This French report helps to understand the Italian media, the current political situation and the big problem of Berlusconi's conflict of interest.
On January 28, the Italian Senate approved a decree allowing Berlusconi's TV channel Retequattro to continue terrestrial broadcasting. This would allow him to keep all three his private channels (while controlling the three public ones, too, as a Prime Minister) -- against a Constitutional Court rule. The lower house will discuss the decree on February 27.
If the decree passes, would the media monopoly be acceptable, in a Western Democracy? Thinking of future common international rules, how will the EU relate to that kind of issues?
I would say the answer to your first question is no. Ideally, the press plays a watchdog roll in a democratic country. If “the people” elect lawmakers to office, they should have the option to make an informed decision. And the press is the primary vehicle for this kind of empowerment.
And I think your second question suggests that the EU – composed of democratic countries and, in essence, a democratic republic itself - should aim to have some shared media law - to protect the media’s function.
Here’s a url to another Reporters Without Borders piece - http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=9394 . It suggests Italy has more to reform than its conflict of interest laws - the article says a reporter was jailed for a defamatory article.
To contrast Italy with the US – the US Supreme Court ruled a reporter doesn’t have to pay damages, let alone serve time, for simply being wrong. The court said it is more important that the press feel free to report on public figures to the best of its ability than it is to protect a public figures reputation - with the idea that fear of a guilty conviction would keep reporters from covering murkier issues that offer valuable information to the public, like the social philosophy of a political figure. So, the court ruled that, to be guilty of defamation, a reporter must be guilty of willful deceit or a wanton carelessness in reporting. Being wrong, alone, warrants only a retraction. - Sarah