Primetime RTE1 27/11/08

sillymoo

Just watching it there now. They seem to be making out that Declan Ganley is a right crook.

I think that was their idea by the looks of the program

Rowley Birkin QC

Seemed to be somewhat biased but what did it actually answer?

Nothing in my view, at least nothing that can be substantiated.

techdiver

As a fan of Prime Time I think that was one of the most one sided episode I've ever seen. No balance what so ever. This is how they treat anyone who attempts to threaten the establishment and not get in line with the "unpopular" view.

From the first moment of the program, they were out to get him in a completely biased way.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Declan's been smeared all across the board. Very unprofessional of RTE I thought. Is it a coinicidence that this was aired in the same week that more news about a second Lisbon treaty referndum hits the news ?

sillymoo

I have to agree. I knew feck all about him before the programme started and feel that they just presented a very negative view of him. I feel sorry for his parents that were on at the start and probably thought the programme would give a fair impression of him.

Aidric

It depends which side of the fence you sit on with regards Ganley. I'm sure all the no voters will be claiming bias and victimisation. I think he looked rattled on a couple of the tougher questions with regards his business dealings. The programme worked if it's aim was to raise questions of his character. It should have the conspiricists on red alert.

humanji

Aidric wrote: »

It depends which side of the fence you sit on with regards Ganley. I'm sure all the no voters will be claiming bias and victimisation. I think he looked rattled on a couple of the tougher questions with regards his business dealings. The programme worked if it's aim was to raise questions of his character. It should have the conspiricists on red alert.

Well the conspiricists are all anti-EU so they'll be complaining about the show too.

Red Sleeping Beauty

The allegations have been answered by him for months and months. This is nothing more than an attempt to show the NO campaign as being bank rolled by hokey business deals. I see there's no prime time investigation into who bank rolled the yes campaign


EDIT: I have to add 2more cents to this :

State body FAS is in the headlines for dodgy spending etc, there's plenty of concerns about overspending and excessiveness in the public sector and RTE are dedicating a show to debunk a man and a party that led a campaign against the Lisbon Treaty which the Government wanted pushed through. Government + public sector + RTE = ?

This post probably belongs in the conspiracy forum though

Rowley Birkin QC

He definitely did seem rattled by some of the questions, but I still feel as though nothing new has come to light about him.

sillymoo

alan dunne 27 wrote: »

The allegations have been answered by him for months and months. This is nothing more than an attempt to show the NO campaign as being bank rolled by hokey business deals. I see there's no prime time investigation into who bank rolled the yes campaign

+1

bogman44

I don't think he's a crook (although his dealings in eastern europe are very suspect) but he needs to come clean about his connections with the neo-cons.

Red Sleeping Beauty

bogman44 wrote: »

I don't think he's a crook (although his dealings in eastern europe are very suspect) but he needs to come clean about his connections with the neo-cons.

Just like Bertie came clean about his dealings ?

lostexpectation

why are trying to lower standards alandunne27? primetime has investigated all the other issues you've mentioned

they guy is a vulture capitlist, look at him going from liberty mobile to libertas, libertas is just another business venture it nothing to do with democracy.


yerman at the end said he had nothing to do with the neocons he spoke at two of their tink tanks including the heritage foundation.


i was looking up that rezko, guy the backing obama, who's own backer is dogey iraqi and came across emails from declan ganley in relation to the corrupt deals there.

pr-guru

A primetime hatchet job. RTE the mouthpiece of the government planting little seeds of doubt in voters minds.
1. Frightening spylike music throughout. Oh listen to the music, he must be evil.
2. No mark anti Ganley interviewees. Wow a foreign journalist and an old guy in a pub who was put out due to a bond issue.
3. Not to mention a lot of odd speech edits throughout, giving me the the feeling that the programme was a bit cut and past.
4. Then finally at the end the titles scrolling in complete silence. Were you meant to sit and think hard about how Ganley could possibly be the antichrist.....

Red Sleeping Beauty

pr-guru wrote: »

A primetime hatchet job. RTE the mouthpiece of the government planting little seeds of doubt in voters minds.
1. Frightening spylike music throughout. Oh listen to the music, he must be evil.
2. No mark anti Ganley interviewees. Wow a foreign journalist and an old guy in a pub who was put out due to a bond issue.
3. Not to mention a lot of odd speech edits throughout, giving me the the feeling that the programme was a bit cut and past.
4. Then finally at the end the titles scrolling in complete silence. Were you meant to sit and think hard about how Ganley could possibly be the antichrist.....

Libertas should really contact a solicitor I think and see if there's a possible case here. I don't think this is even the first time that RTE have done a piece on Ganley, I'm pretty sure they've asked the exact same questions of him before.

ManofMunster

did prime time find out where bertie got his money? must be nest week's show.

evidently ganley is the antichrist. taking over 50% of the gullible population with him on his mission is just unforgiveable. shame on us.

Red Sleeping Beauty

ManofMunster wrote: »

did prime time find out where bertie got his money? must be nest week's show.

evidently ganley is the antichrist. taking over 50% of the gullible population with him on his mission is just unforgiveable. shame on us.

According to the award winning show "Bertie" , Bertie got his money from his "pals" in a "whip round" to help him while he was going through a divorce. This is all truthful as there was some serious looks on Bertie's face telling his story and a few tears from his family. He had it rough did our Bertie. Only man in the country who could walk into a pub and get thousands of punts from "pals" he'd only just met.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bertie is next week's host of The Panel

ArmaniJeanss

ManofMunster wrote: »

did prime time find out where bertie got his money? must be nest week's show.

This a weak argument, basically hinting they shouldn't be allowed investigate personX until such time as they have fully got to the bottom of personZs affairs.

I thought he was a reasonable enough subject for an indepth investigation as he played a pivotal role in this countries future direction, but yet I knew effectively nothing about him.

SEPT 23 1989

well when it comes down to it RTE is a state controlled broadcaster:mad:

deffin

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This a weak argument, basically hinting they shouldn't be allowed investigate personX until such time as they have fully got to the bottom of personZs affairs.

I thought he was a reasonable enough subject for an indepth investigation as he played a pivotal role in this countries future direction, but yet I knew effectively nothing about him.

No question that RTE's agenda from the outset was to discredit this man. Typical of the Irish physce to knock someone that's successful. Most people that are that successful (if you dig hard enough and my god they fairly dug) will have dodgy dealings of some kind but the slant they put on it was disgusting. I hope he takes them to the cleaners and all because he rocked the boat and the government didn't like it.

It was certainly a one sided show in my opinion, wonder will they do the same if they do a program on FAS and our current government :rolleyes:

thecommander

hellboy99 wrote: »

It was certainly a one sided show in my opinion, wonder will they do the same if they do a program on FAS and our current government :rolleyes:

They've done countless Primetimes on the current government, and they did a panel on FAS on Monday night.

Vegeta

Prime Time (but RTE in general) is shockingly bad. I actually get embarrassed for the people working on the show as its so transparent it can be painful to watch.

I would have no problem if they made reports in an objective way but they actively try and influence the audiences opinions (Music, editing, credits scrolling in silence and all other effects like this) rather than just presenting the facts and let me make my own decisions.

If anything last nights show would make me stand up for Ganley as the show was such an obvious attempt at character assassination.

They did a show on legally licensed firearms earlier in the year and I made a complaint to the BCC because it was full of incorrect facts and negative slant.

sillymoo

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This a weak argument, basically hinting they shouldn't be allowed investigate personX until such time as they have fully got to the bottom of personZs affairs.

By all means investigate the man but give a balanced view.

MisterAnarchy

I thought it was very biased against Ganley.
The woman questioning him was getting very agitated and flustered when questioning him,she obviously had an agenda.
As for the music I wish RTE would stop using music from the Bourne films as backing music,I've heard it now on about 5 of their shows ,enough is enough.

BroomBurner

What can you expect from RTE? Primetime have regularly shown that they are sensationalist and biased. They did the same thing to Cornmarket in that programme about AVCs. Sloppy, lazy journalism backed up by no facts and hastily put together interviews.

Whoever is behind Primetime obviously picks their little bugbear and refuses to look at it from all angles.

State broadcaster or not, it is our licence fee they are using to fund this. It will be our licence fee to go up if/when Ganley's solicitors decide if action will need to be taken.

Aidric

The people on this thread intimating that Ganley should pursue legal action over the programme would want to take a long hard look at themselves. Which part of the programme was it exactly that gave rise to the possibility of any legal action being taken? Nothing presented in the programme was anything other than fact. Do you honestly think RTE were going to put out something that would leave them open to a libel case, FFS?

Red Sleeping Beauty

Aidric wrote: »

The people on this thread intimating that Ganley should pursue legal action over the programme would want to take a long hard look at themselves. Which part of the programme was it exactly that gave rise to the possibility of any legal action being taken? Nothing presented in the programme was anything other than fact.

Did you watch the same show ? Look at how it was presented. Other posters have already outlined how the show was produced in a bias manner.

Aidric wrote: »

Do you honestly think RTE were going to put out something that would leave them open to a libel case, FFS?

Yes I do, they just have imo.

AARRRGH

I like him. He is a maverick and a tough bastard. So what if he exaggerates some of his business claims sometimes - every businessman does that.

RTE flung so much ****e towards him but not a single bit of it could be proved. I'm sure you could make a similar programme about anyone, finding randomers to say yes he met the guy who killed yer man, or whatever.

Absolute trash from the ****e that is RTE.

Aidric

AARRRGH wrote: »

So what if he exaggerates some of his business claims sometimes - every businessman does that.

I don't accept that, reputable businessmen don't make up spurious claims with regards their backgrounds.
He claimed he was a special advisor to the Latvian government when in fact he'd only ever met a junior ranking civil servant on one occasion, iirc. It casts doubts on his character IMO.

AARRRGH

Aidric wrote: »

He claimed he was a special advisor to the Latvian government when in fact he'd only ever met a junior ranking civil servant on one occasion, iirc. It casts doubts on his character IMO.

I'd like to know for certain

- what he claimed
- what the truth is

RTE did a poor job of finding out the truth, so I am going to give Ganley the benefit of the doubt for the moment.

I have to say I found RTE going to the Latvian guys house trying to force him to talk on camera repulsive. It shows what kind of scum were behind this show.

/Note I'm not a "No" freak. I just dislike what RTE were trying to do/

Aidric

AARRRGH wrote: »

I have to say I found RTE going to the Latvian guys house trying to force him to talk on camera repulsive. It shows what kind of scum were behind this show.

That sort of stuff is par for the course when it comes to investigative documentaries, in fairness.

ManofMunster

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I thought he was a reasonable enough subject for an indepth investigation as he played a pivotal role in this countries future direction, but yet I knew effectively nothing about him.

you talking about bertie here

on the one hand we have bryan d handing bertie a hankie as bertie led dobbo down the garden path with his 'i never got sterling from no one' bulls***. on the other, we have a fairly lame and obvious effort to discredit someone (whom I don't particularly like, by the way) who deserves a fair hearing as much as the next man.

the fact that the powers that be seem to believe that ganley was responsible for the 'NO' vote just shows how little they've learned. i voted 'NO' coz I didn't think it served ireland's interests and i didn't need ganley or mary lou to point this out to me. and at least we were getting arguments from the 'no' side - not the 'if we don't vote yes, shur they'll all be laughing at us' claptrap we got from our european affairs gob****e dick van dyke.