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

ShamNNspace

SJW Lover wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

There is rarely ever any 'fake news' in mainstream journalism.

:pac::pac:

CARSTON!! Fetch the smelling salts at once

SJW Lover

ShamNNspace wrote: »

CARSTON!! Fetch the smelling salts at once

Said with a straight face and the usual condescending tone. You'd just have to feel pity.

James Brown

SJW Lover wrote: »

:pac::pac:

Yep you go to some alt-right youtuber for your 'facts'

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening,” Trump said.

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” - George Orwell, 1984

Aren't you clued in... :rolleyes:

Discodog

Boggles wrote: »

Really? 15 degrees, completely calm and overcast have killed how many in Ireland?

Anyway storms or adverse weather conditions are more likely to cause injury or be deadly, That's why we have warnings.

To say it was "only an orange warning" is naive and completely misses the point.



Of course they do FFS.



If gusts get high enough to fell trees that pushes it into a different warning category.

This isn't very hard understand TBF.

A tree fell today, someone could of been killed - no warning. You had better get an RTE news crew on the scene right away. Oh & it rained which made the roads wet & slippery. Warnings are for exceptional risk.

But the point isn't ME's warnings. It's RTE's sensationalising of them.

Discodog

Elmo wrote: »

Only as long as storms don't occur in August, if anything major happens in August RTare on holidays.

The Boxing Day Tsunami was a classic example.

Elmo

Discodog wrote: »

The Boxing Day Tsunami was a classic example.

Stephen's Day

Atlantic Dawn

Forbes should be seconded to TG4 for 6 months to see how that is run on a fraction of the cost.

SJW Lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yep you go to some alt-right youtuber for your 'facts'

Why do you people always have to put words in other people's mouths? It really devalues anything you are trying to say. You made the sweeping statement (and i am directly quoting you here) - There is rarely ever any 'fake news' in mainstream journalism." That is complete rubbish and, if you think that, you're at best incredibly naive. You poor boy.

James Brown

SJW Lover wrote: »

Why do you people always have to put words in other people's mouths? It really devalues anything you are trying to say. You made the sweeping statement (and i am directly quoting you here) - There is rarely ever any 'fake news' in mainstream journalism." That is complete rubbish and, if you think that, you're at best incredibly naive. You poor boy.

'you people'
So does spinning yarns and being condescending.

I bet you can't point out any 'fake news' specifically on RTE.
Are we agreed 'fake news' is purposefully broadcasting lies or faked content?

Just because the truth hurts, doesn't make it fake. Sometimes inaccurate and open to correction, for sure. Try watching less American conservative outlets.

Boggles

'Fake news' really is the war cry of the clinical moron!

It use to mean simply false news or lies, now it means any news that the clinical morons don't agree with or don't find favorable to whatever cock eyed narrative they are trying to peddle.

The lot of them should be fired into the sun.

Absolute cretins.

Boggles

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Forbes should be seconded to TG4 for 6 months to see how that is run on a fraction of the cost.

TBF I imagine the copyright on Little House on the Prairie has probably expired.

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

TBF I imagine the copyright on Little House on the Prairie has probably expired.

TBF I am sure Orange is the new Black, Catch 22, Mr Robot & perpetual grace ltd etc have not

retalivity

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Forbes should be seconded to TG4 for 6 months to see how that is run on a fraction of the cost.

Imagine the expenses she could claim for that - taxis up amd down to galway, overnight stays at the G or gelnlo abbey...

SOLD!

end of the road

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Here's an example of highly skilled broadcasters.
Liveline:
Joe: "Good afternoon caller, can I have your point please?"

Repeated ad nausiam - paid 300k a year for this?

Marian:
"Well what do you think will happen with Brexit?"

And similar.

do joe and marian bring in high amounts of revenue in return for what they get paid?
if so, then anything else is irrelevant, if not then do get rid.
both of them, marian especially, are decent broadcasters in my opinion.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

A 5 year old could present most of these shows, particularly with a team of producers, editors and researchers feeding questions in their ear as happens with RTE.

a 5 year old couldn't present anything, never mind shows on a radio station. if they could, they would be presenting. they aren't, at least not on rte, or any station in this country to my knowledge.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Highly paid mediocre broadcasters. Cut these salaries substantially and then see what you are left with. We know from experience the more money you give RTE, the more it is wasted on higher salaries for mediocre broadcasters.

only mediocre broadcasters in your opinion. your opinion doesn't make them mediocre, as mine doesn't make the ones i believe to be as such, mediocre in reality. they may very well be, but if they do what they are expected to do by their employer and bring in what is required, then they are successful.

ToBeFrank123

Boggles wrote: »

'Fake news' really is the war cry of the clinical moron!

It use to mean simply false news or lies, now it means any news that the clinical morons don't agree with or don't find favorable to whatever cock eyed narrative they are trying to peddle.

The lot of them should be fired into the sun.

Absolute cretins.

We can call it false news, exagerated news, inaccurate news, anything you like. Its news that lacks credibility and RTE were guilty of it big time with Lorenzo. They got it wrong and made a mountain out of a molehill.

When a news broadcaster makes a mistake they deserve to be called out on it, rather than patted on the back as you would.

RTE were sued for libel at least once in the past. False news there too. I'm sure there are other examples which you'd prefer we ignored. Oh wait I just thought of one, the Frontline presidental debates tweet of 2011.

ToBeFrank123

end of the road wrote: »

Here's an example of highly skilled broadcasters.
Liveline:
Joe: "Good afternoon caller, can I have your point please?"

Repeated ad nausiam - paid 300k a year for this?

Marian:
"Well what do you think will happen with Brexit?"

And similar.

do joe and marian bring in high amounts of revenue in return for what they get paid?
if so, then anything else is irrelevant, if not then do get rid.
both of them, marian especially, are decent broadcasters in my opinion.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

A 5 year old could present most of these shows, particularly with a team of producers, editors and researchers feeding questions in their ear as happens with RTE.

a 5 year old couldn't present anything, never mind shows on a radio station. if they could, they would be presenting. they aren't, at least not on rte, or any station in this country to my knowledge.



only mediocre broadcasters in your opinion. your opinion doesn't make them mediocre, as mine doesn't make the ones i believe to be as such, mediocre in reality. they may very well be, but if they do what they are expected to do by their employer and bring in what is required, then they are successful.

Do you think a guy whose on air for under 90 minutes a day, takes most of the summer off and whose main skill is saying "good afternoon caller, can I have your point?" deserves 300k a year??

Because I don't. And he's fairly typical of RTE.

As for bringing in ad revenue, there's large teams behind most of these programs and they need to be paid too. So I'd query how much they take in. Of course RTE will use the time honoured excuse of commercial sensitivity to hide behind.

end of the road

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Forbes should be seconded to TG4 for 6 months to see how that is run on a fraction of the cost.

she wouldn't need to go to tg4 to see how it is ran on a fraction of the cost, i can even tell you that.
it is 1 channel.

ToBeFrank123

end of the road wrote: »

she wouldn't need to go to tg4 to see how it is ran on a fraction of the cost, i can even tell you that.
it is 1 channel.

Still a great channel and full of Irish produced content. And their coverage of Irish sport is far superior to the main RTE channels.

end of the road

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

We can call it false news, exagerated news, inaccurate news, anything you like. Its news that lacks credibility and RTE were guilty of it big time with Lorenzo. They got it wrong and made a mountain out of a molehill.

When a news broadcaster makes a mistake they deserve to be called out on it, rather than patted on the back as you would.

RTE were sued for libel at least once in the past. False news there too. I'm sure there are other examples which you'd prefer we ignored. Oh wait I just thought of one, the Frontline presidental debates tweet of 2011.

rte were not guilty of fake or false news with their reporting of the storm.
there was no intent to deceive the audience, nor did they deliberately broadcast inaccurate information.
ergo, no fake or false news, no news that lacked credibility. simply news that didn't happen as expected.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Do you think a guy whose on air for under 90 minutes a day, takes most of the summer off and whose main skill is saying "good afternoon caller, can I have your point?" deserves 300k a year??

Because I don't. And he's fairly typical of RTE.

yes i believe he must be worth it, as if he wasn't, he wouldn't be getting it.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

As for bringing in ad revenue, there's large teams behind most of these programs and they need to be paid too. So I'd query how much they take in. Of course RTE will use the time honoured excuse of commercial sensitivity to hide behind.

because it is commercially sensitive given rte is expected to operate as a commercial entity. you can blame the state for that one.

Jeff2

I did lol yesterday l when a TV news presenter saying Brendan.C..... Was playing the part of Trump in a film instead of Brendan Gleeson.

It looked planed.:)

Elmo

End of the Road one thing I would not do is defend the wages of RTÉ personalities.

When RTÉ continues to trot out that they only spend 1% on there top earners and say this is a drop in the ocean.

And then tell the media that they do not plan to cut funding to children’s content when in reality they all ready had by 25% and then the following year cut it again by 50% bringing it down to just 1% of their total costs.

Indeed RTÉ did reduce the top earners fees by 30% but this was down to the departure of Pat Kenny and the death of Jerry Ryan.

Then for some unknown reason they decided to hire Ray D’Arcy, a risk and while he increased his audience in his radio time slot his TV show lost audiences from The Saturday Night Show, in effect loss far more that he brought in.

So no they don’t deserve those wages.

Boggles

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

RTE were sued for libel at least once in the past. False news there too. I'm sure there are other examples which you'd prefer we ignored. Oh wait I just thought of one, the Frontline presidental debates tweet of 2011.

You'll struggle to find a media outlet that hasn't been successfully sued for libel.

That doesn't automatically equate to maliciously making up to stories.

Now you have established you are not a fan of nuance so that may go over your head.

But the fact remains, knuckle dragging simpletons who constantly scream "Fake News" are an absolute scourge and should be immediately ridiculed and then ignored.

ToBeFrank123

Boggles wrote: »

You'll struggle to find a media outlet that hasn't been successfully sued for libel.

That doesn't automatically equate to maliciously making up to stories.

Now you have established you are not a fan of nuance so that may go over your head.

But the fact remains, knuckle dragging simpletons who constantly scream "Fake News" are an absolute scourge and should be immediately ridiculed and then ignored.

You can call people what you like.
The storm was exaggerated by RTE beyond all recognition. False, fake, misleading, exaggerated, wrong.

Maliciously make up stories? I think the priest and Sean Gallagher who sued them would beg to differ. Both won substantial damages, paid for out of the licence fee no doubt. Made up and fabricated and a horrendous lack of due diligence on the part of producers.

Like many RTE defenders, you ignore what you want and focus on what you want such as someone using the term fake, and when losing an argument you resort to throwing around insults.

Boggles

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

You can call people what you like.
The storm was exaggerated by RTE beyond all recognition. False, fake, misleading, exaggerated, wrong.

Maliciously make up stories? I think the priest and Sean Gallagher who sued them would beg to differ. Both won substantial damages, paid for out of the licence fee no doubt. Made up and fabricated and a horrendous lack of due diligence on the part of producers.

Like many RTE defenders, you ignore what you want and focus on what you want such as someone using the term fake, and when losing an argument you resort to throwing around insults.

Like I said, tunnel vision.

Pointless trying to explain anything to you.

As you were lad.

elperello

Jeff2 wrote: »

I did lol yesterday l when a TV news presenter saying Brendan.C..... Was playing the part of Trump in a film instead of Brendan Gleeson.

It looked planed.:)

I always thought that presenter's style was a bit wooden

SJW Lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

'you people'
So does spinning yarns and being condescending.

I bet you can't point out any 'fake news' specifically on RTE.
Are we agreed 'fake news' is purposefully broadcasting lies or faked content?

Just because the truth hurts, doesn't make it fake. Sometimes inaccurate and open to correction, for sure. Try watching less American conservative outlets.

As i said, you poor poor boy. Well done on your retort to an argument that wasnt made.

ToBeFrank123

Boggles wrote: »

Like I said, tunnel vision.

Pointless trying to explain anything to you.

As you were lad.

What the hell is up with you and the use of Lad? Its beyond bizarre.

You haven't explained anything except trot out the latest pro RTE propaganda.

As you were too.

James Brown

SJW Lover wrote: »

As i said, you poor poor boy. Well done on your retort to an argument that wasnt made.

So you can't give an example? Understood.
Your level of discourse leads me to just put you in the whole 'libtard', 'woke', 'SJW', 'fake news' using bucket. I hope your are young, then you might mature. Right now you are wallowing in americanised right wing propaganda whether you are aware of it or not.

SJW Lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So you can't give an example? Understood.
Your level of discourse leads me to just put you in the whole 'libtard', 'woke', 'SJW', 'fake news' using bucket. I hope your are young, then you might mature. Right now you are wallowing in americanised right wing propaganda whether you are aware of it or not.

Putting more words in my mouth i see. Words that i never used once. Pretty pathetic. And you expecting me to engage on your self-made argument = lolz

James Brown

SJW Lover wrote: »

Putting more words in my mouth i see. Words that i never used once. Pretty pathetic. And you expecting me to engage on your self-made argument = lolz

'Lolz' indeed :rolleyes: