Today Show with Sarah McInerney

First Up

First Up wrote: »

If you listened properly (between McInerney's interruptions) you'd have heard him say that nobody is saying people can't travel, but there are consequences.

The rest of his statement explained what those consequences are.

There are no consequences. There is no quarantine for green listed countries. People are telling themselves that the Green List is safer than Ireland (too simplistic but people will tell themselves anything to excuse a foreign holiday), and why not? The Tanaiste won't say people should stay at home.

First Up

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

There are no consequences. There is no quarantine for green listed countries. People are telling themselves that the Green List is safer than Ireland (too simplistic but people will tell themselves anything to excuse a foreign holiday), and why not? The Tanaiste won't say people should stay at home.

There consequences for visiting non greenlist countries are a two week quarantine.

He has advised people to stay home. He (and everyone else) has also advised people to observe safety measures wherever they are. That is all the government can do. It is down to personal responsibility after that.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

He has advised people to stay home.

Did he? I thought he only said "the best thing" to do would be to stay at home. He explicitly refused to say anyone "should", that would be advice.

Cole

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Did he? I thought he only said "the best thing" to do would be to stay at home. He explicitly refused to say anyone "should", that would be advice.

All this 'confusion' that people have drives me mad, as I think it's clear, but I did cringe when listening to that exchange he had with Sarah. He could have been so much clearer and direct...just say should not travel or don't travel. He was more effective when putting David McCullagh straight on Primetime.

Robert McGrath

I’m with First Up on this. It’s extraordinary how little personal responsibility people are willing to take on this issue. There is a spectrum of reasons for people to travel abroad that range from the clearly essential to the clearly non-essential. It’s impossible for the government to prescribe in granular detail where the binary line is between essential and non-essential in each specific circumstance. So the government guidelines are as specific as they can be. It’s not simple because human behaviour and circumstances are varied and complicated. But it is clear and it is understandable

First Up

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

Did he? I thought he only said "the best thing" to do would be to stay at home. He explicitly refused to say anyone "should", that would be advice.

You interpret "the best thing" any way you like. Some people have valid reasons to travel. Varadkar explained what happens if they do.

Robert McGrath

Robert McGrath wrote: »

I’m with First Up on this. It’s extraordinary how little personal responsibility people are willing to take on this issue. There is a spectrum of reasons for people to travel abroad that range from the clearly essential to the clearly non-essential. It’s impossible for the government to prescribe in granular detail

Nobody was asking for rules on this occasion. Only guidelines. A simple "People should stay in Ireland and avoid unnecessary foreign travel".

Please tell me what's wrong with saying that? Varadkar was asked to say it and wouldn't.

First Up

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

Please tell me what's wrong with saying that? Varadkar was asked to say it and wouldn't.

I just watched his interview on Prime Time and he could not have said it more clearly. It probably helped that David McCullough didn't keep interrupting him while he did.

Muahahaha

touts wrote: »

For Gender balance David McCullough's place on prime time is likely to go to Cormac ó Headhra. Sarah likely to replace Cormac on Saturday Lunchtime.

I was thinking Sarah might end up on Prime Time or on the 1 o'clock news show, doesnt Claire Byrne do a few of those a week? Would seem like an easy straight swap.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The added gimmicky of late with Claire sitting on mock plane's etc has made it feel a bit afternoon show

Yeah that was a bit of a joke, we had Claire in a mock isolation unit, Claire on a mock airplane, Claire in a mock pub and of course Claire in her shed. I can only presume it was because Fair City is shuttered that Byrne got the set designers in to do a few hours rather than sitting around RTE all week doing nothing.

padd b1975

Cole wrote: »

I just heard a snippet of it on Playback...might listen back later. Sarah is clearly a bright person, so saying to Leo that she is confused by the travel advice just seems to be the intentional hyping of the 'confusing travel advice' narrative...yet again.

She was taking a hit on behalf of the listener.

First Up

Muahahaha wrote:

Yeah that was a bit of a joke, we had Claire in a mock isolation unit, Claire on a mock airplane, Claire in a mock pub and of course Claire in her shed. I can only presume it was because Fair City is shuttered that Byrne got the set designers in to do a few hours rather than sitting around RTE all week doing nothing.

She just presents the programme. She doesn't produce it.

Muahahaha

No but as the presenter who has her own name on the show she has input into the production. If something is daft she should be speaking up and saying it. Phoenix reported that RTE management were rolling their eyes with all the studio mock ups she was doing during the lockdown.

iirc there was a change of producer on her show about a year or 18 months back. It went from a serious current affairs show under the old producer to more of a magazine style show under the current one with Claire running from stage one to audience to stage 2 back to audience again and so on. Its a bit all over the place and it doesnt seem to know if it is a current affairs show or a lifestyle one.

First Up

Muahahaha wrote:

iirc there was a change of producer on her show about a year or 18 months back. It went from a serious current affairs show under the old producer to more of a magazine style show under the current one with Claire running from stage one to audience to stage 2 back to audience again and so on. Its a bit all over the place and it doesnt seem to know if it is a current affairs show or a lifestyle one.

So the change in style coincided with the arrival of a new producer?

I'm not here as a cheerleader for Byrne. I don't know how well she would handle the radio show but I think McInerney could learn a bit from her interviewing style.

Muahahaha

Yeah it was mentioned on the Claire Byrne show thread that a new producer came in and that coincided with the lurch towards a magazine style show. They try to fit about six different slots/issues into a single show of about 48 minutes and it all feels very rushed at times. You have Claire running around the studio doing stacks of 90 second interviews with various people on the stage or in the audience. Also the topics covered can be laughable at times.

Robert McGrath

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Nobody was asking for rules on this occasion. Only guidelines. A simple "People should stay in Ireland and avoid unnecessary foreign travel".

Please tell me what's wrong with saying that? Varadkar was asked to say it and wouldn't.

Are we really going to get hung up on the distinction between “should” and “the best thing”? The semantical argument on yesterday’s show was ridiculous. As you say, these are not legally enforced laws which prevent people from leaving the country. They’re guidelines. I can only assume Leo’s reluctance to use the word “should” came from a desire to stick to avoid unfair moral judgement on this point, as already evidenced by the curtain-twitching references online to recent travel by the crèche employee who got covid during the week.

Robert McGrath

Robert McGrath wrote: »

Are we really going to get hung up on the distinction between “should” and “the best thing”?

I'm not the one making that distinction, Varadkar did. I dont know if he was clearer earlier in the week, if he was then he has changed his tune. He interjected and corrected Sarah McInerney to say he wasn't advising against unnecessary travel (not saying they shouldn't go) — it wasn't simply a slip or an omission.

I'm sure it won't make a difference to you or me, but if someone has a holiday booked and hears that, I wouldn't blame them for thinking "Ah here, I'm going so".

Robert McGrath

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not the one making that distinction, Varadkar did. I dont know if he was clearer earlier in the week, if he was then he has changed his tune. He interjected and corrected Sarah McInerney to say he wasn't advising against unnecessary travel (not saying they shouldn't go) — it wasn't simply a slip or an omission.

I'm sure it won't make a difference to you or me, but if someone has a holiday booked and hears that, I wouldn't blame them for thinking "Ah here, I'm going so".

Fair enough - I’d have to listen back

Brendan Bendar

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not the one making that distinction, Varadkar did. I dont know if he was clearer earlier in the week, if he was then he has changed his tune. He interjected and corrected Sarah McInerney to say he wasn't advising against unnecessary travel (not saying they shouldn't go) — it wasn't simply a slip or an omission.

I'm sure it won't make a difference to you or me, but if someone has a holiday booked and hears that, I wouldn't blame them for thinking "Ah here, I'm going so".

All about insurance Ty, I would suggest.

Result of legal advice.

First Up

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

I'm sure it won't make a difference to you or me, but if someone has a holiday booked and hears that, I wouldn't blame them for thinking "Ah here, I'm going so".

People are responsible for their own decisions and actions. The advice from government and the health professionals couldn't be clearer. You travel at your own risk.

If you catch the virus as a result of your own behaviour there is nobody else to blame.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

All about insurance Ty, I would suggest.

Result of legal advice.

How's that Brendan? I thought the insurance situation was that they'll pay out if travel is not advised, but customers can be pretty well take the hit if there's no official advice against travel.

First Up wrote: »

The advice from government and the health professionals couldn't be clearer. You travel at your own risk.

It's not just your own risk though, is it. It's associated with a public health risk and economic risk.

The chair of NPHET has been very clear about his concerns and, to their credit, other members of the Government have advised against unnecessary travel. They have all clearly said you shouldn't travel unnecessarily. It's only Varadkar who's done a solo run and insisted that is not his position.

First Up

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

It's only Varadkar who's done a solo run and insisted that is not his position.

I haven't heard him say anything to supports that claim.

Brendan Bendar

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

How's that Brendan? I thought the insurance situation was that they'll pay out if travel is not advised, but customers can be pretty well take the hit if there's no official advice against travel.



It's not just your own risk though, is it. It's associated with a public health risk and economic risk.

The chair of NPHET has been very clear about his concerns and, to their credit, other members of the Government have advised against unnecessary travel. They have all clearly said you shouldn't travel unnecessarily. It's only Varadkar who's done a solo run and insisted that is not his position.

There is official advice against travel.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

There is official advice against travel.

There sure is. As I said, other members of Government are crystal clear.

I don't see why this is difficult for Varadkar, although he did refer to himself in the interview as a "civil libertarian".

Yet more in the Sun this morning, regurgitating the Noel Kelly line on Claire and turning up the pressure/preparing the way. Unbelievable stuff. I genuinely feel sorry for Sarah McInerney; jobs should be awarded in this ramshackle, underhanded drip feed way.

Brendan Bendar

Faux outrage springing up on Sarah’s show now.

Do these people not understand English.

This payment not avail unless avail for work.....

What the fcukk is wrong with people..... this Aaaah shure crap is killing the country.

O’Reilly won’t be stopped, this should be interesting.

Infoanon

Sarah giving Willie O Dea an easy ride there - Airport's and Ports demanding your PPS number ??

Brendan Bendar

Infoanon wrote: »

Sarah giving Willie O Dea an easy ride there - Airport's and Ports demanding your PPS number ??

Despicable by O’Dea the little weasel trying to have a foot in every camp, and yes Sarah should have taken a stronger line.

This ‘ you can’t do this but “aaaah shure’ utter crap should be stamped out.

O’Reilly at the same game and again Sarah tossed the passes to her to tap the ball into the net

Saying people were “living it up” and suggesting that people were using the COVID cash to “ pay for their holiday”.

Back to original point.... Willie o Dea and his ilk need voting out of the Dail havent the balls of a fieldmouse when the hard views are needed.

Total churns

hotmail.com

O'Dea has a point. People are availing of social welfare through the Temporary Wage Scheme and don't have such limitations.

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Faux outrage springing up on Sarah’s show now.

Do these people not understand English.

This payment not avail unless avail for work.....

But the Dole is, isn't it?

Doesn't make sense that you can go on holidays on the Dole but not on the Covid Payment, even though people were constantly told during Lockdown "This is not a holiday". They are going to lose a lot of the annual leave that would have accrued to them.

It does seem a bit unfair. But I know, the virus isn't a fair master.

Infoanon

hotmail.com wrote: »

O'Dea has a point. People are availing of social welfare through the Temporary Wage Scheme and don't have such limitations.

TWSS - you are working. Different scheme.

For months is has been known that you would not receive the PUP scheme if you travelled.
Clearly the advice is do not travel.

O'Dea was talking nonsense and Sarah for whatever reason didn't pick him up on any of it.