Defund RTE

GT89

I see in the UK there is a campaign to defund the BBC why not do the same for RTE. The constant left wing bias annoys the hell out of me and the over paid talentless presenters there has been clear bias on display when it comes to things like Brexit, Trump and Coronavirus no voice from the other side. Turn it into a subscription based service like Sky or Virgin and if it dosen't make money close it down

https://www.defundbbc.uk/tv-press-radio/

Junkyard Tom

There has never been a greater need for a national public service broadcaster. Reform RTE, don't remove it.

Rodney Bathgate

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

There has never been a greater need for a national public service broadcaster. Reform RTE, don't remove it.

I though ‘defund’ didn’t mean abolish / remove it?

(Not saying you said it did say it etc. but that seems to be the claim when supporters of ‘defunding the police’ are questioned about what happens after.)

Junkyard Tom

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

I though ‘defund’ didn’t mean abolish / remove it?

(Not saying you said it did say it etc. but that seems to be the claim when supporters of ‘defunding the police’ are questioned about what happens after.)

Yeah fair enough.

ampleforth

Remove TV Licence and just leave them all and see how it goes...

MrMusician18

The other side to Coronavirus? dafuk??

James Brown

Defund as it refers to the police is taking some of the budget and moving it towards mental health and social work etc.

RTE needs to open up to hiring from the public and cease the inbreeding.

GT89

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The other side to Coronavirus? dafuk??

Having people like the Professor Delores Cahill and Marcus De Brun who have different view about the lockdown and masks for example instead of constantly having Luke O'Neill and Sam McConkey on the air would be a good start. Allow us to talk about thing like Hydroxyclorquine aswell

MrMusician18

GT89 wrote: »

Having people like the Professor Delores Cahill and Marcus De Brun who have different view about the lockdown and masks for example instead of constantly having Luke O'Neill and Sam McConkey on the air would be a good start. Allow us to talk about thing like Hydroxyclorquine aswell

How do you know those two acedemics have different views?

GT89

MrMusician18 wrote: »

How do you know those two acedemics have different views?

I've heard them on Youtube and Bitchute

quokula

GT89 wrote: »

Having people like the Professor Delores Cahill and Marcus De Brun who have different view about the lockdown and masks for example instead of constantly having Luke O'Neill and Sam McConkey on the air would be a good start. Allow us to talk about thing like Hydroxyclorquine aswell

I think sticking to the facts and not giving a voice to nut jobs from YouTube is exactly why we need a public service broadcaster.

nj27

I vote for a defunding of RTE ahead of free blowies.

Overheal

Sounds just like other countries want to get in on defund culture to be trendy.

jimmycrackcorm

ampleforth wrote: »

Remove TV Licence and just leave them all and see how it goes...

Sure - all we will get is endless re-runs of Friends and other imported programmes.
When RTE does a prime time investigates that has the whole country talking then there are no complaints. Simply put, we do need a national broadcaster that does doe public service broadcasting.

ted1

Berties_Horse wrote: »

Sink or swim, the hacks won't last long if the public abandon them in droves. Lottie Ryan and Amy Huberman would be cast out in a hurry.

It’s not a commercial station , by its definition it would sink. There’s a big PSB element.

If it sunk where would the news come from ? Rupert murduck? Dennis o Brien ?
Do kids educational programs bring in review ? And so on

ronivek

Defunding is not the same thing as removing.

The linked campaign seems to be about achieving the following:

• Decriminalising the license fee.
• Removing the link between the license fee and non-BBC broadcasters and content; in other words you don't need a TV License to watch channels such as ITV or foreign broadcasts.

Which don't sound like particularly unreasonable demands; especially if you don't actually consume BBC services.

One interesting point to note is that some 75% of the BBC's income comes from the license fee; but only 50% of RTE's income comes from the license fee. So it's not like RTE is riding a license fee gravy train; especially when compared to the BBC.

As to the comments about RTE's bias: the RTE is the state broadcaster and as such reflects the views of most of those in the state. If you're constantly finding yourself gnashing your teeth at their coverage you're likely sitting at one end or the other of the political and/or conspiracy theory spectrum.

BonnieSituation

ronivek wrote: »

Defunding is not the same thing as removing.

The linked campaign seems to be about achieving the following:

• Decriminalising the license fee.
• Removing the link between the license fee and non-BBC broadcasters and content; in other words you don't need a TV License to watch channels such as ITV or foreign broadcasts.

Which don't sound like particularly unreasonable demands; especially if you don't actually consume BBC services.

One interesting point to note is that some 75% of the BBC's income comes from the license fee; but only 50% of RTE's income comes from the license fee. So it's not like RTE is riding a license fee gravy train; especially when compared to the BBC.

As to the comments about RTE's bias: the RTE is the state broadcaster and as such reflects the views of most of those in the state. If you're constantly finding yourself gnashing your teeth at their coverage you're likely sitting at one end or the other of the political and/or conspiracy theory spectrum.

They're not unreasonable demands on the face of it, but realistically will decimate the funding of the BBC.

Another example of a stealth "defunding" was when the Tories forced the BBC to pay up for the free oap licences that the Tory govt promised. This was a handy way of getting kudos for a policy from the grey vote and removing funding from the BBC without abolishing the licence fee. Basically just another stealthy way of getting the job done without raising the heckles of Guardian readers.

Anyone who thinks they want a world without RTÉ or public service broadcasting in general should give pause to the ****e served upon Canada and (non-SBS and some -ABC) Australia.

Having the BAI as a buffer also helps.

In short, it's a nonsensical idea usually championed by "freedom loving contrary right wingers".

James Brown

BonnieSituation wrote: »

They're not unreasonable demands on the face of it, but realistically will decimate the funding of the BBC.

Another example of a stealth "defunding" was when the Tories forced the BBC to pay up for the free oap licences that the Tory govt promised. This was a handy way of getting kudos for a policy from the grey vote and removing funding from the BBC without abolishing the licence fee. Basically just another stealthy way of getting the job done without raising the heckles of Guardian readers.

Anyone who thinks they want a world without RTÉ or public service broadcasting in general should give pause to the ****e served upon Canada and (non-SBS and some -ABC) Australia.

Having the BAI as a buffer also helps.

In short, it's a nonsensical idea usually championed by "freedom loving contrary right wingers".

Canada has the CBC. No licence too.
We need RTE but it's long overdue a culling.

fran38

quokula wrote: »

I think sticking to the facts and not giving a voice to nut jobs from YouTube is exactly why we need a public service broadcaster.[/QU

So, you've heard their point of view on youtube I take it?

Risteard81

quokula wrote: »

I think sticking to the facts and not giving a voice to nut jobs from YouTube is exactly why we need a public service broadcaster.

Nothing claimed by the State about COVID is true.

YellowBucket

Defunding Public service broadcasting is just the mantra of the British tabloids and media moguls from what I can see. They more or less drive the U.K. political agenda and if it wasn’t for those pesky public service broadcasters like BBC and aspects of C4 wouldn’t it be lovely, for Boris and the chaps?

RTÉ has issues but if you compare its content to what goes out on a lot of similar size and often even bigger and better funded broadcasters, it’s really is quite good.

We should certainly look at ensuring that money actually gets to programme makers and not just spent on layers of admin and overhead but throwing away public service broadcasting here would be a huge mistake.

It’s often the kitchen table where Irish debates happen and it’s not the private bubbles of like minded opinions that occur on social media either.

My view of it is it needs to be reformed to maximise the money actually getting into production of tv and radio. They do far too much stuff that’s nothing to do with that and they really need to trim the fat in all areas that aren’t directly connected to broadcasting.

Annasopra

GT89 wrote: »

Having people like the Professor Delores Cahill and Marcus De Brun who have different view about the lockdown and masks for example instead of constantly having Luke O'Neill and Sam McConkey on the air would be a good start. Allow us to talk about thing like Hydroxyclorquine aswell

Nah. They're nutjob conspiracy theorists.

Kivaro

Defund them.
Defund them back to oblivion.
And then start again and create a functional national broadcaster without the bells and whistles.

Let's replace the current RTE quango with an entity that serves the people, instead of what is happening now ............... where the people are forced to serve an overpaid and biased State media.

Pa ElGrande

You are asking all the wrong questions.

How much is an hour of your time worth? put a figure on it.

Do you need traditional broadcast media (free to air TV and radio) in your life?

How many hours of traditional broadcast (free to air TV and radio) do you consume every year?

breaking that down further:

How many hours consumed by you is content provided by RTE?

How many hours consumed by you is content provided by independent broadcasters based in the Republic or Ireland?

How many hours consumed by you is content provided by services based in another country (e.g BBC)?


Do you have a paid subscription to cable service that carries TV and radio broadcast? - how much do you pay for this?

Do you have a paid subscription to satellite channels? how much do you pay for this?

Do have a paid subscription to internet stream services? (Netflix, Spotify and many others)

When you add up your current outlays for broadcast media services, how many hours does your household need to work per annum to pay for it this?

If you are a pensioner or other welfare dependent that is excluded from having to pay the RTE tax and free to air broadcast media was removed tomorrow how much of your income would you allocate for these services if they were paid subscription only?

Would you prefer a different consumption model? pay per hour of broadcast media consumed? pay based on quality of broadcast media consumed? would a basic service (news,weather and afternoon chat shows suit your consumption and time allocation better)


All this talk about RTE salaries, RTE content, RTE lack of talent and RTE bias is pointless since you are not RTE shareholders or RTE board of management and therefore the decisions about what content is broadcast and when is not yours. Unless you are a prisoner you control how you spend your time and income, rather than calling for de-funding RTE put a price on your time spent consuming it versus other things you could be doing on your life (i.e what is the opportunity cost of watching RTE or TV in general).

dan1895

Is "defund RTE" not just something anonymous accounts on Twitter with little Ivory Coast flags and words like "Patriot" on their profile say?

ThunbergsAreGo

Why is the word defund everywhere?
Its like people can't think for themselves anymore

mickuhaha

I would be all for removing the TV licence and having the funds come directly from government. It also needs major reforms in all areas. I also don't see why it needs to be as big as it is for what content we get from it. It needs an external review and a cap on pay. Plenty of other countries have a small public service station with other private stations. The main aim of a public service station should be to provide impartial news and programs relating to local culture ect.

boombang

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Sure - all we will get is endless re-runs of Friends and other imported programmes.
When RTE does a prime time investigates that has the whole country talking then there are no complaints. Simply put, we do need a national broadcaster that does doe public service broadcasting.

I see your point, but the problem is the worthwhile programmes RTE produces are so few and far between. Occasionally it produces excellent quality TV, but that's between loads of junk with no public service remit. Furthermore, when there are important issues to investigate, it often only provides the most superficial of analyses: I'm thinking of coverage of most economic issues, plenty of social affairs, crime and corruption and longerview analyses of politics.

pjohnson

I think Lottie Ryan and Ryan Tubridy would have a more useful opinion than any conspiracist crank on "bitchute"

biko

RTÉ was set up to be dual-funded, with the idea being that roughly half of its money would come from the television licence fee and half from advertising.
In 2018, advertising pulled in €150 million, and out of the €221 million collected from the current TV licence system €189 million went to RTÉ.
This gave RTÉ total revenue of €339.1 million 2018. Its total operating costs, however, were €339.8 million, and once a depreciation and amortisation charge and other factors were taken into account, it made a loss of €13 million.

We can defund it in the sense that licence money is revoked. It can still survive on 150 million/year if it makes cuts.

fits

Just renewed the license there. Think they’re doing a great job at the moment.

tooth*grinder

I'd sooner defund facebook.

Superfoods

The TV license is 160 quid a year. Hardly breaking the bank.

RTE should live on the license and no more. This constantly going to government for top up is not on anymore.

The likes of 2FM which serves zero purpose should be dropped. High pay for presentors is not really working, they said the like of Darcy was brought in for advertisement money yet they had to cancel his show? any dog on the street said he was decent on the radio but after that no good.

The lack of talent in Ireland is the excuse, case in point is the Samantha Barry who went to interview numerous times in RTE, no relative so got no job. Then had no problem getting into other jobs and one of the most high profile in the World. Then RTE put out advertising campaign as if they helped her career. Sorry they did by not hiring her.

Cut it off. No more money. Live on the license fee

ancapailldorcha

That defund the BBC thing looks like a crank campaign run by the least trusted press in Europe. I see no reason to import it to Ireland aside from the usual promoting of crackpots.

GT89

GT89 wrote: »

I see in the UK there is a campaign to defund the BBC why not do the same for RTE. The constant left wing bias annoys the hell out of me and the over paid talentless presenters there has been clear bias on display when it comes to things like Brexit, Trump and Coronavirus no voice from the other side. Turn it into a subscription based service like Sky or Virgin and if it dosen't make money close it down

https://www.defundbbc.uk/tv-press-radio/

In terms of content I'm happy with the channels and their output overall.

But I agree on the left wing bias, whomever runs their website is shamefully biased.

There was a period there where they were posting pro direct provision stories daily featuring personal stories about how amazing the individuals were.

The national broadcaster should stick to the middle and not have someone pushing an agenda.

Invidious

There's no reason why RTE can't become one TV station and one radio station.

RTE 2's offerings for this evening include The Simpsons, The Goldbergs, Shortland Street, Neighbours, Home and Away, Top Gear, White Gold, Grey's Anatomy, and NCIS: New Orleans. A typical RTE evening lineup overwhelmingly dominated by imported British, American and Australian programming. How is this "public broadcasting" in any meaningful way?

RTE's model evolved in bygone days when RTE was the only game in town for TV. Now that we have a zillion choices of what to watch and how to watch it, the government should make the necessary cuts. Take RTE down to the essentials and stop forcing the public to pay for waste.

ancapailldorcha

Invidious wrote: »

There's no reason why RTE can't become one TV station and one radio station.

RTE 2's offerings for this evening include The Simpsons, The Goldbergs, Shortland Street, Neighbours, Home and Away, Top Gear, White Gold, Grey's Anatomy, and NCIS: New Orleans. A typical RTE evening lineup overwhelmingly dominated by imported British, American and Australian programming. How is this "public broadcasting" in any meaningful way?

RTE's model evolved in bygone days when RTE was the only game in town for TV. Now that we have a zillion choices of what to watch and how to watch it, the government should make the necessary cuts. Take RTE down to the essentials and stop forcing the public to pay for waste.

I'm not sure it needs to be showing that sort of thing in this day and age to be honest. Surely room for cuts here while maintaining its Radio, News, Sports & Current Affairs services.

Superfoods

Invidious wrote: »

There's no reason why RTE can't become one TV station and one radio station.

RTE 2's offerings for this evening include The Simpsons, The Goldbergs, Shortland Street, Neighbours, Home and Away, Top Gear, White Gold, Grey's Anatomy, and NCIS: New Orleans. A typical RTE evening lineup overwhelmingly dominated by imported British, American and Australian programming. How is this "public broadcasting" in any meaningful way?

RTE's model evolved in bygone days when RTE was the only game in town for TV. Now that we have a zillion choices of what to watch and how to watch it, the government should make the necessary cuts. Take RTE down to the essentials and stop forcing the public to pay for waste.

If the likes of Shortland Street, Neighbours, H&A costing that much? maybe that is the question. How many viewers do the shows get? theey could actually make perfect sense to keep. If you reduce to one station then it would clash with news.



If RTE 2 just became like Dave or some of those channels in the UK, minimal staff but just playing repeats of old shows etc it might make sense.


Then have RTE 1 for home grown programs etc.



You have to remember not everyone has Netflix etc. The TV licenses is good value for money and been able to watch some US/UK programs can be a bonus.

paw patrol

quokula wrote: »

I think sticking to the facts and not giving a voice to nut jobs from YouTube is exactly why we need a public service broadcaster.

pjohnson wrote: »

I think Lottie Ryan and Ryan Tubridy would have a more useful opinion than any conspiracist crank on "bitchute"

I'd laugh if it wasn't so pathetic. People demand experts , then professors in said field are produced and you claim they are nutjobs and cranks.


In reality you want experts that tow the line which is EXACTLY the problem with the media (not just RTE) in this country.


In the Uk its' pretty much the same and with a dash of controlled opposition like Piers Morgan.

Superfoods

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm not sure it needs to be showing that sort of thing in this day and age to be honest. Surely room for cuts here while maintaining its Radio, News, Sports & Current Affairs services.

Loads of older people only have Saorview. Nothing else. They wont have RTE player etc. You can't just cut off a section of the community because you personally dont watch these shows on RTE.



Maybe they want to watch Grey Anatomy. They have paid 160 euro. If it is value for money why can it? Especially when the fat in RTE is all over the place. People who pay the license should not be the one to suffer to keep some clown of a presentor on 500k a year who cant even hold a TV show together for the full season

ancapailldorcha

paw patrol wrote: »

I'd laugh if it wasn't so pathetic. People demand experts , then professors in said field are produced and you claim they are nutjobs and cranks.


In reality you want experts that tow the line which is EXACTLY the problem with the media (not just RTE) in this country.


In the Uk its' pretty much the same and with a dash of controlled opposition like Piers Morgan.

People who were going on and on about how left wing Universities allegedly are and loony, biased academics are now telling us we need to know our place when one of them comes out with guff they like. That's what's pathetic.

Invidious

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm not sure it needs to be showing that sort of thing in this day and age to be honest. Surely room for cuts here while maintaining its Radio, News, Sports & Current Affairs services.

Agreed.

My suggestion is to consolidate worthwhile content into one radio station and one TV station, and get rid of all the rest. RTE shouldn't be playing at running a media empire for a population of 5 million people.

ancapailldorcha

Invidious wrote: »

Agreed.

My suggestion is to consolidate worthwhile content into one radio station and one TV station, and get rid of all the rest. RTE shouldn't be playing at running a media empire for a population of 5 million people.

I wouldn't have a problem with this. If they need to be running ads to support airtime for the likes of Top Gear and Simpsons reruns then I think that there's a problem there.

tooth*grinder

paw patrol wrote: »

In the Uk its' pretty much the same and with a dash of controlled opposition like Piers Morgan.

the guy who hacked a dead woman's phone? That's the guy you're putting forward as a beacon of journalistic standards?


sweet jesus. Stick to getting your news from Facebook, memes, whatsapp and the like. I'll happily pay for a public service broadcaster that is answerable to the taxpayers and not a board of directors controlled by god knows who.

Superfoods

pjohnson wrote: »

I think Lottie Ryan and Ryan Tubridy would have a more useful opinion than any conspiracist crank on "bitchute"

Have you listened to Lottie Ryan?



Only she is Gerry daughter the poor children would struggle to hold down a job in a coffee shop. She is awful. 2FM have pushed her into anything and everything to try and make the public like her and it has all failed. The Breakfast show was doing ok so she was pushed into that and it fell flat on its face.


The Dacning on Ice show was a pure fix, she was terrible and nearly got voted off a few times. Que RTE to spend weeks sticking her on the front of every magazone possible and she is the winner. Now she will be stuck on huge money because she is a "star". Absolute joke.



If she is so popular, dont renew her contract and see who else picks her up. I think Lottie will be waiting a long time

ampleforth

Overheal wrote: »

Sounds just like other countries want to get in on defund culture to be trendy.

Culture == RTE?

Superfoods

Invidious wrote: »

Agreed.

My suggestion is to consolidate worthwhile content into one radio station and one TV station, and get rid of all the rest. RTE shouldn't be playing at running a media empire for a population of 5 million people.

But then you are hurting the one person who shouldn't be hurt. The viewer. The person paying for a TV license.



How much does a Dave style TV channel actually cost to run? If they strip the staff from RTE 2 and just keep the same shows as they currently have it will save money. They don't need 20 different people to introduce tv programs. They dont need a seperate XYZ.


I bet RTE 2 has its own news department, that is the sort of stupidity you would have in RTE

ancapailldorcha

Superfoods wrote: »

Loads of older people only have Saorview. Nothing else. They wont have RTE player etc. You can't just cut off a section of the community because you personally dont watch these shows on RTE.

Nobody's cutting anyone off. There are other channels on Saorview, no? What about Freeview?

Superfoods wrote: »

Maybe they want to watch Grey Anatomy. They have paid 160 euro. If it is value for money why can it? Especially when the fat in RTE is all over the place. People who pay the license should not be the one to suffer to keep some clown of a presentor on 500k a year who cant even hold a TV show together for the full season

If they want to watch Grey's Anatonmy, why can't they pay for it themselves? If something I want to watch isn't on RTÉ do I have an entitlement to demand it?

It's a public service broadcaster, not a meal ticket to everyone with a sense of entitlement.

Invidious

Superfoods wrote: »

If the likes of Shortland Street, Neighbours, H&A costing that much?

RTE spends over €26 million a year on imported programming so that it can keep two TV stations broadcasting 24/7.

The question is whether a country of 5 million people needs two public-service TV stations broadcasting 24/7, at a time when people can watch or listen to content via any number of alternative platforms.

paw patrol

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

People who were going on and on about how left wing Universities allegedly are and loony, biased academics are now telling us we need to know our place when one of them comes out with guff they like. That's what's pathetic.

you had me in the 1st half, cos I agree they are loons.
But then you went off on a mad one, I'd never silence anybody nor have them exclude from state media - once they were well behaved guests.
Even loony theories are interesting.

tooth*grinder wrote: »

the guy who hacked a dead woman's phone? That's the guy you're putting forward as a beacon of journalistic standards?

.

I never said that , nor did I even get even close to saying that.
You do know that controlled opposition is a dig at somebody?
Generally said when you don't have a high opinion of somebody. In effect you are calling them a stooge.

So did you read what I actually wrote...I mean...did you actually read it....

Superfoods

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Nobody's cutting anyone off. There are other channels on Saorview, no? What about Freeview?



If they want to watch Grey's Anatonmy, why can't they pay for it themselves? If something I want to watch isn't on RTÉ do I have an entitlement to demand it?

It's a public service broadcaster, not a meal ticket to everyone with a sense of entitlement.

People in 60/70/80/90's. It is a section of the community and you can't just cut them off because it doesn't suit you. These people pay a TV license so they are just as entitled to watch RTE and have an opinion as you are.



Not just in this age group, people all over Ireland only have Saorview. Freeview? that UK, we don't live in the UK



Do you know how much these programs cost? how much advertisement they bring in etc? what are the viewing numbers? if you do and are willing to share it would be useful.