According to what was publicly declared by Fabrizio Corona, Alfonso Signorini exploited his position to obtain sexual favors from some Big Brother contestants. This is a story which, at present, is not supported by judicial findings, but which has been presented as a “scoop” that many are talking about, at least on social media. On television, however, the story was given very little prominence. The reasons can be many: from prudence in dealing with unverified accusations, to the protection of a figure who is now central in the television system, to the distrust that often accompanies Corona’s declarations. In any case, this story cannot be dismissed as simple gossip, as it brings with it several relevant issues from a sociocultural point of view.

The problem of method

The first concerns the method. Even assuming that what Corona said was true, an issue of such gravity should not be addressed through a YouTube video, nor by using ironic tones or provocative images, such as photographs of the alleged perpetrator naked or in underwear. If similar conduct were ascertained, we would in fact find ourselves faced with an extremely serious case of sexual abuse of power, since in contexts characterized by a strong role asymmetry, consent cannot be considered fully free. The relationship between a famous television presenter and a little-known participant in one of his programs poses a structural problem of inequality. This leads to the second reflection: how would the story have been narrated and received if in Alfonso Signorini’s place there had been a heterosexual man and a woman in the place of the alleged victim? In all likelihood, unfortunately, the news would have aroused less surprise, given that historically it is women who are most frequently the targets of blackmail or sexual pressure. However, the sensitivity with which to approach such stories should remain the same. Instead, on social media, the whole thing was quickly turned into a joke, often with an openly homophobic undertone. Influencers and creators rushed to publish ironic videos, miming limping walks after hypothetical “auditions” with Signorini. A grotesque drift that does not arise from nothing, but which also depends on how the story was initially narrated by those who brought it to the public’s attention.

The visibility of Corona

Fabrizio Corona, moreover, seems to be obsessed with visibility. He has been claiming his experience for years, repeating that he has “been doing this job for thirty years” and often recalls his judicial affairs not as an element of reflection or discontinuity, but as an integral part of the public narrative that he builds on himself. The convictions suffered, including those for extortion and other crimes, are thus exhibited and reworked as proof of audacity, functional to strengthening the image of a man who has suffered injustices and who is not afraid of anyone. In fact, Corona presents himself as the superhero who openly challenges the so-called “strong powers”.

A story that now seems to have taken root even for that part of the public who in the past observed it with greater distance or skepticism. Perhaps this is precisely the main lesson that Corona has learned from the numerous legal proceedings that involved him: learning to identify the legal limit and walk above it like a tightrope walker. Knowing that sooner or later it will fall again. But, for him, this seems to be exactly the “price of success”, which he appears willing to pay.