RTE 1: 'Today' with Claire Byrne

walshb

Jessica Ward: fantastic speaker...

imme

'All white men are basstards'.

Well done Claire Byrne Show.:rolleyes:

jimwallace197

imme wrote: »

'All white men are basstards'.

Well done Claire Byrne Show.:rolleyes:

Yesterday, it was all about the slimy male professor, today, all about Laura Bates, flogging her book, men hate women & nobody on the other side their counter her claims, I wonder what tomorrow?

Rte and Claire Byrne arent even being discreet in their biased agenda

padd b1975

walshb wrote: »

Jessica Ward: fantastic speaker...

I wouldn't go that far.

She seemed to know the questions in advance and was definitely reading some pre-prepared answers.

Cole

I listened to that Laura Bates interview and what struck me was the complete lack of any challenge or even a question on some of her statements.

I'm pretty sure there is a lot of horrendously abusive stuff on social media (not really my area of experience or knowledge), but when she used the term "atrocities" to refer to online abuse/threats, I did expect some kind of question or comment from CB...nothing. Or when she seemed to suggest that misogyny is common among schoolboys today, I did expect some kind of follow up questioning...nothing.

It was just question...answer...question...answer...

After the interview, CB commented that there had been a lot of listener reaction to the interview. Was it positive or negative? What were the comments?...again nothing.

Cole

Cole wrote: »

I listened to that Laura Bates interview and what struck me was the complete lack of any challenge or even a question on some of her statements.

I'm pretty sure there is a lot of horrendously abusive stuff on social media (not really my area of experience or knowledge), but when she used the term "atrocities" to refer to online abuse/threats, I did expect some kind of question or comment from CB...nothing. Or when she seemed to suggest that misogyny is common among schoolboys today, I did expect some kind of follow up questioning...nothing.

It was just question...answer...question...answer...

After the interview, CB commented that there had been a lot of listener reaction to the interview. Was it positive or negative? What were the comments?...again nothing.

To me Claire Byrne does half a job. She may be polished in her manner of speech & delivery, but it doesn't go too much further than that, and we are not well served by her limited interviewing skills.

jimwallace197

Cole wrote: »

I listened to that Laura Bates interview and what struck me was the complete lack of any challenge or even a question on some of her statements.

I'm pretty sure there is a lot of horrendously abusive stuff on social media (not really my area of experience or knowledge), but when she used the term "atrocities" to refer to online abuse/threats, I did expect some kind of question or comment from CB...nothing. Or when she seemed to suggest that misogyny is common among schoolboys today, I did expect some kind of follow up questioning...nothing.

It was just question...answer...question...answer...

After the interview, CB commented that there had been a lot of listener reaction to the interview. Was it positive or negative? What were the comments?...again nothing.

Yes, I agree, like a robot, either she is extremely biased on this topic herself or she wasnt prepared for the interview.

I'm not impressed by Claire Byrne at all so far, dull, scripted delivery, polished yes and well spoken by thats about it. Its like the lights are on but no one is home.

I was in the studio audience several times on her tv show, She and her production team were really most pleasant with the audience before the show etc, and always a serene atmosphere in the studio. However it was clear that this was not really a show for much question time, it was purely formulaic and pleasant. All questions had to be submitted before the show and only a handful were taken. It was made understood, very nicely, that the agenda and flow would not be disrupted by any shift of mood in the audience.

Cole

jimwallace197 wrote: »

Yes, I agree, like a robot, either she is extremely biased on this topic herself or she wasnt prepared for the interview.

Yes. I wondered that too, but even without preparation, when someone starts equating online abuse/threats to terrorism (in the way we usually understand that term) and terrorist atrocities, you'd expect some response.

Deleted User wrote: »

To me Claire Byrne does half a job. She may be polished in her manner of speech & delivery, but it doesn't go too much further than that, and we are not well served by her limited interviewing skills.

jimwallace197 wrote: »

I'm not impressed by Claire Byrne at all so far, dull, scripted delivery, polished yes and well spoken by thats about it. Its like the lights are on but no one is home.

I haven't caught as much of the show as usual in the last couple of weeks, but those seem similar to what I've noticed...a bit surprising. I'm not on the "Bring back Sarah" cheerleader squad, but I think she would have done a better job with that interview today.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

To me Claire Byrne does half a job. She may be polished in her manner of speech & delivery, but it doesn't go too much further than that, and we are not well served by her limited interviewing skills.

She does not have the breadth of knowledge, the nuance, the depth and the quick thinking on your feet..

It’s all just scripted and repetitive...

Sorely lacking in my view..

_Kaiser_

I've stopped listening entirely. I'm not Pat Kenny's biggest fan either but he's better than CB any day of the week.

0xzmro3n4y7lb5

I find it very boring since Claire took over.

jelutong

golondrinas wrote: »

Nah , sure they would claim them anyway.

I sat near John Bruton on a Ryanair flight to Charleroi during his time as an MEP. His in flight meal was a packet of Peanuts and little bottle of red wine. All around him other passengers were having proper meals. I felt sorry for the man.
We’re not paying our politicians half enough for the Trojan work they do.

Coillte_Bhoy

Has the Monday sports review been ditched?

AJB39

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Has the Monday sports review been ditched?

It appears so. It’s not been on since Claire took over.

serfboard

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I've stopped listening entirely. I'm not Pat Kenny's biggest fan either but he's better than CB any day of the week.

It'll be interesting to see the JNLRs in time to come.

I'm in the same boat as you. Pat Vs Sean or Sarah did not prompt me to "move the dial" much, but Pat Vs Claire is a different proposition.

Will Yam

jelutong wrote: »

I sat near John Bruton on a Ryanair flight to Charleroi during his time as an MEP. His in flight meal was a packet of Peanuts and little bottle of red wine. All around him other passengers were having proper meals. I felt sorry for the man.
We’re not paying our politicians half enough for the Trojan work they do.

Just exactly when was bruton an Mep?

elperello

Will Yam wrote: »

Just exactly when was bruton an Mep?

He never was an MEP.

He was EU Ambassador to the United States.

In that and other roles he would be no stranger to the Dublin-Brussels route.

imme

jelutong wrote: »

I sat near John Bruton on a Ryanair flight to Charleroi during his time as an MEP. His in flight meal was a packet of Peanuts and little bottle of red wine. All around him other passengers were having proper meals. I felt sorry for the man.
We’re not paying our politicians half enough for the Trojan work they do.

Maybe he had eaten at Burger King in Dublin Airport before the flight.:pac:

As other posters have said John Bruton wasn't an MEP.
The other problem is Ryanair doesn't do "proper meals".

elperello

Good interview with Aoibhinn ní Shúilleabháin.

Sensitive handling of the issue of harassment.

https://twitter.com/RTERadio1?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

s1ippy

"What is being lost because these venues aren't open?"

It's like she's trying to start some sort of debate as to whether we need music and dancing in society at all. And she keeps pressing him in a belligerent way. Is she a Lutheran or something to say that she has such a general objection to gigs?

plodder

Who was the other doctor on at the same time as Gabriel Scally today?

Cole

plodder wrote: »

Who was the other doctor on at the same time as Gabriel Scally today?

Professor Paul Moynagh from Maynooth.

Claire trying hard to get control of the interview

spakman

s1ippy wrote: »

"What is being lost because these venues aren't open?"

It's like she's trying to start some sort of debate as to whether we need music and dancing in society at all. And she keeps pressing him in a belligerent way. Is she a Lutheran or something to say that she has such a general objection to gigs?

It's her job to question (or interview!) the guests.

s1ippy

spakman wrote: »

It's her job to question (or interview!) the guests.

She didn't grill the guy beforehand about the meat plants not paying their workers sick leave, but she decided to bring out the Spanish inquisition to demand to know why we even need gigs and dancing.

Right.

dulpit

I listen to the podcast rather than live. I've noticed that they now play the sponsor sting in the podcast, this is new and mildly irritating.

That girl Chelsea, speaking about being trolled on social media is a bit self-important, whoever she is. Anyway nobody should be giving her or anyone that abuse. However she spoke of setting up her 8 year old sister a Tic Toc account to amuse herself over the summer, firstly supervised by her but then she had unfettered access for some of the time and was posting unsupervised. To me that kind of thing is by default a form of child abuse, although unintended. When a listener pointed out to Claire that children should not be allowed unsupervised access she simply retorted that Chelsea is an adult. Actually that makes it worse, an adult allowing a child any opportunity for free access and indeed encouraging such a young child to get in social media in the first place.

Sir Oxman

Deleted User wrote: »

That girl Chelsea, speaking about being trolled on social media is a bit self-important, whoever she is. Anyway nobody should be giving her or anyone that abuse. However she spoke of setting up her 8 year old sister a Tic Toc account to amuse herself over the summer, firstly supervised by her but then she had unfettered access for some of the time and was posting unsupervised. To me that kind of thing is by default a form of child abuse, although unintended. When a listener pointed out to Claire that children should not be allowed unsupervised access she simply retorted that Chelsea is an adult. Actually that makes it worse, an adult allowing a child any opportunity for free access and indeed encouraging such a young child to get in social media in the first place.

Yep, while no-one should be exposed to that level of abuse and threats, she herself said she had a friend monitor DMs etc and screen them but curiosity got the better of her and she ended up feeling like sh1t again.
That's the definition of FOMO, fear of missing out, which is plaguing everyone on social media or at least a helluva lot of them especially her generation.
She was at least honest about her not safeguarding her 8 yr old sister though listening to her, she didn't appear to accept responsibility or see how wrong she was to do that then went on about that poor girl who killed herself over social media abuse. Contradictory messages.

ShamNNspace

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That girl Chelsea, speaking about being trolled on social media is a bit self-important, whoever she is. Anyway nobody should be giving her or anyone that abuse. However she spoke of setting up her 8 year old sister a Tic Toc account to amuse herself over the summer, firstly supervised by her but then she had unfettered access for some of the time and was posting unsupervised. To me that kind of thing is by default a form of child abuse, although unintended. When a listener pointed out to Claire that children should not be allowed unsupervised access she simply retorted that Chelsea is an adult. Actually that makes it worse, an adult allowing a child any opportunity for free access and indeed encouraging such a young child to get in social media in the first place.

The whole item was a bit silly imo. She kept reassuring herself that she was "strong" and had "a thick skin" then immediately admitted that she would spend the day crying over some idiots comment on whatsapp or whatever. Can she not block the account thats sending the abusive messages, as for setting her 8 year old sister with a tik-tok account words really fail me