Global Village on Newstalk

DeadHand

Dil was a dogmatic whinge merchant utterly unsuited to radio work who attempted to insert herself into an inflated "controversy" for personal advancement.

Hers was a dramatic stunt and she lacked the clout and wherewithal to pull it off successfully. She likely believed NT would cave to her virtue signalling and beg her to come back but, hilariously, they seem to have just said 'don't let the door hit you on the way out'.

An inarticulate, dull one trick pony, she lacks the talent to get a job anywhere else In radio- she should have been happy in her token role with NT. She was always irrelevant and is now deservedly unemployed.

One of the few good things to come of the frankly disturbing Hook witchhunt is the disappearance from the airwaves of this boring professional victim. She constantly disparaged Ireland and the Irish people as if this was 1950s Alabama. It was exaggerated, unfair and dishonest.

Few listened, fewer still will be upset she's gone.

hullaballoo

If everyone in Ireland thought as most on this forum do, then 1950s Alabama is an exceptionally apt description.

PeterTheNinth

hullaballoo wrote: »

If everyone in Ireland thought as most on this forum do, then 1950s Alabama is an exceptionally apt description.

Give me a break. Most people outside of the liberal media call for at least a morsel of personal responsibility, even from minority groups. I saw the guards down at about four different parts of the ring road in Naas this evening, trying to move on Dil's friends who had broken down the barriers that the council put up to prevent illegal parking/halting. The Guards are trying to prevent them from trashing the place like they did last year. Dil NEVER presented this side to the story.

Nobody has a problem with somebody getting a hand up from the State, but they do have a problem with them taking the handout and then p1ssing all over the rules that the rest of us (who fund the whole operation) have to obey. It seems it's enough for the media that you can play the discrimination card, and that absolves you of having to behave like a decent Irish citizen or give anything back.

PeterTheNinth

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Give me a break. Most people outside of the liberal media call for at least a morsel of personal responsibility, even from minority groups. I saw the guards down at about four different parts of the ring road in Naas this evening, trying to move on Dil's friends who had broken down the barriers that the council put up to prevent illegal parking/halting. The Guards are trying to prevent them from trashing the place like they did last year. Dil NEVER presented this side to the story.

I think Dil Wickremasinghe's programme qualified as an 'authored' programme under the rules of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, in the same way as (for example) George Hook's former programme did.

Hosting an authored broadcast allows a presenter to present their own vision and political outlook in a way that might not necessarily be appropriate on news output.

You mention personal responsibility, and that's something I'd like to take up here.

Dil Wickremasinghe didn't arrive onto our airwaves with a privileged leg-up. She began her life in Europe as a homeless person in Italy. I don't mean to presuppose your own politics, this is merely a general observation; but surely the very essence of right-wing politics is to reward those who pull themselves up from dependency to self-sufficiency, especially where such persons promote that transition?

Surely an intellectually honest appraisal of DW's career would avoid the petty slings and arrows of ideology, and emphasise her underlying approach to policy.

Dil Wickremasinghe's style always seemed to encourage the individual to overcome economic and bureaucratic barriers, in order to defend their fate against the vicissitudes of modern life.

This is essentially a classic-liberal message. Yet, Dil Wickremasinghe didn't do this from her keyboard, she espoused this message throughout a 10-year career in a private-sector media outlet. 10 years in a privately-owned station isn't to be sniffed at. Try it sometime.

I wasn't exactly a dedicated listener, nor an uncritical one. Among my many criticisms, Dil Wickremasinghe wasn't radical enough in my book. She always seemed to be espousing the benefits of individual ambition, as opposed to the systematic change than me and my fellow lefties prefer to prioritise.

But this just brings me back to my confusion as to why she wasn't better-welcomed by the more conservative elements in our media. She seemed to typify everything they argue is possible, provided a person has sufficient ambition and determination.

southstar

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Give me a break. Most people outside of the liberal media call for at least a morsel of personal responsibility, even from minority groups. I saw the guards down at about four different parts of the ring road in Naas this evening, trying to move on Dil's friends who had broken down the barriers that the council put up to prevent illegal parking/halting. The Guards are trying to prevent them from trashing the place like they did last year. Dil NEVER presented this side to the stor

Nobody has a problem with somebody getting a hand up from the State, but they do have a problem with them taking the handout and then p1ssing all over the rules that the rest of us (who fund the whole operation) have to obey. It seems it's enough for the media that you can play the discrimination card, and that absolves you of having to behave like a decent Irish citizen or give anything back.

De lesbians down in Naas now? Probably signing on.

ballsymchugh

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think Dil Wickremasinghe's programme qualified as an 'authored' programme under the rules of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, in the same way as (for example) George Hook's former programme did.

Hosting an authored broadcast allows a presenter to present their own vision and political outlook in a way that might not necessarily be appropriate on news output.

You mention personal responsibility, and that's something I'd like to take up here.

Dil Wickremasinghe didn't arrive onto our airwaves with a privileged leg-up. She began her life in Europe as a homeless person in Italy. I don't mean to presuppose your own politics, this is merely a general observation; but surely the very essence of right-wing politics is to reward those who pull themselves up from dependency to self-sufficiency, especially where such persons promote that transition?

Surely an intellectually honest appraisal of DW's career would avoid the petty slings and arrows of ideology, and emphasise her underlying approach to policy.

Dil Wickremasinghe's style always seemed to encourage the individual to overcome economic and bureaucratic barriers, in order to defend their fate against the vicissitudes of modern life.

This is essentially a classic-liberal message. Yet, Dil Wickremasinghe didn't do this from her keyboard, she espoused this message throughout a 10-year career in a private-sector media outlet. 10 years in a privately-owned station isn't to be sniffed at. Try it sometime.

I wasn't exactly a dedicated listener, nor an uncritical one. Among my many criticisms, Dil Wickremasinghe wasn't radical enough in my book. She always seemed to be espousing the benefits of individual ambition, as opposed to the systematic change than me and my fellow lefties prefer to prioritise.

But this just brings me back to my confusion as to why she wasn't better-welcomed by the more conservative elements in our media. She seemed to typify everything they argue is possible, provided a person has sufficient ambition and determination.

really? i always got the impression that it was the average irish person who was keeping the downtrodden down. any time i heard it, it was why aren't we helping 'insert minority here'?

as i've said before, the last time i heard the show, she wasn't presenting, but it was some guy interviewing a bunch of immigrants that had taken up irish classes. it was pretty heartwarming to listen to people talking irish when it wasn't their 2nd/3rd/4th tongue.
you can bet that if it was Dil presenting, it would be why can't we learn all the languages of immigrants as they've already suffered enough.

Grolschevik

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

Surely an intellectually honest appraisal of DW's career would avoid the petty slings and arrows of ideology, and emphasise her underlying approach to policy.

The populist iteration of right-wing/quasi-libertarian ideology in Ireland, and especially on many Boards forums, is more often than not hopelessly internally inconsistent.

The terms 'SJW', 'PC', 'virtue signalling' 'feminazi' etc are all imports of various vintages from the depths of American chatrooms for the grievously offended white male.

It's all really childish. They should actually try reading some political theory, economic theory, and philosophy, as a start. Note I said theory. Not just the 4Chan, Reddit, and Wiki regurgitations of Rand-esque bull****.

suicide_circus

And what theory do you suggest reading, comrade?

Calhoun

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think Dil Wickremasinghe's programme qualified as an 'authored' programme under the rules of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, in the same way as (for example) George Hook's former programme did.

Hosting an authored broadcast allows a presenter to present their own vision and political outlook in a way that might not necessarily be appropriate on news output.

You mention personal responsibility, and that's something I'd like to take up here.

Dil Wickremasinghe didn't arrive onto our airwaves with a privileged leg-up. She began her life in Europe as a homeless person in Italy. I don't mean to presuppose your own politics, this is merely a general observation; but surely the very essence of right-wing politics is to reward those who pull themselves up from dependency to self-sufficiency, especially where such persons promote that transition?

Surely an intellectually honest appraisal of DW's career would avoid the petty slings and arrows of ideology, and emphasise her underlying approach to policy.

Dil Wickremasinghe's style always seemed to encourage the individual to overcome economic and bureaucratic barriers, in order to defend their fate against the vicissitudes of modern life.

This is essentially a classic-liberal message. Yet, Dil Wickremasinghe didn't do this from her keyboard, she espoused this message throughout a 10-year career in a private-sector media outlet. 10 years in a privately-owned station isn't to be sniffed at. Try it sometime.

I wasn't exactly a dedicated listener, nor an uncritical one. Among my many criticisms, Dil Wickremasinghe wasn't radical enough in my book. She always seemed to be espousing the benefits of individual ambition, as opposed to the systematic change than me and my fellow lefties prefer to prioritise.

But this just brings me back to my confusion as to why she wasn't better-welcomed by the more conservative elements in our media. She seemed to typify everything they argue is possible, provided a person has sufficient ambition and determination.

I did not know she was homeless in Italy, i know why she left her home country but never heard that part. She has done well in Ireland, its a shame you never hear to much about that part from her.

I suspect that she ticked all the right boxed for tokenism, as others have pointed out she did not fit with overall style of other programs on the station.

Grolschevik

Theory in the sense I mean is neutral. But try Gill's 'Great Debates in Economics', Roll's 'History of Economic Thought', and Kymlicka's 'Contemporary Political Philosophy' for starters. Though I prefer the first edition of the latter. Feel free to tap me for other recommendations.

suicide_circus

I fail to see what any of those publications have to say about Dil...

Calhoun

suicide_circus wrote: »

I fail to see what any of those publications have to say about Dil...

I would take a guess that the point being made is that us lesser intellects just did not understand Dil and we irrationally dislike her.

If we expanded our mind on topics of philosophy and economics we might start to understand where she is coming from.

suicide_circus

Calhoun wrote: »

I would take a guess that the point being made is that us lesser intellects just did not understand Dil and we irrationally dislike her.

If we expanded our mind on topics of philosophy and economics we might start to understand where she is coming from.

Oh I think we know where she's coming from, she's been flogging that particular one trick dead horse for many a year.

hullaballoo

Moderator: I presume it's the full moon but people are losing the run of themselves here.

The next comment on moderation is a permanent forum ban.

*Addition**
Since it was raised if you do have a problem with the modding you should send a PM to the mod or full mod team and explain why; questioning and arguing about mod decisions on thread will be dealt with as per above.

The_Valeyard

I found her show awful and i felt she was personally a pontificating windbag. But i wouldnt call for her to be taken off the air like Hook.

Yes her show was terrible, but it did offer a different point of view.


Bring back Hook though!!

DeadHand

suicide_circus wrote: »

I fail to see what any of those publications have to say about Dil...

It wasn't anything to do with Dil or the intellectual advancement of the poor peasants on this forum- that wasn't the point.

The point was to make the poster look/feel superior and all who disagree look/feel inferior. Like someone tangentially claiming they once had trials for Liverpool in an argument about soccer.

It grates some that others are allowed to have opinions.

In any case, I'd bet good money the poster hasn't actually read the publications mentioned.

DeadHand

The_Valeyard wrote: »

I found her show awful and i felt she was personally a pontificating windbag. But i wouldnt call for her to be taken off the air like Hook!

The comical part is no one called for her to be taken off, she took herself off.

She tried to bully NT with a massive publicity stunt but not enough people cared and they let her go.

No one cares now that her posturing failed and she is gone- except, of course, for our massively intellectual superiors here who are so steeped in philosophical, political and economic theory that they can appreciate the brilliance of Dil when the rest of the nation can't.

The_Valeyard

DeadHand wrote: »

The comical part is no one called for her to be taken off, she took herself off.

She tried to bully NT with a massive publicity stunt but not enough people cared and they let her go.

No one cares now that her posturing failed and she is gone- except, of course, for our massively intellectual superiors here who are so steeped in philosophical, political and economic theory that they can appreciate the brilliance of Dil when the rest of the nation can't.

maybe tbe whole thing is satire on a whole new level, but we simpletons are not able to grasp it?

Grolschevik

DeadHand wrote:

It wasn't anything to do with Dil or the intellectual advancement of the poor peasants on this forum- that wasn't the point.

Nope. Someone asked what 'theory' should be looked at rather than online quasi-libertarian echo chambers.

So I took them at face value and offered a couple of suggestions. I guess I should have realised they weren't serious by the snarky 'comrade' addendum.

Grolschevik

DeadHand wrote:

In any case, I'd bet good money the poster hasn't actually read the publications mentioned.

By the way, I'll take that bet.

yosser hughes

Calhoun wrote: »

I did not know she was homeless in Italy, i know why she left her home country but never heard that part. She has done well in Ireland, its a shame you never hear to much about that part from her.

I suspect that she ticked all the right boxed for tokenism, as others have pointed out she did not fit with overall style of other programs on the station.

Well, the 'source' for that is Dil herself. She did not arrive in Europe homeless, she arrived with her parents and lived with them and then she claims was she was kicked out by her Mother when she was 17 because she came out as a lesbian.
This is all Dil's version of events, we have no other.

Turnipman

Grolschevik wrote: »

By the way, I'll take that bet.

If the wording of the bet was changed to "read and understood" would you still take it?

Grolschevik

Turnipman wrote:

If the wording of the bet was changed to "read and understood" would you still take it?

I'd take it even if the wording was changed to "read, understood, wrote about, and taught to others in a formal way"...

Raven Runner

The_Valeyard wrote: »

i felt she was personally a pontificating windbag. But i wouldnt call for her to be taken off the air like Hook.

Same could be said for a lot of radio presenters including Ivan Yates , Dr. Ciara Kelly & George Hook

southstar

suicide_circus wrote: »

And what theory do you suggest reading, comrade?

Try coming up with some ideas of your own

DeadHand

Raven Runner wrote: »

Same could be said for a lot of radio presenters including Ivan Yates , Dr. Ciara Kelly & George Hook

True enough, but Yates and Hook usually have enough charm, humour and self awareness to soften their arrogance.

Kelly has no business on radio, bringing little to the table beyond staggering levels of self-righteousness.

PeterTheNinth

yosser hughes wrote: »

she claims was she was kicked out by her Mother when she was 17 because she came out as a lesbian. This is all Dil's version of events, we have no other.

But that's what I don't understand. She's constantly slapping herself on the back for fighting the good fight. But if you step back and look at it, she MOVED from the country where she was having difficulty over her sexuality, and chose to relocate to the most liberal country in the world that was accepting of her way of life. Surely the "fighter" would have stayed in Sri Lanka and fought for gay and lesbian rights there.

DeadHand

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Surely the "fighter" would have stayed in Sri Lanka and fought for gay and lesbian rights there.

It's a good deal safer and more profitable to combat imagined injustice in the first world than real injustice in the third.

the_pen_turner

I haven't heard much of her show so I won't comment beyond that what I heard I didn't like

Has anyone got her best and worst podcast or you tube videos .
I would like to hear them before I make my mind up

mugsymugsy

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I haven't heard much of her show so I won't comment beyond that what I heard I didn't like

Has anyone got her best and worst podcast or you tube videos .
I would like to hear them before I make my mind up

Honestly don't bother save your time and energy and do some work in the garden or hoovering the house