This is
"Question 12" to be answered by Eni.
Introduction Question 12: My Social Networks vs
Eni
Eni also
stated in the company’s “offial document” Questions
and answers before the Shareholders Meeting 2017 that my Social Networks
are slandering and defaming Eni:
“In fact, as of 2014, Mr Flinto
has escalated his communication initiatives for alleged ethical purposes with
the creation of an Internet site, a blog and various social network accounts,
entirely dedicated to Eni, which publish and continuously implement negative
news about Eni, along with denigrating comments and images that damage the
company’s image”.
Indeed, my Social Networks talk about Eni. I only transcribe what the
Italian media (a few newspapers), and the global media notice about Eni. But there is no sort of slander or defamation.
Its important to remember that slander and defamation strike the “honor”
of someone (or a company). But, when it comes to Eni, not at all am I
slandering or defaming the company. And
this because honor is classified as:
a) Subjective
honor: it is that linked to the intimate of a person (or a company), to
what they think of themselves, their self-esteem.
b) Objective
honor: it is that linked to the judgment that others make of the individual
(or the company), social consideration, the image that the individual (or the
company) passes to the social group in which they are inserted.
However, in
order to characterize “slander”, the imputed fact tem que ser falso,
while in “defamation” it suffices that is is offensive to the reputation
(Injury, in turn, affects the subjective honor of the victim, that is, the
judgment that each one makes of themselves, not having the imputation of any
fact).
But it is important to remember that, for facts that reach objective
honor, it is possible to exercise the EXCEPETION OF TRUTH, that is, if the fact
that is imputed to someone (or a company) is “true” there is no harm!
Besides, there is the EXCEPTION OF NOTORIETY, that is, if the facts are
of “public domain” there are is also no harm!
Everything that I write on my Social Networks are of public domain.
Questions 12:
12-A) The
publications in my Social Networks are totally of “public domain”. So why di
Eni say that “In fact, as of 2014, Mr Flinto has escalated his communication
initiatives for alleged ethical purposes with the creation of an Internet site,
a blog and various social network accounts, entirely dedicated to Eni, which
publish and continuously implement negative news about Eni, along with
denigrating comments and images that damage the company’s image”?
12-C) For a
global company like Eni, “negative news” must be as important as “positive
news”! Because “negative news” give the companies the opportunity to reverse a
situation to turn it into “positive news”. Doesn’t the newspaper publish
“negative news” all the time? Why can’t I do the same?
12-C) Does
Eni respect “freedom of expression”? What does the company think about it?
I am Eni's
Whistleblower that suffers "retaliation" from this company until
today.
There will
be a total of "15 questions" which, in these 17 years, Eni has not
yet answered.
Follow
daily the new questions in this Blog to see if the Italian
oil giant will answer.
Question 12
is also in my LinkedIN.
No comments:
Post a Comment