General RTE Discussion

zoobizoo

160 quid a week is about 3 quid a week.... 50c a day....

John Creedon, some Mystery Train, Morning Ireland, Six One News, Doc on One, The Business show, some half decent dramas, a couple of movies, the weather........ even Nationwide has some interesting pieces which I don't mind paying 50c a day for.

I've no interest in a lot of their output, I don't think Tubs or Darcy deserve what they get but that is the commercial reality.

As for covering the Galway story and the holy well - I appreciate that they cover those stories because those people, however Father Ted like they seem, are Irish and doing what is normal for them. And if you lived in Spain, Italy or Portugal, you'd probably see similar.

Why anyone would be embarrased by a tv station is beyond me.... I can't imagine any English person being embarrassed by an ITV station.

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

Guess that’s a no, you can’t provide that single example then? Oh well, back to “debating” another Thread with your “wisdom” there Francis :pac:

Damn right I want the TV license to be held accountable and cut back from its current p!sstaking levels or waste and greed. You keep applauding their money furnace though like a good Brady :rolleyes:

What's a no? The curve ball you threw into the debate? I never claimed any of it was 'critical for survival'.
If 'surviving' is all you want to do...knock yourself out there kiddo.

Sleeper12

DubInMeath wrote:

Don't remember that and I'm in my 40s. Do notice that on the channels provided by Sky etc that this happens a lot however. Given that in the US there are whole groups who campaign to have what they see as foul language removed and the FCC have to levy fines against a broadcaster/station if they receive enough complaints there are for tv edits of films and shows which are often used.

It never happens on the sky movie channels. Ever. The movie channels had an 8pm watershed as it was subscriber only but sky don't sensor their movie channels.
It was common with RTE though. Not just with swear words but scenes could be cut too.

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What's a no? The curve ball you threw into the debate? I never claimed any of it was 'critical for survival'.
If 'surviving' is all you want to do...knock yourself out there kiddo.

I’ll reign it in so, 1 of these vitally important services you claim they provide, come on, just 1 bbz.

Bunny Colvin

Just watching Dancing With The Stars, Jennifer Maguire is presenting it and she signs the show off for ad break. The next ad is for RTE Player featuring Jennifer Maguire. The next ad is for Bridget and Eamon, starring (you guessed it) Jennifer Maguire.

I think that just about sums up RTE.

zoobizoo

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It was common with RTE though. Not just with swear words but scenes could be cut too.

It really wasn't.

It was a common misperception back then that seems to persist but as a tv addict, I can tell you that RTE were a lot more lax than the BBC and the ITV stations.

JohnCreedon81

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

Just watching Dancing With The Stars, Jennifer Maguire is presenting it and she signs the show off for ad break. The next ad is for RTE Player featuring Jennifer Maguire. The next ad is for Bridget and Eamon, starring (you guessed it) Jennifer Maguire.

I think that just about sums up RTE.

Made a name for herself being the token eejit in the uk apprentice, comes back and gets famous literally insulting celebrities on the red carpet for the republic of Telly, and is now absolutely rolling in our hard earned money.

But yeah, pure bargain that €160 lads, only 50c a Day sure :rolleyes:

screamer

I don’t care that it’s crap I rarely watch it, what I object to is being forced to pay a license to keep it going.....

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

I’ll reign it in so, 1 of these vitally important services you claim they provide, come on, just 1 bbz.

The remit of a national broadcaster is 'vitally important' imo John and well worth paying for in any self respecting sovereign country.

You seem to base your rant on dislike for a few presenters, kinda sad.

Bunny Colvin

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

Made a name for herself being the token eejit in the uk apprentice, comes back and gets famous literally insulting celebrities on the red carpet for the republic of Telly, and is now absolutely rolling in our hard earned money.

But yeah, pure bargain that €160 lads, only 50c a Day sure :rolleyes:

That's it. RTE have her elevated to something she's not. She didn't even have a big profile before they allowed her into their golden circle. In fairness, they're brilliant at that.

Sleeper12

zoobizoo wrote:

It was a common misperception back then that seems to persist but as a tv addict, I can tell you that RTE were a lot more lax than the BBC and the ITV stations.

A lot more lax does not mean that they didn't sensor movie's. RTE 100 percent did buy in sensord versions of movies and Beverly Hills Cop in particular had some of the swear words dubbed out. I know because I saw it. Trying to tell me that I watched it on ITV when I didn't have ITV or UTV as it at the time doesn't compute. RTE would have first shown this movie in 1987 or 1988 and it was definitely sensord

FrancieBrady

Sleeper12 wrote: »

A lot more lax does not mean that they didn't sensor movie's. RTE 100 percent did buy in sensord versions of movies and Beverly Hills Cop in particular had some of the swear words dubbed out. I know because I saw it. Trying to tell me that I watched it on ITV when I didn't have ITV or UTV as it at the time doesn't compute. RTE would have first shown this movie in 1987 or 1988 and it was definitely sensord

The BBC censored Frankie Goes To Hollywood and other stuff. They all did it at various times in more conservative days.

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The remit of a national broadcaster is 'vitally important' imo John and well worth paying for in any self respecting sovereign country.

You seem to base your rant on dislike for a few presenters, kinda sad.

You think people questioning where their hard earned is spent, after they are forced to pay it, is worth arguing against, instead of perhaps making further suggestions on the massive savings they could make by simply cutting some of the overpaid imbeciles they have on the gravy train.

3,125 poor sods are needed each year to pay their €160 in full to cover tubridy’s bill alone.

Are you that oblivious to reality that you can’t see the huge waste of OUR money currently happening? Or are you benefiting from this circus?

Pathetically sad.

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

You think people questioning where their hard earned is spent, after they are forced to pay it, is worth arguing against, instead of perhaps making further suggestions on the massive savings they could make by simply cutting some of the overpaid imbeciles they have on the gravy train.

3,125 poor sods are needed each year to pay their €160 in full to cover tubridy’s bill alone.

Are you that oblivious to reality that you can’t see the huge waste of OUR money currently happening? Or are you benefiting from this circus?

Pathetically sad.

And RTE would say the advertising revenue he brings in pays his way.
Are you suggesting they get rid of him and forgo the ad revenue and make your licence fee more expensive?

Do you have an understanding of how these things work or is it just jealousy?

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And RTE would say the advertising revenue he brings in pays his way.
Are you suggesting they get rid of him and forgo the ad revenue and make your licence fee more expensive?

Do you have an understanding of how these things work or is it just jealousy?

You don’t think the late late would pull in the exact same ad revenue if they replaced him with someone every bit as competent, for around a 5th of his salary?

Do you have an understanding that the people who watch that show will watch it even if it’s hosted by a decent DCU media graduate, simply due to routine? Or are you simply that simple and oblivious in all areas?

Sleeper12

FrancieBrady wrote:

The BBC censored Frankie Goes To Hollywood and other stuff. They all did it at various times in more conservative days.

I totally agree with you. Ireland were usually a few years behind The UK in stuff like this. It took 25 years or so for The Life Of Brian to eventually be taken off the banned list in Ireland. I'm pretty sure RTE Radio Two banned Relax. The pirate's played it non stop but not RTE

Sleeper12

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It never happens on the sky movie channels. Ever. The movie channels had an 8pm watershed as it was subscriber only but sky don't sensor their movie channels.
It was common with RTE though. Not just with swear words but scenes could be cut too.

Can't comment on on Sky movies as I never seen the point in paying for it, but I seen loads of films such as Taxi Driver, Goodfellas first on RTE without any cuts.

Dank Janniels

What better way to wrap up the christmas season programming than some ballroom dancing or a documentary about Hitler!

Larbre34

If you can't spelled censored, then really don't.

RTÉ as a PS TV broadcaster have to be as many things to as many people as possible. In these changing media times, thats a nigh on impossible task, yeah some stuff is dreadful, but a lot of their factual coverage, science and agriculture, history, documentary items (eg Maurice McCabe) can be pretty good.

Its a tough comparison for RTE to be next door to the Worlds best public broadcaster in the BBC, but having travelled a lot in the english speaking world I've seen some dreadful crap standards.

Yes RTE need to simply pull out of the stuff they dont have the budget to do well and stop duplication of programme styles across radio and TV, but whether you watch them or dont, the licence fee is here to stay and I for one am glad that the whole sector won't be thrown to the O'Brien / Murdoch / Disney wolves.

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

You don’t think the late late would pull in the exact same ad revenue if they replaced him with someone every bit as competent, for around a 5th of his salary?

Do you have an understanding that the people who watch that show will watch it even if it’s hosted by a decent DCU media graduate, simply due to routine? Or are you simply that simple and oblivious in all areas?

We get you don't like him, I don't listen to him either. But I can readily accept that a lot of people do and consewuently he attracts ad revenue. Another one of those facts of business life.

I find it true to form for someone like you to propose running a TV/Radio station on an ad hoc ('I don't like him or her, get rid, the viewer will watch anyway') and patronising basis. No surprise there at all actually.:rolleyes:

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We get you don't like him, I don't listen to him either. But I can readily accept that a lot of people do and consewuently he attracts ad revenue. Another one of those facts of business life.

I find it true to form for someone like you to propose running a TV/Radio station on an ad hoc ('I don't like him or her, get rid, the viewer will watch anyway') and patronising basis. No surprise there at all actually.:rolleyes:

And we’ve just established that you think people watch the Late Late for Ryan Tubridy

Case closed!

That and your satisfaction for spending €160 a year simply to access a bog average radio show says all I need to know about you.

:rolleyes: :pac:

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

And we’ve just established that you think people watch the Late Late for Ryan Tubridy

Case closed!

That and your satisfaction for spending €160 a year simply to access a bog average radio show says all I need to know about you.

:rolleyes: :pac:

No, again I didn't say that. I said Tubridy's shows bring in revenue. Like it or not, that is true.

160 euro works out at less than 50 cent a day. I get far far more than Ryan Tubridy for that.

Dillosk412

Nermal wrote: »

I’m don’t face a prison sentence for not ponying up for Virgin merely for the privilege of owning a TV though, do I? That’s why it’s infuriating - I have the option not to watch it, but I still have to pay for it.

You don't face a prison sentence for not having a TV license either

JohnCreedon81

The Late Late show brings in revenue, despite Ryan Tubridy, not because of him. If you do not realize this, you haven’t a clue. It’s an Irish institution, a large portion of the country will watch it even if Dustin the turkey hosted it.

You’re not the brightest though, and clearly not in touch with reality, so I’ll say well done on being happy to waste your €160 a year without even questioning how RTÉ spend it, and I’ll leave it there Roisin! Xo

Dillosk412

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, again I didn't say that. I said Tubridy's shows bring in revenue. Like it or not, that is true.

160 euro works out at less than 50 cent a day. I get far far more than Ryan Tubridy for that.

True and I would suspect that all the top presenters more than cover their salaries but those who whine about rte never want to hear about this nor do they bother to read the rte annual report as it would throw their argument out of the water

Sleeper12

DubInMeath wrote:

Can't comment on on Sky movies as I never seen the point in paying for it, but I seen loads of films such as Taxi Driver, Goodfellas first on RTE without any cuts.

Maybe now but my original point was in the early 90s and earlier RTE censored movies or more likely bought in the censored version. Many movies were cut to ribbons between violence and nudity. In the 80s many violent movies never made it to RTE at all. It was one of the reasons why I dropped Irish TV altogether

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

The Late Late show brings in revenue, despite Ryan Tubridy, not because of him. If you do not realize this, you haven’t a clue. It’s an Irish institution, a large portion of the country will watch it even if Dustin the turkey hosted it.

You’re not the brightest though, and clearly not in touch with reality, so I’ll say well done on being happy to waste your €160 a year without even questioning how RTÉ spend it, and I’ll leave it there Roisin! Xo

We'll send you out selling the ads when you place some young unknown in the chair.

Stops embarrassing youself on this, it is clear that these presenters (Love em or hate em or just indulge your jealousy) bring in huge revenue.

And again, your licence fee doesn't just go into the wallets of people you hate, it pays for the running of a huge organisation in this country as well as infrastructure.
A reasonable person would call it a bargain at 50 cents a day. But I guess we aren't dealing with someone capable of seeing reason.

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Stops embarrassing youself on this, it is clear that these presenters (Love em or hate em or just indulge your jealousy) bring in huge revenue
.

FrancieBrady

JohnCreedon81 wrote: »

[img][/img]

Yeh, we get it, you hate Tubridy.
You do know what a remote is for?

JohnCreedon81

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yeh, we get it, you hate Tubridy.
You do know what a remote is for?