Tonight with Vincent Browne TV3

Zamboni

I think it was aupposed to be about the Education system and the Catholic Church but it never really got to that as it was wrecked by Ronan Mullen who I have decided I dislike with a passion.
How the hell did he become a senator?

Ruined.

Meself

totally agree with you. never really had an opinion of him untill i seen him last night. Browne let him take over the arguements. He was very annoying alright

BeatNikDub

Great television though, he showed himself up something rotten.
Vincent was delighted!

Morgans

Yeah. Hadnt spotted him previously but had heard his spat with Fergus Finlay on Newstalk a few weeks back. A thoroughly unlikeable character.

After Mullen had said "Well, you are saying Ive a question to answer, and if I was at home, I would think 'hold on', this fella must be in some way implicated in something" (Im paraphrasing here)

Vincent should have said at the end of the program "How do you think it looks to the viewers when you refuse to comment until you are presented chapter and verse with the transcript of the interview?"

Dick.

Aidric

In fairness Lads, with the incident at hand being such a sensitive one I don't blame him for having a pop at Vincent. If he was being misrepresented the natural defence is to become outraged.

dearwatson

Yes I don't think anyone would appreciate being accused of being involved in coverups. It is an especially serious matter to accuse a political figure. As regards to Ronan asking for chapter and verse what he said, I thought that was a fair request since several accounts of the events were being given. Surely its better to actually have the truth of what was said rather than what peoples opinions were of what was said.

Morgans

Or asking for chaper and verse was a good and successful method of avoiding the question. He only asked for chapter and verse when Vincent phrased the question correctly - when Ronan Mullen couldnt avoid answering the question by saying that Vincent Browne AND Patsy McGarry were wrong in their account by 7 years. It wasnt the Archbishop's testimony that was being addressed, it was the spinning that Ronan Mullen engaged in.

Had there been a stronger research team with TV3, the issue could have been brought to a satisfactory conclusion during the two breaks that were taken. Or even had Vincent totally stitched him up and had the report to hand.

Not to mention the tactic of making sure he had the last word on the matter by lying to the panel on a point he was about to make.

Too smug by half.

Zamboni

dearwatson wrote: »

Yes I don't think anyone would appreciate being accused of being involved in coverups. It is an especially serious matter to accuse a political figure. As regards to Ronan asking for chapter and verse what he said, I thought that was a fair request since several accounts of the events were being given. Surely its better to actually have the truth of what was said rather than what peoples opinions were of what was said.

Jesus christ Ronan did you sign up to boards for that one post?
I supose being a senator gives you plenty of free time...

Elmo

I thought it went on for too long, and went a tiny bit off topic and VB should have just stopped him, it seems to me producers and presenters are happy for people to continue talking bollocks for most of the debate. I remember when the used to call John Bowman "chairman".

It isn't like any of the schools are actually run by the catholic church, pretty much only in name. The government just don't want to have to take on the responsibility. What is worse is the schools are in (pardon the cliche) Limbo. It is time for the schools to be given to the Community with the school board made up of Teachers, Parents, Local Councillors and different local groups, and that the Government take on the responsibility of National schools across the country as a regulator. Where the school board meet with the departments National/Primary School level division. And if teachers or pupils are bullied or harassed or abused that the State takes a hardline with the perpetrators.

Ruth's point about the 1830 was a bit all over the place since Catholic's only got emancipation in the 1830s.

moe_sizlak

Morgans wrote: »

Yeah. Hadnt spotted him previously but had heard his spat with Fergus Finlay on Newstalk a few weeks back. A thoroughly unlikeable character.

After Mullen had said "Well, you are saying Ive a question to answer, and if I was at home, I would think 'hold on', this fella must be in some way implicated in something" (Im paraphrasing here)

Vincent should have said at the end of the program "How do you think it looks to the viewers when you refuse to comment until you are presented chapter and verse with the transcript of the interview?"

Dick.

was never much of a fan of mullen but now that ive heard he had a spat with that idiot fergus ( no child should have to make do with hand me down school uniforms ) finlay , he cant be all bad

let me guess , mullen was pointing out how those on wellfare in ireland do better than many who are working and finlay reacted with his usual pious holier than thou form of wooly liberalism , i nearly choked on my supper the other night when finlay came out with this blather , if the xmas bonus is not reinstated , thier are people in ireland who will go hungary this xmas , its time this clown took a trip out to one of the sink estates in dublin and asked the local off licences and bookies what kind of trade they are doing

Johnny Giles

I wouldn't agree with ye. Vincent Browne is a bully. He is not a good interviewer.

He sits there whining: "Well we asked Brian Cowen, Enda Kenny to come on but they won't".

Why is that Vincent?

You bully your guests and nag, nag, nag till you get someone to say a word out of place and you come down on them.

Johnny Giles

Zamboni wrote: »

Jesus christ Ronan did you sign up to boards for that one post?
I supose being a senator gives you plenty of free time...

I hate this kind of crap. Someone doesn't agree with you so you assume that the subject (Mullen) has signed up to back himself.

BeatNikDub

Johnny Giles wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with ye. Vincent Browne is a bully. He is not a good interviewer.

He sits there whining: "Well we asked Brian Cowen, Enda Kenny to come on but they won't".

Why is that Vincent?

You bully your guests and nag, nag, nag till you get someone to say a word out of place and you come down on them.

Not to mention the coughing and the sighing.

Vincent is indeed a terrible interviewer, he is like a dog with a bone, or opinion in his case. God help you if you try to explain your differing view, you are on a hiding to nothing.

Having said that it can make some great tv, once you see the humourous side of it!

jooo gilligence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-fnYBhPcrY

Hollyg'lightly

Vincent Browne is an arrogant snob. That lady talking about the State schools was spittn venom and unable to make a single clear point.

The Prophet

Well if Vincent Browne is one extreme, then the likes of RTE's Prime Time is the other... where the nearest politicians get to a real grilling is standing up too close to the studio lights.

One thing in Browne's favour is his insistence on his original question being returned to and answered without mediaspeak guff, and his persistence in re-asking it if he detects evasionary spiel (which happens so often) from his interviewees.









Of course, it's a separate topic as to whether he is asking the right question in the first place.

moe_sizlak

vincent browne apart from allowing his left wing bias to surface all the time , hardly ever has his facts straight , almost every night he is rabbiting on about how inequality in ireland has increased hugely in the past ten years , if he done some research he would see that in actual fact , the gap between the so called rich and poor has actually narrowed

dearwatson

Morgans wrote: »

Or asking for chaper and verse was a good and successful method of avoiding the question. He only asked for chapter and verse when Vincent phrased the question correctly - when Ronan Mullen couldnt avoid answering the question by saying that Vincent Browne AND Patsy McGarry were wrong in their account by 7 years. It wasnt the Archbishop's testimony that was being addressed, it was the spinning that Ronan Mullen engaged in.

Had there been a stronger research team with TV3, the issue could have been brought to a satisfactory conclusion during the two breaks that were taken. Or even had Vincent totally stitched him up and had the report to hand.

I think if you could watch the program again you would realise that McGarry and Browne didn't agree on the dates either hence his call for what he actually said. I don't think you appreicate how detremental something like this could be for a political figure whatever your views of Ronan Mullen himself are. If Ronan simply contradicted Browne it would be his word against Brownes and people tend not to side with politicians as can be seen from this thread!!!

I do agree with that it was sly of Mullen not to make the point which he appeared to say he would and it certainly didn't do anything for his credibility.

Elmo

dearwatson wrote: »

I think if you could watch the program again you would realise that McGarry and Browne didn't agree on the dates either hence his call for what he actually said. I don't think you appreicate how detremental something like this could be for a political figure whatever your views of Ronan Mullen himself are. If Ronan simply contradicted Browne it would be his word against Brownes and people tend not to side with politicians as can be seen from this thread!!!

I do agree with that it was sly of Mullen not to make the point which he appeared to say he would and it certainly didn't do anything for his credibility.

Mullen is an Indo NUI Senator he doesn't have a political career. That is the whole point of senators to be able to avoid politics and try and do what is in the interest of the country based on what has been pushed through the Dail. In other words the political blinkers should be removed. This is obviously not the case here.