Giuseppe Cruciani reads in his famous radio program “La Zanzara” a letter written by Alessandro Impagnatiello, recently sentenced to life imprisonment for the feminicide of Chiara Tramontano. In the young man’s words one can clearly see his manipulative nature, between victimization and disjointed sentences that testify to a clear disconnect from reality.

Impagnatiello pathological manipulator

A reality that he tries to reconstruct as he pleases and that he would like to sell to us too, because a pathological manipulator is deeply convinced that he can deceive anyone, exactly as he deceived himself. Giuseppe Cruciani defined this letter as “news” and as such, from his point of view, it should be disclosed. But are we sure that the ravings of an unscrupulous killer are worthy of being classified as “news”? No, they are not, because they add nothing to what we already know about the story and have the sole purpose of fueling the ego of a person with likely narcissistic traits.

Obscuring the pain of family members

They only serve to obscure the victim and the pain of his family, instead making the executioner the only true protagonist of the story. All this also risks encouraging a mechanism of emulation, because in large numbers there will certainly be those who aspire to that stage, however shameful and dishonorable.

Some human beings work like this: they want to constantly be the center of attention, and we shouldn’t let them, we shouldn’t give them away. Impagnatiello’s letter is part of an increasingly vast and extreme trend, which seeks to monetize in every way any case of crime news, current or past. Let’s think, for example, of Massimo Bossetti, interviewed in a Netflix documentary, or Alberto Stasi, often involved in Le Iene in prime time.

How to give another weapon in hand

Giving a manipulator the opportunity to speak means giving him a weapon in his hand, the most powerful and lethal weapon he has at his disposal. So let’s stop arming them, giving them those minutes of glory that they don’t deserve, and let’s focus on the problems that these human beings have ended up embodying. Even assuming that they are innocent, it is not up to us to establish it and, in case of doubt, we should still refrain from giving them media visibility. And if we really want to give them this space, this possibility of extra expression compared to what they are already guaranteed by law in court, then let’s at least try to contextualize their words and not give them the microphone in their hands without even a reply. Perhaps from Giuseppe Cruciani’s point of view any comment on the matter would have been superfluous, since the madness behind those words was clear to him, but he cannot take it for granted that it is so for everyone, and sometimes it is necessary to reiterate the obvious.

If, however, he decided not to comment because he didn’t consider “La Zanzara” the right program, in terms of target and tone, then he shouldn’t even have read the letter in that context, perhaps sending it to a more suitable newspaper. But the point in the end is always clicks and views, and “news” of this type was too juicy to bury under moral questions.