As you must know, Italian Prime Minister Giovanni Goria visited Washington last week, accompanied by his foreign minister, Giulio Andreotti. He held a press conference at the National Press Club. Vainly did I search for any mention of this in The Post. Nary a word.

As a longtime journalist and foreign correspondent, including with Time magazine, I am surprised by this. You publish a World News section, the Federal Report page and lots of trivia about what occurs in the provinces. Yet the visit of a representative of a major Western ally, a man who is struggling against great political odds to maintain a shaky government coalition, goes unreported.

True, you cannot compare a Goria with a Mikhail Gorbachev. Still, when Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited Washington some months ago, you managed to give him if only passing mention. I seriously wonder: what are the criteria by which you judge news?

You'd think that visiting VIPs would at least be noted in a special box, given that Washington is the nation's capital and draws distinguished visitors from all parts of the world. Or have you become so blase' that you can afford to ignore news of this kind?

-- Gabriel De Sabatino Who Needs Glasnost?

I found the graphics design for the "Summit in Washington" coverage extremely offensive.

Why was the president of the United States of America pictured in the shadow of the profiled Soviet leader? Was this supposed to be another act of courtesy as was extended to the visiting leader at the press conference immediately following the summit where President Reagan spoke second?

And what in the name of love of God and country was the American flag doing under the pictured Soviet flag?

The adage "a picture speaks a thousand words" leaves me to question what the picture (duplicated throughout The Post) communicated to those who are just learning to read the English language. What did it attempt to communicate to you and to me, and to our veterans?

With this type of journalism, who needs glasnost? -- Cynthia M. Flamminio No 's' I have been reading a great many of your columns lately that use the word "counsels" in referring to the various independent counsel who are now active in Washington. At least four of your writers have been using the word with great frequency. I now find that your editorial Dec. 19 also uses the word.

For your information, the correct word is "counsel." It is both singular and plural. I have never heard or seen the word "counsels" used until the current spate of appointments of such counsel. The word is like "fish"; it is both singular and plural. Never have I been in a court of law where the judge said, "Will counsels please approach the bench?" It is always "counsel." Please pass the word to your various writers.

-- Carl R. Meininger 'Hardly Newsworthy' I have just read a story on the front page of the Metro section regarding a Wheaton woman who gave birth to a baby in a toilet bowl. The story was titled "After Eight Months of Not Waiting, Surprised Maryland Woman Gives Birth" {Dec. 5}.

As an obstetrician practicing in this inner city, I found your story to be a classic case of media irresponsibility and poor taste. The story is hardly newsworthy.

By glorifying this event, you are sending a clear signal to pregnant teen-agers that they need not seek prenatal care in order to have healthy babies. You are, in fact, telling our teen-agers that denial of pregnancy is acceptable behavior.

The District of Columbia, as well as the entire country, is struggling to lower infant mortality. The Post, as a socially responsible newspaper, has chosen irresponsible sensationalism.

-- Gideon M. Kioko, M.D. Offended by Fur Ads I would like to address the issue of The Post's support of the fur industry. Every day there are numerous ads for furriers, and the number has recently increased substantially. I am quite offended by the ads, and many of the people I have talked to have found them offensive too.

By running ads for furriers your paper promotes and consents to the sale of furs. I would assume that your paper would recognize the immorality and disrespect to animals of supporting the sale of dead animals for human vanity.

If the promotion of furs continues in The Post, I plan to stop supporting The Post, and I am sure there are many others who are willing to withdraw their support on the basis of fur advertisements. -- Sarah Brody