for four years to no avail (after all, Secretary Antonio Tajani is launching a campaign against excessive bureaucracy, whilst Forza Italia holds the portfolio for Public Administration)? Why was such goodwill not shown earlier, in time to pass a law? Was it really all the fault of the previous group leaders (the Forza Italia rapporteur is the very same person…)? It feels like we are witnessing the same farce – this time far more painful – as a few summers ago over the ius Italiae; what ever became of that? Secondly, on the substance of the matter. Stefania Craxi’s line of reasoning sets the debate on the role of the National Health Service back by decades. Back to the days when it was argued – using the very same arguments as Stefania Craxi – that public healthcare facilities should not perform abortions. Thank goodness Forza Italia didn’t exist back then… otherwise we wouldn’t have had Law 194, imperfect though it may be! Kind regards.
Elio Vito
To the Editor – I am writing to the very kind Senator Craxi; as a palliative care doctor, I would like to thank her for what she has written regarding the legislative debate on end-of-life care. Some of the points she makes are fundamental: a clear, non-ideological approach that avoids ‘emotional shortcuts’, and which takes into account the reality of palliative care and the deeply painful experiences of patients and families who are often completely cut off from any necessary support. However, I would like to take the liberty – and I do so as a doctor – of raising a few concerns. First of all, once again you write as if a ‘law on end-of-life care’ did not exist in Italy: this is not true. Law 219 of 2017 is a reality – comprehensive and specific – and is also accompanied by an article on shared care planning, which is one of the fundamental yet sadly overlooked aspects of the current legislation. The ‘state legislation’ you refer to should not be understood in the broad sense of end-of-life care but specifically in relation to medically assisted death, which is indeed absent from our legal system to date. And on this point, a doctor should find it hard to forget that the act of prescribing a lethal substance which the patient can administer to themselves (assisted suicide) or the act of directly injecting a poison to end a patient’s life – even if the patient requests it – is not something that belongs to conventional medicine, whatever its ethical stance may be. The fact that some ‘progressive’ nations have decided to legislate, allowing certain ‘exceptions’ where such acts become ‘non-punishable’ and therefore legally permissible, does not mean that this kind of action has a different significance or gravity today than it did in the past. Finally, you call for a national law that ‘clarifies boundaries’, ‘establishes safeguards’, ‘prevents a rush to adopt extreme measures’, ‘protects patients’, ‘safeguards doctors’, ‘preserves the identity of the healthcare system’ and ‘avoids regulatory chaos’. Unfortunately, dear Senator, there are many countries that began with the same aspirations and which, today, find themselves faced with boundaries that have vanished, guarantees that have evaporated, terrible overreach, patients being pressured—more or less subtly—to step aside, and palliative care doctors (the genuine ones) suffering greatly. Once we have genuinely and universally implemented the existing Law 219/2017 throughout our country (something far, far more complicated than drafting a new law with a different aim), we will be able to take stock, confident that we have already carried out the ‘practical’ work that patients and their families need.
Ferdinando Cancelli