Is the narcissism of RTE employees getting out of hand?

Wheeliebin30

artvanderlay wrote: »

I wonder how many travellers pay the licence fee, or are fined/imprisoned if they don't. They are really going to police that!

Or electricity and bin charges?

Phoebas

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I wonder if they'll be as quick to threaten the "New Irish" with this for non payment.

artvanderlay wrote: »

I wonder how many travellers pay the licence fee, or are fined/imprisoned if they don't. They are really going to police that!

That's quite the segue.

artvanderlay

Maybe we should all claim discrimination against us, and go to the EU about our government forcing us to pay bin charges, tv licences, utility bills, car tax/insurance etc. If others don't do it, or the rules are not enforced against them, then why should we have to do it? The only answer is discrimination against us

Maybe if paying a licence fee was optional for everybody, there wouldn't be a problem then.

ohnonotgmail

Phoebas wrote: »

That's quite the segue.

there is nothing that the good people of AH cannot turn into an anti-immigrant or traveler thread. Nothing

DublinWriter

Demonique wrote: »

That part kept me from liking your post, Pat Kenny was the most mediocre and overpaid of the lot of them

PK was/is a very good political interviewer.

What he's not is "Mr.Saturday Night" which is what RTE tried to shoe-horn him into after GB's retirement.

artvanderlay

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is nothing that the good people of AH cannot turn into an anti-immigrant or traveler thread. Nothing

Oh relax. It was just a thought: I wonder how many travellers have tv licences? Just thinking out loud. I'd love to see the stats for this. Not everything is an anti-immigrant/anti-traveller rant: sometimes people can just be curious about statistics Also, so long as the rules are the same for everybody, then I have no problem.

jmayo

Phoebas wrote: »

That's right.
Similar to other public services that you don't use but have to pay for.

It's swings and roundabouts. I bet there are public services that you consume but other people don't but still have to pay for.

Why oh why do I believe someone has skin in the game ?

My taxes are supposedly contributing towards schools, hospitals, fire services, Garda.
Now thankfully I don't need those emergency services, but at least I know they offer someone somewhere help in times of need.

RTE on the other hand, what do they offer.
Sanctimonious claptrap, arrogant personal opinions from over paid gimps who more often than not are in their positions thanks to a full dollop of nepotism.

Fooks sake working in RTE must be like a community get together in rural Ireland, the rural Ireland they often poke fun at, you never who the fook you are talking to and how many relatives they have in the room.

Phoebas

jmayo wrote: »

Why oh why do I believe someone has skin in the game ?

I don't have any skin in the game.
I'd suggest the reason you believe I do is because you're so blinkered that you just can't believe anyone could hold a different opinion without an ulterior motive.

Doctor Jimbob

Phoebas wrote: »

That's right.
Similar to other public services that you don't use but have to pay for.

It's swings and roundabouts. I bet there are public services that you consume but other people don't but still have to pay for.

I think more people would be okay with paying for a national TV service, provided that service a) Represented good value, b) Was unbiased and c) Hired based on talent rather than creating jobs for the lads.

RTE don't meet any of those criteria.

Phoebas

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I think more people would be okay with paying for a national TV service, provided that service a) Represented good value, b) Was unbiased and c) Hired based on talent rather than creating jobs for the lads.

RTE don't meet any of those criteria.

There again, you both wrote these criteria and made the judgement on them.

Almost RTE-esque, wouldn't you say?

Bigbagofcans

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Cheaper and less addictive that sleeping pills ?

You could never fall asleep to EastEnders cos of the endless roaring and crying!

Bigbagofcans

artvanderlay wrote: »

Maybe we should all claim discrimination against us, and go to the EU about our government forcing us to pay bin charges, tv licences, utility bills, car tax/insurance etc. If others don't do it, or the rules are not enforced against them, then why should we have to do it? The only answer is discrimination against us

Maybe if paying a licence fee was optional for everybody, there wouldn't be a problem then.

Genuine question: Do people on benefits have to pay licence fee?

artvanderlay

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Genuine question: Do people on benefits have to pay licence fee?

Yes. I think they get it free if they are on disability. Some perk that is!

Squatter

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Genuine question: Do people on benefits have to pay licence fee?

Some do, others don't!

You qualify for the Household Benefits Package if you are aged 70 or over. You do not need to be getting a State pension and the package is not means tested.

You also qualify if you are getting Carer's Allowance, whether on a full or half-rate payment, but you must be providing full-time care and living with the person you are caring for.

You can also qualify for the Household Benefits Package if you meet one of the following conditions and live alone or only with excepted people.

1. You are between 66 and 70 and are getting:

State Pension (Contributory)
State Pension (Non-Contributory)
Widow's, Widower's or Surviving Civil Partner's (Contributory) Pension
Widow's, Widower's or Surviving Civil Partner's (Non-Contributory) Pension
Deserted Wife's Benefit or Allowance
An ordinary Garda Widow's Pension from the Department of Justice and Equality or
An equivalent Social Security Pension/Benefit from a country covered by EU Regulations or from a country with which Ireland has a Bilateral Social Security Agreement

2. You are aged between 66 and 70 and not getting one of the above qualifying payments, but satisfy a means test

3. You are under 66 and are getting:

Disability Allowance
Invalidity Pension
Blind Pension
Incapacity Supplement or Workmen's Compensation with Disablement Pension (for at least 12 months)
An equivalent Social Security Pension/Benefit from a country covered by EU Regulations, or from a country with which Ireland has a Bilateral Social Security Agreement

4. You are caring for a person who is getting Constant Attendance Allowance.

RobbieTheRobber

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Genuine question: Do people on benefits have to pay licence fee?

You can get a free Tv license under the household benefits package if you are under 66 and in receipt of the following
Disability Allowance
Invalidity Pension
Blind Pension
Incapacity Supplement or Workmen's Compensation with Disablement Pension (for at least 12 months)
An equivalent Social Security Pension/Benefit from a country covered by EU Regulations, or from a country with which Ireland has a Bilateral Social Security Agreement

Citizens information has the full details here

jmayo

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't have any skin in the game.
I'd suggest the reason you believe I do is because you're so blinkered that you just can't believe anyone could hold a different opinion without an ulterior motive.

Well for someone that doesn't have skin in the game you really are a very vehement supporter of said organisation.

Maybe it is because we all know RTE is such an incestous organisation that a lot of people can only see someone connected to it being so blinkered in their support for it.

Phoebas wrote: »

There again, you both wrote these criteria and made the judgement on them.

Almost RTE-esque, wouldn't you say?

Care to argue Doctor Jimbob's points rather than glibly writing them off.

I think more people would be okay with paying for a national TV service, provided that service a) Represented good value, b) Was unbiased and c) Hired based on talent rather than creating jobs for the lads.

RTE don't meet any of those criteria.

For instance, do you think RTE offers value for money ?

Is paying some "broadcasters" nearly 500k worth it ?
Are you going to seriously tell us ray d'arcy is worth 400k p.a ?

Can you tell us the recent presidential election coverage was not completely biased against Peter Casey ?

Can you tell us how come so many offspring of RTE staff end up is nice paying jobs there ?

Phoebas

jmayo wrote: »

Well for someone that doesn't have skin in the game you really are a very vehement supporter of said organisation.

Again, take your blinkers off.
I don't think you could point to a single post of mine that qualifies as 'vehement support' for RTÉ.

I support public service broadcasting. I think RTÉ leave a lot to be desired, but I wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Cina

The worst thing about the license fee for me is that's we're still subjected to adverts!

At least the BBC don't have adverts.

RTÉ are getting money from the license fee AND from adverts, which already gives them an unfair advantage over other broadcasters here, and yet they still seem to be constantly in debt because of their insane salaries to people most of the public don't even like.

It's a disgrace.

artvanderlay

So I think we can all agree that RTE is utter ****e; that the nepotism/arrogance/cronyism on display there is disgusting; none of the employees are worth their inflated salaries; and we shouldn't have to pay a license fee to fund this crap. Ok, I'm done. Night all! :P

Doctor Jimbob

Phoebas wrote: »

There again, you both wrote these criteria and made the judgement on them.

Almost RTE-esque, wouldn't you say?

What standards do you think a public service broadcaster should be held to?

Phoebas

Cina wrote: »

The worst thing about the license fee for me is that's we're still subjected to adverts!

At least the BBC don't have adverts.

RTÉ are getting money from the license fee AND from adverts, which already gives them an unfair advantage over other broadcasters here, and yet they still seem to be constantly in debt because of their insane salaries to people most of the public don't even like.

It's a disgrace.

The BBC get almost £4bn from the UK licence fee.

You're comparing apples and orchards.

Phoebas

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

What standards do you think a public service broadcaster should be held to?

Fairness, impartiality, equality of access, quality programming, value for money... You could probably add to this list.

Do RTÉ score highly on all of these? Not often.
Does that mean the best course of action is to shutter RTÉ? No.

Cina

Phoebas wrote: »

The BBC get almost £4bn from the UK licence fee.

You're comparing apples and orchards.

Right, they do. So RTÉ in that case should be scaling back and operating within their means instead of paying their "stars" nearly as much as the BBC pay theirs.

Plus the BBC has what? 8x the budget? And arguably 20x the quality.

if TV3 can do it without license fees then why can't RTÉ?

Bigbagofcans

RTÉ really get their money's worth with Kathryn Thomas.

Doctor Jimbob

Phoebas wrote: »

The BBC get almost £4bn from the UK licence fee.

You're comparing apples and orchards.

In 2016, RTE received 179 million euro in licence fees, with 158 million coming from commercial income, for a total of 337 million.https://static.rasset.ie/documents/about/rte-annual-report-2016.pdf

In the same year, the BBC received 3.74 Billion in licence fees. https://www.statista.com/statistics/284705/the-bbc-s-licence-fee-income-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/

Based on their figures, RTE's total income is around 10% of the BBC's, with their Licence income being around 5% of BBC. Given that the population of Ireland is around 7% of the UK's, that actually seems like a fair enough way to make up any comparative deficit without charging even more for the licence fee.

When you look into salaries though, the problem becomes clear. In 2017, BBC's highest paid presenter was Chris Evans, on 2.2 million, while RTE's was Ryan Tubridy on just under half a million. The BBC generate 10 times more income than RTE, but their highest paid staff member is only on around 4 times more than RTE's.

I do think it's unfair to expect RTE to be able to exist entirely on a licence fee, or to produce the same quality as the BBC do, but things clearly aren't being run well when people like Tubridy and Duffy are being paid these inflated salaries.

James Brown

Cina wrote: »

Right, they do. So RTÉ in that case should be scaling back and operating within their means instead of paying their "stars" nearly as much as the BBC pay theirs.

Plus the BBC has what? 8x the budget? And arguably 20x the quality.

if TV3 can do it without license fees then why can't RTÉ?

I remember having laugh a long time ago. The idea was Gerry Ryan, Pat Kenny et al were worth every penny in the fear Channel 4 or the BBC would poach them

While every organisation would have an element of nepotism, a struggling broadcaster with a poor reputation should really be putting talent and skill first.

AndrewJRenko

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I think more people would be okay with paying for a national TV service, provided that service a) Represented good value, b) Was unbiased and c) Hired based on talent rather than creating jobs for the lads.

RTE don't meet any of those criteria.

Honestly, if Darcy and Tubs were getting the same €198 a week as people on the dole get, there would still be whingers round here and elsewhere moaning about RTE, just like they moan about every public service and most private ones.

jmayo wrote: »

Sport ?

TG4 now probably offers more sport than RTE.

RTE no longer are covering English Premier League, Heineken ERC Cup, Pro 14.
I remembered when they had live coverage of such things as Wimbledon, RDS Horse Show, Tour de France.
Some of those are now done by TG4.

They no longer cover all of Ireland's rugby matches, or Rep of Ireland's soccer matches.
Hell AFAIK they didn't even have radio coverage of the day that Ireland beat the Kiwis for the first time ever.

They no longer cover all of the GAA championship calendar either, and I am tired of having to go to pub to watch some matches on Sky.

I think all broadcasters worldwide are running foul of sporting organisations selling out to the highest bidder. Ironically, to address the problems that you're complaining about would almost certainly require increases in the licence fee or whatever form of subvention they get for public service broadcasting.

I'm not sure why they would be doing English premier league or TDeF though. There is some public service value on focusing on native Irish events, GAA, League of Ireland, local rugby teams (though it is a stretch to consider any of these teams as 'local' any more).

jmayo wrote: »

A lot of what RTE offers is in no bloody way public service broadcasting.
Australian and British soaps, repeats of same ad nauseam.
A home grown soap, a few chat shows that are basically vehicles for over paid supposed talent.
The amount of fawning they do over their own is vomit inducing.

Sad to think that an old sick octogenarian is still miles head and shoulders above anything that RTE currently have.

Hell I heard Mike Murphy interviewed the other day by another of the current crop of supposed stars i.e. overpaid sanctimonious opionated ar**holes ray d'arcy.

77 year old Mike Murphy has probably forgotten more about broadcasting than that eejit from Kildare will ever know.

There is some truth in this, though I'm not sure I'd be holding up MM as a bastion of public service broadcasting. He handled the light entertainment stuff lightly, when there was a market for that kind of thing.

But ironically, the standard bearer that others are holding up for RTE - Virgin Media - is almost completely gone down the road you described above, of crap soaps and crap 'celeb'/reality shows.

jmayo wrote: »

And then when they do current affairs the shows are in no way objective, see for prime example how they dealt with Peter Casey, same for way they deal with discussion on immigration.
FFS you can be sure who the usual chancers characters they have on the shows with the same bleating arguments.
They now don't even bother offering a different opinion ala someone like Ian O'Doherty.

Would that be the same Ian O'Doherty who made his own documentary on RTE? The one who appeared on Brendan O'Connor's show last year? The one who appeared on Daithi/Maura's show this year? Yeah, he's really being silenced completely, isn't he?

And exactly what bias did they show with Casey? What interview or what article was biased - please be specific now.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

How is RTE a "public service" akin to hospitals and roads ?

Because countries with public service broadcasting have less right-wing extremism and more press freedom.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

But still have to pay for it under pain of sanctions, fines and possibly jail ?

Yes, just like other taxes.

DublinWriter wrote: »

The licence-fee is used by the government like a choke-chain on RTE to keep them generally in line.

Anyone remember that politician on RTE Radio a few years back lashing out at one interviewer, stating that he was on the working-committee that decides the licence fee, and the interviewer having to remind him that he was live on air?

Early 2000's I think.

Don't remember anything like that interview, but it would be interesting to see who the politician involved was. There is bit of a 'clubby' relationship between RTE and politicians all right. They do get a fair grilling by any of the political interviewers, but they also get too much unchallenged coverage for their latest announcement or initiative.

artvanderlay wrote: »

I see the value in public services (primary schools, healthcare etc) so your argument is a bit ridiculous. I don't see any value in RTE, certainly with the way it is being run now. It should be an optional service: if there are people out there who want to pay to support the cronyism, nepositism and over-inflated salaries in RTE, then fire away. But don't force me to do it if I don't want to, and certainly don't threaten me with the law if I refuse to pay for a sub-standard service.

As I said I have no problem paying for a good service. I am contributing to my local radio station, which has more genuine talent on in than RTE, and it's people doing it for free. I'll pay Netflix a few quid a month because it entertains me. RTE should be ashamed of itself, of it's greed and arrogance. It's a Dublin-centered small pond; it's a joke. It copies everything from the UK or better broadcasters, and then says look at us aren't we great, we came up with this **** by ourselves (no you didn't!).

I don't see any value in primary school system, certainly with the way it is being run now. It should be an optional service: if there are people out there who want to pay to support the cronyism, nepositism and over-inflated salaries , then fire away. But don't force me to do it if I don't want to, and certainly don't threaten me with the law if I refuse to pay for a sub-standard service.

As I said I have no problem paying for a good service. I am contributing to my primary school, which has more genuine talent on in than the govt funded schools, and it's people doing it for free. I'll pay the grinds teacher a few quid a month because it keeps the kids busy. The primary school system should be ashamed of itself, of it's greed and arrogance. It's a Dublin-centered small pond; it's a joke. It copies everything from the UK or better educators, and then says look at us aren't we great, we came up with this **** by ourselves (no you didn't!).

That's how it works, right? Once I've decided that I don't want/like any public service, I get to opt out of paying?

artvanderlay wrote: »

It copies everything from the UK or better broadcasters, and then says look at us aren't we great, we came up with this **** by ourselves (no you didn't!).

That's pretty much how the international TV business works. Someone comes up with a 'format' and they all sell or licence the formats to each other. The RTE show 'Play the Game' was hugely successful abroad - desperate show, but it works.

artvanderlay wrote: »

I have no problem with a public tv or radio service, and yes there should be a public service in each country. But do all those countries you listed compel you to pay a television licence??? Show me that stat. That's the one that really counts.

If you want me to do your research for you, we'll need to agree an hourly rate up front. Are you sure you can afford me?

But does it really matter whether public service broadcasting is funded by licence fee or general taxation or a levy on broadcasters? There are a few different models out there, but one way or other, but taxpayer pays.

artvanderlay wrote: »

If the government wants to fund a national broadcaster, then do so through taxes, and make RTE accountable for how they spend their money. But don't ask me for €160 to finance those c*nts Tubridy, Joe Duffy, Dee Forbes, and the likes.

Accountable as in - publishes an annual report? Publishes the salaries of the top earners? What exact form or accountability would you like?

I've no time for Tubridy or Darcy myself, and I despair when I see them interviewing another RTE insider, but they do manage to bring in the audience that brings in the advertisers, whether you or I like it or not.

jmayo wrote: »

Can you tell us the recent presidential election coverage was not completely biased against Peter Casey ?

What specifically was wrong with their coverage of Casey? What particular article or clip was biased?

jmayo wrote: »

Can you tell us how come so many offspring of RTE staff end up is nice paying jobs there ?

How many offspring in any business end up in nice paying jobs? Isn't it fairly common for kids to follow their parents into medicine, or law, or plumbing or farming, or broadcasting?

Phoebas

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

In 2016, RTE received 179 million euro in licence fees, with 158 million coming from commercial income, for a total of 337 million.https://static.rasset.ie/documents/about/rte-annual-report-2016.pdf

In the same year, the BBC received 3.74 Billion in licence fees. https://www.statista.com/statistics/284705/the-bbc-s-licence-fee-income-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/

Based on their figures, RTE's total income is around 10% of the BBC's, with their Licence income being around 5% of BBC. Given that the population of Ireland is around 7% of the UK's, that actually seems like a fair enough way to make up any comparative deficit without charging even more for the licence fee.

When you look into salaries though, the problem becomes clear. In 2017, BBC's highest paid presenter was Chris Evans, on 2.2 million, while RTE's was Ryan Tubridy on just under half a million. The BBC generate 10 times more income than RTE, but their highest paid staff member is only on around 4 times more than RTE's.

I do think it's unfair to expect RTE to be able to exist entirely on a licence fee, or to produce the same quality as the BBC do, but things clearly aren't being run well when people like Tubridy and Duffy are being paid these inflated salaries.

The licence fee isn't the BBCs only source of revenue and I don't know why population is a useful metric when calculating how much it costs to run a broadcasting service.

I do agree that Duffy and Tubridy are vastly overpaid.

Edgware

Can a week go by without getting a "Gaybo's brave battle against cancer" and how he wants to get back on the airwaves again?

Doctor Jimbob

Phoebas wrote: »

The licence fee isn't the BBCs only source of revenue and I don't know why population is a useful metric when calculating how much it costs to run a broadcasting service.

I do agree that Duffy and Tubridy are vastly overpaid.

BBC having other sources of revenue just reinforces my point about RTE's top earners being vastly overpaid though. You've said you agree with that point though, so fair enough.

I don't see how population isn't relevant when you're comparing two services partly run via funding from said population.