"Does O'Reilly ever read his sleazy paper"

dbnavan

The following article appeared in yesterdays Irish Daily Mail, bit harsh IMO, i dont think that there is such a link between women who are abused/forced into the sex trade, and those who choose to entertain. just wonder what others think?


WHAT makes for a good leader? For me, it's someone who tries to leave the world in a better state than he found it. Take a successful businessman, for example. He's had to work hard, take risks and make a lot of sacrifices. But he knows that life has been good to him too. So he doesn't just congratulate himself and screw people for all he can get. He knows how to make money, but he won't exploit. With his money and prestige he knows he can set a standard - by the way he does business, the way he treats his employees, by his attitude to his customers and to his country.When successful businessmen become big players in the mass media, their potential is even greater. They know they must cater for public tastes. But they can exert influence too. They can take society up or down.

That is why I believe Sir Anthony O'Reilly should examine his conscience. No doubt, he is behind many charitable works and ventures. More than a few buildings around the country seem to bear his name. But he and his agents are directly involved in the exploitation of people and they are damaging society as a result.
The context is the sex industry. Last Monday night's Prime Time investigation brought us face to face with the experience of vulnerable foreign women, preyed on and trafficked into Ireland for forced prostitution.

Prime Time does not always cover itself in glory but Monday night's offering was stirring.A number of newspapers gave pre-publicity to the programme. Sir Anthony O'Reilly's Sunday World wrote up the story of Maria, a young Romanian girl tricked by a friend into coming to Ireland, then beaten up by her pimp and forced to work as a prostitute in Dublin's Herbert Park apartments. There was nothing objectionable in the Sunday World's coverage of Maria's story. But the newspaper was guilty of the most outrageous and destructive hypocrisy elsewhere in its pages.
Page 10 had the story of a young Irishwoman, Frances, who began working in a lapdancing club aged 16. She was encouraged, perhaps lured would be a better word, to go to Donegal to act in a hardcore porn film. Frances told all to the Sunday World after they 'tracked her down' in Coventry. `My mum ... will be shocked when I have to ring her up now and tell her I did porn,' says Frances. But the newspaper seemed to have no problem about naming her. Perhaps it paid Frances for permission to reveal her identity. Or maybe she was lured by the culture of celebrity that deranges the minds of many people, especially those from an under privileged background. It hardly matters. Frances is just 18 years of age. But old enough, it seems, for the Sunday World to exploit.
It gets worse, I'm afraid. The Sunday World took the trouble to name the porn film in which Frances featured (a nice bit of free advertising) and they also named another lady, `Yasmine' - the one who got Frances involved. On page 6 of the Sunday World we see Yasmine again. 'Girls see the bunny side of Playboy' is the headline this time, accompanying a gushing report about auditions in Dublin's Central Hotel for a Playboy feature.
`A touch of glamour lightened up a dull day,' the World reports. Just to keep us informed, you understand, there is a picture of Yasmine, and we are told she attended the Playboy auditions.
We are also told of her role in 'Ireland's first hardcore porn series' and of course the series is named.

What is this if not the `celebrification' of pornography and prostitution by the Sunday World? Is this to be part of the legacy on which Sir Anthony O'Reilly can muse so fondly when he reflects on a lifetime of achievement?
On page 100 of the paper we get more sleaze. Two full pages, in fact, of advertising chat lines and maybe a bit more. Supposedly 'bored' housewives are looking for `afternoon fun and games'.
Is it all strictly legal? Perhaps. But the Sunday World seems to have no problem carrying a phone number for 'Anonymous Cork', accompanied by the line: 'My mum will be furious if she finds out.' You don't have to be a detective to work out which kind of appetite that ad is pandering to.
Of course, all of this is now commonplace and the Sunday World is not the only sleazy newspaper in town. The difference is that the Sunday World is owned by a highly-regarded captain of industry who is widely respected throughout this countryand abroad. One phonecall from him could redirect the sleazy ship. He could get rid of anything which celebrates or endorses the commodification of women. And he could still sell plenty of newspapers.
Maybe Sir Anthony has fallen for some of the cheap rationalisations used to justify unacceptable treatment of women and their sexuality by the media.
For example, it is usual for newspapers such as the Sunday World to present themselves as great humanitarians in their coverage of sex trafficking and prostitution. They are doing the State some service, they would have us believe, by exposing the dark underbelly of society.
They revel in exposing the villains. Yet there is something other than humanitarian intent behind the lurid headlines. These journalists are merely titillating a prurient public. They write tut-tutting headlines to be sure. But there is little focus on those who are trying to fight the problem, no leader articles calling for legislation, and certainly no call for a return to moral values.
These newspapers also pretend there is a line of respectability to be drawn between lapdancing clubs and brothels, adult and child pornography, and voluntary or forced prostitution. Hence the ads for the adult chatlines and the Playboy promos.

But there can be no respectable distinction. For one thing, the providers of these services are frequently the same. They may provide lapdancing in one venue, but scratch the surface and you will find these people connected with other, illegal, services somewhere else.
What's more, the 'respectable soft core' pornography to be found in the Sunday World is still about treating women as sexual play-things. It fosters and foments the lusts and cravings of immature people. Women are turned into objects. Why should we doubt, either, that the cultivation of such deviant tastes facilitates other acts of violence and illegality.
Isn't it probable that, once people's moral sense is weakened, it is only a short step to contemplating, and participating in, illegal acts?
The rot goes much higher than Sir Anthony O'Reilly and the Sunday World. For example our politicians are failing to give any kind of leadership. Lapdancing is legal, even though it is often a cover for prostitution. Sex shops are completely unrestricted - an underage person can walk in, any day of the week, and avail of whatever services he finds there. As for the unfortunate women who are trafficked, beaten, raped and held in servitude in Ireland, they get no help from the politicians here.
Ultimately, however, it is the people of Ireland who must take responsibility for the situation we are in. We elect our politicians. We buy the newspapers and the magazines that exploit young women. We show no outrage when somebody like Peter Stringfellow is feted at the Meteor awards and lauded as an impresario by the newspapers, instead of being ignored for being little better than a pimp.

dbnavan

Mods on seconds thoughts please move this to news/media

lostexpectation

there was a letter in time yesterday from Dick Roche I think which quite rightly pointed out the hypocracy of the "Human traffic shocker" and "Ireland Sex slaves" when they pages of smutty phone lines and escrots services on the back page.

pbsuxok1znja4r

wrote:

WHAT makes for a good leader? For me, it's someone who tries to leave the world in a better state than he found it.

Heh, the leader leaves in a better state or the world in a better state? And no, I doubt if he does ever read his paper. I was talking to a guy once who was something of a head honcho at the sun and he maintained that he would never dream of buying or reading the paper himself.

gaf1983

lostexpectation wrote:

there was a letter in time yesterday from Dick Roche I think which quite rightly pointed out the hypocracy of the "Human traffic shocker" and "Ireland Sex slaves" when they pages of smutty phone lines and escrots services on the back page.

That letter was from Jim McDaid.

Victor

dbnavan wrote:

The rot goes much higher than Sir Anthony O'Reilly and the Sunday World.

And what about the Sunday Independent itself?