Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

xl500

elperello wrote: »

In your opinion.
You will find however that lot's of us politics watchers will appreciate the extra attention to this really big story.

Still could have interviewed from Dublin I see no benefit in having her in London

GreenandRed

Kivaro wrote: »

I chuckled at that one.
RTE behave as if they have unlimited resources.
Exhibit A:

If there are any decent independent investigative reporters in this country, they should take a look at RTE. The current debacle at the FAI might be an indicator of what could possibly be found.

They fairly well do have limited resources. Sitting on the golden goose when they should be singing for their supper. They should be producing more of what a TV audience will view, to provide a return for TV licence fee money, government revenue and whatever they get through advertising to a dwindling viewership in 2019. Or sell it to any organisation who think they could make any areas of it profitable.

elperello

xl500 wrote: »

Still could have interviewed from Dublin I see no benefit in having her in London

OK you fret about a few grand and I'll sit back and enjoy the coverage.

Kivaro

elperello wrote: »

OK you fret about a few grand and I'll sit back and enjoy the coverage.

It is called "accountability" and justification of the expenses incurred.

end of the road

Expunge wrote: »

It's not normal when the company is bust.

it's normal full stop.
and the company isn't actually bust, but is losing money while it's costs are rising. so down the line the public service which is expected to be both public service and commercial at the same time may indeed end up bust.
either way, public service national networks do seem to have some sort of presence outside the capital city of their country.

Expunge wrote: »

The station is 100 per cent funded by licence fee but has 2 millionaire presenters in it's lineup, neither contributing much to 'arts and culture'.

what station is 100% supported by the license fee?
whatever station it is, who cares unless it's 2fm?
even if it has 2 millionair presenters, so what? they did well for themselves and earned their money, whether you agree with it or not.
and it's in your opinion that they contribute little to arts and culture, others may not share such an opinion. others may not be bothered as long as the service provides what they want.

Expunge wrote: »

Out of the rest of the lineup of presenters and producers, salaries apparently range from 60 to 90 thousand Euro.

that's a non-issue really. only a small few are likely to be on those salaries and it will be based on length of service and what they bring in no doubt.

Expunge wrote: »

They have done really well for themselves alright compared to, say, most of the staff of Live 95fm or anyone else in the independent radio sector. No wonder they are squalking loud and hard.

it's up to staff in the independant sector to organise themselves and try and get better pay where they are, or try and get into rte or another broadcaster abroad if it's viable for them to do so.
it's not rte's fault that their pay may not be what they actually deserve.

Expunge wrote: »

As a listener to both Classic FM and Radio 3, as well as some other European and US similar radio services, it's very hard to tell where the unique expertise is in Lyric.

your judge of expertese may be different to another's. that is ultimately the issue. one person's expertese is another's clueless.

Expunge wrote: »

The word 'chancer' comes to mind when I hear some of them. And now we're supposed to believe that the world of the arts and serious music will shudder to a halt without 'em?

no, we are not supposed to believe that the world of the arts and serious music will shudder to a halt without "them" because nobody suggested as such apart from you suggesting that is what they were trying to say.
so chancer wouldn't really come to mind here, tbh.

Expunge wrote: »

They might have convinced you, a myriad of vested interest hangers on and some local politicans but I'd prefer the service to get better and become more credible. That actually might happen with some focused cutbacks.

convinced me of what?

elperello

Kivaro wrote: »

It is called "accountability" and justification of the expenses incurred.

Will you relax?
They are not accountable to you personally.

GreenandRed

elperello wrote: »

Will you relax?
They are not accountable to you personally.

If we pay taxes that help subsidise their income and pay for TV licences that help subsidie their income, then, yes, they are accountable to us.

end of the road

GreenandRed wrote: »

They fairly well do have limited resources. Sitting on the golden goose when they should be singing for their supper. They should be producing more of what a TV audience will view, to provide a return for TV licence fee money, government revenue and whatever they get through advertising to a dwindling viewership in 2019. Or sell it to any organisation who think they could make any areas of it profitable.

but what will a tv audience view? that is the problem. different people want different things, so providing this return probably isn't hugely possible.
it's also not the job of rte to be profitable, the expectation that it should be is exactly what i focuses on commercial activities at the expence of more public service content.
to sell it to any organisation who think they could make any areas of it profitable would mean quite likely a lot more commercial programming at the expence of ps content, probably even a removal of ps content altogether. as we can see from virgin media and others, that is the worst idea possible given the absolute tripe pumped out.

GreenandRed wrote: »

If we pay taxes that help subsidise their income and pay for TV licences that help subsidie their income, then, yes, they are accountable to us.

not to us on an individual basis, but rather to the relevant department/body/regulator on our behalf.

GreenandRed

end of the road wrote: »

but what will a tv audience view? that is the problem. different people want different things, so providing this return probably isn't hugely possible.
it's also not the job of rte to be profitable, the expectation that it should be is exactly what i focuses on commercial activities at the expence of more public service content.
to sell it to any organisation who think they could make any areas of it profitable would mean quite likely a lot more commercial programming at the expence of ps content, probably even a removal of ps content altogether. as we can see from virgin media and others, that is the worst idea possible given the absolute tripe pumped out.

There's plenty of deadwood in RTE television. Some of them seem happy not to move with the times, their jobs untouchable. I'm not talking about presenters on big money here. They made a smart move a couple of years ago to outsource their childrens TV content, someone made a good decision for once. In 2019 viewers have more and ever-increaing ways to watch television online. Last week Amazon broadcast a full weeks Premier League program and will do the same in 2 weeks. RTE television are not moving with the time. They upgraded the content on the player when the main problem with it is the coverage and buffering issues across the country. I hear you on the public service broadcasting but what public service TV would you class as essential broadcasting and how much of it could be done online and cheaper rather than in Montrose?

Kivaro

elperello wrote: »

Will you relax?
They are not accountable to you personally.

Oh yes they are. I am a stakeholder, as are the other license holders.
They are wasting our money .......... as is their norm.
And I doubt if the word "accountable" was ever heard in the RTE boardroom.

end of the road

GreenandRed wrote: »

There's plenty of deadwood in RTE television. Some of them seem happy not to move with the times, their jobs untouchable. I'm not talking about presenters on big money here. They made a smart move a couple of years ago to outsource their childrens TV content, someone made a good decision for once. In 2019 viewers have more and ever-increaing ways to watch television online. Last week Amazon broadcast a full weeks Premier League program and will do the same in 2 weeks. RTE television are not moving with the time. They upgraded the content on the player when the main problem with it is the coverage and buffering issues across the country. I hear you on the public service broadcasting but what public service TV would you class as essential broadcasting and how much of it could be done online and cheaper rather than in Montrose?

sure, but what moving with the times do you want them to engage in?

elperello

Kivaro wrote: »

Oh yes they are. I am a stakeholder, as are the other license holders.
They are wasting our money .......... as is their norm.
And I doubt if the word "accountable" was ever heard in the RTE boardroom.

Of course RTE should be accountable but not to you personally because you think
you have the right to dictate how they cover an important story.

44c a day is just to watch the telly.

elperello

GreenandRed wrote: »

If we pay taxes that help subsidise their income and pay for TV licences that help subsidie their income, then, yes, they are accountable to us.

Please see previous reply above.

NIMAN

I heard Matt Cooper mention RTE and how 81 of its 'contractors' are about to get made into RTE employees?
I think thats what they hinted at.

So is that the likes of Joe Duffy etc? So RTE was paying them as contractors wrongly all along? Should they have been getting employed by RTE and paid as an RTE employee?

I would guess these folk preferred to do this as it allowed them to take advantage of some tax break or other?

smelly sock

**** me what a ****e app. What a joke. I actually think they have tried to make it as bad as possible so people wont use it. Shameful service. How could they get it so wrong.

elperello

smelly sock wrote: »

**** me what a ****e app. What a joke. I actually think they have tried to make it as bad as possible so people wont use it. Shameful service. How could they get it so wrong.

I presume you refer to the RTE Player.
About time it was sorted out and made usable.

Dayo93

NIMAN wrote: »

I heard Matt Cooper mention RTE and how 81 of its 'contractors' are about to get made into RTE employees?
I think thats what they hinted at.

So is that the likes of Joe Duffy etc? So RTE was paying them as contractors wrongly all along? Should they have been getting employed by RTE and paid as an RTE employee?

I would guess these folk preferred to do this as it allowed them to take advantage of some tax break or other?

Sound like revenue needs to audit these "contractors" too .

GreenandRed

elperello wrote: »

Please see previous reply above.

44c a day just to watch the telly? The massive bulk of that goes to RTE television. I watch plenty of channels and listen to radio plus podcasts more than I watch RTE TV.

Plus paying Vodafone for broadband and TV. At least I have a choice when I choose my TV and broadband provider. If I could decide where my licence fee goes YouTube and The GAA Hour would be getting a lot of it.

mgn

elperello wrote: »

Of course RTE should be accountable but not to you personally because you think
you have the right to dictate how they cover an important story.

44c a day is just to watch the telly.

26c a day for Netflix, see what you get for that.

Kivaro

Dayo93 wrote: »

Sound like revenue needs to audit these "contractors" too .

More than an audit is required.
As I suggested earlier, an investigation is warranted.

RTE has been untouchable for years; it is time to rattle their protected, detached cage.

Boggles

mgn wrote: »

26c a day for Netflix, see what you get for that.

95% shíté and an ever dwindling database.

Probably on par with RTE but they spend 16 billion.

elperello

mgn wrote: »

26c a day for Netflix, see what you get for that.

I know and if you consider the amount of content on Amazon, Google Chromecast and other platforms as well it's a wonder RTE can exist at all.

If we don't get this Commission right it might not.

GreenandRed

end of the road wrote: »

sure, but what moving with the times do you want them to engage in?

I wasn't ready for that question End of the Road, a very good question.

I think they need to stop adding to the player without first improving the coverage and quality of streaming. If. They could do that it's possible, not probable, that they could add some subscription content like add-free live programming, archive material.

I can only say what I like and a more youthful look to sports presentation, plus more live sports, would be nice but not to everyone's taste. I like RTE radio still and especially live sport but wonder why live sport and highlights on RTE TV seems flatter than on radio. it's cheap enough for them to show American TV repeats but there are surely some talented musicians/comedians/filmmakers in Ireland to showcase on RTE. But I'm probably too old to answer that question well because I don't consider X-Factor, Dancing with the Stars, Celebrity Jungle as real TV, just vehicles for talentless people to show how talentless they actually are.

elperello

GreenandRed wrote: »

44c a day just to watch the telly? The massive bulk of that goes to RTE television. I watch plenty of channels and listen to radio plus podcasts more than I watch RTE TV.

Plus paying Vodafone for broadband and TV. At least I have a choice when I choose my TV and broadband provider. If I could decide where my licence fee goes YouTube and The GAA Hour would be getting a lot of it.

Didn't mean to be disparaging but under our current system you do just pay the licence to have a TV.

I expect that will change radically in the coming years.

GreenandRed

elperello wrote: »

Didn't mean to be disparaging but under our current system you do just pay the licence to have a TV.

I expect that will change radically in the coming years.

Not disparaging at all or taken as disparaging. Paying the licence isn't a problem, most of it subsidising a loss making TV station is. There are surely plenty of talented people in RTE and plenty of talented movie makers, plus viewers that have good ideas on a way forward.

For all their hype, Netflix, Amazon Prime, NOW TV etc also has a high proportion of junk content. Just because they have a lot of subscriptions is no reason that RTE couldn't have some good forward thinking plans and improve their content. But not under the current regime.

elperello

GreenandRed wrote: »

Not disparaging at all or taken as disparaging. Paying the licence isn't a problem, most of it subsidising a loss making TV station is. There are surely plenty of talented people in RTE and plenty of talented movie makers, plus viewers that have good ideas on a way forward.

For all their hype, Netflix, Amazon Prime, NOW TV etc also has a high proportion of junk content. Just because they have a lot of subscriptions is no reason that RTE couldn't have some good forward thinking plans and improve their content. But not under the current regime.

OK, misunderstanding cleared up.

As I see it we have chance now with this Commission to secure a sustainable Public Broadcasting Service to serve us into the future.

All ideas should be on the table and the more submissions the better.

We can't rely on the services you mention and others to provide content that reflects and reports on our country.

We need to find a way to do it for ourselves.

We will have to pay for it.

mfceiling

end of the road wrote: »

it's not rte's fault that their pay may not be what they actually deserve.

So who is at fault for these huge wage costs in RTE?

They whinge about costs etc. and then they go all out on the coverage of the UK elections. Zero reason Dobbo and Sharon need to be over there and no reason to cover it throughout the night as nobody is staying up to watch it here. Give us an update in the morning like other outlets will for a fraction of the cost ffs.

end of the road

GreenandRed wrote: »

I wasn't ready for that question End of the Road, a very good question.

I think they need to stop adding to the player without first improving the coverage and quality of streaming. If. They could do that it's possible, not probable, that they could add some subscription content like add-free live programming, archive material.

I can only say what I like and a more youthful look to sports presentation, plus more live sports, would be nice but not to everyone's taste. I like RTE radio still and especially live sport but wonder why live sport and highlights on RTE TV seems flatter than on radio. it's cheap enough for them to show American TV repeats but there are surely some talented musicians/comedians/filmmakers in Ireland to showcase on RTE. But I'm probably too old to answer that question well because I don't consider X-Factor, Dancing with the Stars, Celebrity Jungle as real TV, just vehicles for talentless people to show how talentless they actually are.

that's a good answer in fairness and i agree with it all.
i do think the "entertainment" fluff and imported stuff does need to go from rte if i'm honest as it can be got elsewhere and it's not very good tbh.
i used to watch i'm a celebrity years ago but i did get board of it.

mfceiling wrote: »

So who is at fault for these huge wage costs in RTE?

to clear up the matter i was referring to the staff in the independent sector.
it's not rte's fault that the staff of the independent sector may not be paid what they actually deserve.
the reasonable to high wage costs in rte depending on the individual are down to many factors i would think.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

They whinge about costs etc. and then they go all out on the coverage of the UK elections. Zero reason Dobbo and Sharon need to be over there and no reason to cover it throughout the night as nobody is staying up to watch it here. Give us an update in the morning like other outlets will for a fraction of the cost ffs.

giving an update in the morning like other outlets will at a fraction of the cost is not public service broadcasting, and there may very well be people staying up to watch it as it's not an average general election.
rte are absolutely right to be giving serious coverage to this election, it's an election that will in all likely hood see serious changes to britain, brexit asside, should the result go as is being said, which is likely.