Are the Irish Times still barred from Newstalk?

dulpit

As far as I know Newstalk (and Today FM) initially barred journalists from the Irish Times because Denis O'Brien was a bit precious about coverage of him. Is this banning still in place? I assume once the takeover of Communicorp occurs this will cease if it's not yet? I don't think I've heard anyone from the times on with Pat Kenny in years though...

I heard Derek Scally (The Irish Times' Berlin correspondent) on Moncrieff a couple of weeks ago. Although he was selling his book (it looks very interesting by the way*) and not on the programme qua journalist.

Obviously, Moncrieff is himself a columnist for The Irish Times.

It's puzzling to think the ban might still be in place. They're going to have to climb down, if they haven't already. This is a very small island, and like it or not, The Irish Times is the most reliable media outlet on it.

end of the road

to be honest it's a disgrace that this ban was able to stand in the first place.
and the BAI stood by and did nothing, and even if they couldn't specifically do anything, they could and should at least have condemned it.

KReid

end of the road wrote: »

to be honest it's a disgrace that this ban was able to stand in the first place.
and the BAI stood by and did nothing, and even if they couldn't specifically do anything, they could and should at least have condemned it.

Meh, the owners have a right to dictate who they do and dont use as contributors, i'm not sure what the BAI could have done legally to intervene, it's not like they where refusing to interview certain political parties. There was barely an eyebrow raised when RTE refused to air Newstalk commercials in the past, and that's government owned. It was petty and pointless, it should have been done in more hushed tones, no need for it to made public though.


In terms of the ban, it's probably been ignored, Bauer will be taking over in a few weeks and i'm sure lots of NT staff would happily like to forget about it and use those jounros again.

end of the road

KReid wrote: »

Meh, the owners have a right to dictate who they do and dont use as contributors, i'm not sure what the BAI could have done legally to intervene, it's not like they where refusing to interview certain political parties. There was barely an eyebrow raised when RTE refused to air Newstalk commercials in the past, and that's government owned. It was petty and pointless, it should have been done in more hushed tones, no need for it to made public though.


In terms of the ban, it's probably been ignored, Bauer will be taking over in a few weeks and i'm sure lots of NT staff would happily like to forget about it and use those jounros again.

there is a massive difference between deciding who would be used to contribute on a particular topic on a station, or contribute on a station, and a bann on a legitimate organisation and anyone got to do with it, contributing on a station because that organisation prints facts about the station's owner.
there is also a massive difference between such a serious and dangerous act, and simply not airing adds for another radio station.
in short your point is nonsense.

Fann Linn

Illustrates just how biased this station is and I say that as not a fan of either mediums.

KReid

KReid wrote: »

There was barely an eyebrow raised when RTE refused to air Newstalk commercials in the past, and that's government owned. It was petty and pointless, it should have been done in more hushed tones, no need for it to made public though.

This has already been answered, but to add – wasn't it Newstalk who made a song & dance about that?

It was a publicity stunt.

dulpit

Looks like the answer is yes. But O'brien has suggested they can now lift the ban.

Joke...

https://m.independent.ie/business/denis-obrien-marks-last-day-as-owner-of-radio-brands-by-telling-staff-its-time-to-lift-irish-times-ban-40489447.html

KReid

end of the road wrote: »

there is a massive difference between deciding who would be used to contribute on a particular topic on a station, or contribute on a station, and a bann on a legitimate organisation and anyone got to do with it, contributing on a station because that organisation prints facts about the station's owner.
there is also a massive difference between such a serious and dangerous act, and simply not airing adds for another radio station.
in short your point is nonsense.

Sorry I don't frequent these boards as much anymore and didn't notice the reply until this was bumped.


Private company chooses not to use journalists from another private company isn't a issue for me, regardless of the reason. If we start putting Irish Times journalists on a pedestal, then we may as well be asking why they aren't using journalists from The Sun or the The Star really.

I appreciate it was a ban, and as I said it could have been dealt with in a better way internally, but this stuff happens all the time in business, a company cuts ties with a supplier for all kinds of reasons, many of them personal.

As for the Rte point, to clarify, it wasn't "another radio radio", it was TV airtime that was refused. It should have been a bigger issue that the state run broadcaster refused to accept money and run TV adverts for a private company.

KReid

KReid wrote: »

Private company chooses not to use journalists from another private company isn't a issue for me, regardless of the reason. If we start putting Irish Times journalists on a pedestal, then we may as well be asking why they aren't using journalists from The Sun or the The Star really.

Not really, when there seems to be precious little regulation over the concentration of media ownership.

If you own most of the big, private media organisations (as had been the case, here) and you fail to run a story, then obviously you are framing the national debate in a way that could be described as manipulative.

nc6000

I guess O'Brien had it in for the Irish Times after articles like this detailing the dodgy transactions to Lowry around the time of the East license award.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/money-trail-denis-o-brien-michael-lowry-and-the-criminal-assets-bureau-1.3283392

nc6000

nc6000 wrote: »

I guess O'Brien had it in for the Irish Times after articles like this detailing the dodgy transactions to Lowry around the time of the East license award.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/money-trail-denis-o-brien-michael-lowry-and-the-criminal-assets-bureau-1.3283392

The ban was down to this article by Fintan O'Toole...

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-why-i-will-not-appear-on-newstalk-again-1.3216957

Newstalk sought an apology from The Irish Times, they didn't get one - so Communicorp banned all Irish Times journalist from their radio stations.

dulpit

KReid wrote: »

Sorry I don't frequent these boards as much anymore and didn't notice the reply until this was bumped.


Private company chooses not to use journalists from another private company isn't a issue for me, regardless of the reason. If we start putting Irish Times journalists on a pedestal, then we may as well be asking why they aren't using journalists from The Sun or the The Star really.

I appreciate it was a ban, and as I said it could have been dealt with in a better way internally, but this stuff happens all the time in business, a company cuts ties with a supplier for all kinds of reasons, many of them personal.

As for the Rte point, to clarify, it wasn't "another radio radio", it was TV airtime that was refused. It should have been a bigger issue that the state run broadcaster refused to accept money and run TV adverts for a private company.

Interestingly, the article by Fintan O'Toole (linked above) specifically counters this point:

Newstalk is not a private business. Its use of the bandwidth is licensed by the State, through the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland.

Newstalk had its licence to operate as one of only two independent national talk radio stations renewed a year ago, largely because no one else applied for the licence. But it is emphatically not a private concern – as citizens we are ultimately responsible for it.

And I wasn't putting the times on a pedestal, but it is mad that they were able to get away with this ban for so long. If they were to ban any other paper I'd feel the same unless there was a justifiable reason (e.g. the paper in question was peddling hate or something like that - so none of the major papers, tabloid or broadsheet, would be affected)

end of the road

KReid wrote: »

Sorry I don't frequent these boards as much anymore and didn't notice the reply until this was bumped.


Private company chooses not to use journalists from another private company isn't a issue for me, regardless of the reason. If we start putting Irish Times journalists on a pedestal, then we may as well be asking why they aren't using journalists from The Sun or the The Star really.

I appreciate it was a ban, and as I said it could have been dealt with in a better way internally, but this stuff happens all the time in business, a company cuts ties with a supplier for all kinds of reasons, many of them personal.

As for the Rte point, to clarify, it wasn't "another radio radio", it was TV airtime that was refused. It should have been a bigger issue that the state run broadcaster refused to accept money and run TV adverts for a private company.

nope, this is not private company chooses not to use journalists from another private company.
this was private company which was the biggest commercial independant radio operator in the country, bars all from a particular media organization from appearing on all of that operator's stations.
that's not putting journalists from any organization on a pedestal, that is just stating reality, and if it is okay in that situation, then it has to be okay in other situations, such as banning whole political parties just because.
i very much doubt a radio or television company banning whole organizations from all of their stations happens all of the time in business in this part of the world, unless an organization is genuinely problematic, and is in no way comparable to businesses cutting ties with other businesses, what happened here was an exception.
because rte is a state company does not mean it has to advertise competitors, and the fact it didn't take money from news talk and advertise it is i'm afraid a legitimate commercial decision, and is nothing compared to what happened with the irish times and communicorp.

L1011

Ahwell wrote: »

Newstalk sought an apology from The Irish Times, they didn't get one - so Communicorp banned all Irish Times journalist from their radio stations.

Ignoring one of their core presenters who continues to write for the Irish Times, that is - obviously to their benefit not the ITs benefit.

L1011

L1011 wrote: »

Ignoring one of their core presenters who continues to write for the Irish Times, that is - obviously to their benefit not the ITs benefit.

Moncrieff started his Irish Times column not long after the ban. Which could only of been a very deliberate act of defiance on his part. Him sticking two fingers up to Communicorp was not really to Communicorp's benefit.

nc6000

Ahwell wrote: »

Moncrieff started his Irish Times column not long after the ban. Which could only of been a very deliberate act of defiance on his part. Him sticking two fingers up to Communicorp was not really to Communicorp's benefit.

I can remember Moncrief being less than impressed that his show was shortened to give Hook more airtime. This was a few years back as I couldn't tell you the last time I've listened to Newstalk

nc6000

nc6000 wrote: »

I can remember Moncrief being less than impressed that his show was shortened to give Hook more airtime. This was a few years back as I couldn't tell you the last time I've listened to Newstalk

I was less than impressed myself when that happened.

nc6000

Ahwell wrote: »

Newstalk sought an apology from The Irish Times, they didn't get one - so Communicorp banned all Irish Times journalist from their radio stations.

Just had a read of the article and am wondering if there's even much in there which warrants an apology? I'd say he was waiting for a chance to have a go at the Irish Times after they detailed all the dodgy payments to Lowry. It's not like it was covered in his own newspapers.

nc6000

nc6000 wrote: »

Just had a read of the article and am wondering if there's even much in there which warrants an apology? I'd say he was waiting for a chance to have a go at the Irish Times after they detailed all the dodgy payments to Lowry. It's not like it was covered in his own newspapers.

This is an account of how the ban came about...

https://www.thejournal.ie/newstalk-irish-times-3631283-Oct2017/

I don't doubt that O'Brien holds grudges, but it does really appear to be about the O'Toole article. The whole thing was ridiculous. How was it supposed to affect the Irish Times? OK, some journalists lost out on appearance fees, but it wasn't a well paid gig anyway. Coner Pope tweeted a picture of one of his appearance fee checks, it was for €40.

Radio5

i thought I read that Denis O'Brien decided that the ban could end on his last day as owner? New owners have taken over now so it's a moot point presumably ...

elperello

The ban was like a sub-plot from some b movie.

My own reaction was to avoid buying anything from Newstalk advertisers.

I am prepared to review that policy now.:)

EmmetSpiceland

elperello wrote: »

The ban was like a sub-plot from some b movie.

My own reaction was to avoid buying anything from Newstalk advertisers.

I am prepared to review that policy now.:)

De Facto shaving oils?

Conor Pope was on Newstalk with Kieran Cuddihy yesterday evening, and has been on other programmes since June 3rd

https://www.newstalk.com/news/conor-pope-i-was-delighted-to-get-a-pps-scam-call-1205422

The ban seems to be over

elperello

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Conor Pope was on Newstalk with Kieran Cuddihy yesterday evening, and has been on other programmes since June 3rd

https://www.newstalk.com/news/conor-pope-i-was-delighted-to-get-a-pps-scam-call-1205422

The ban seems to be over

I noticed that.

No fanfare, no announcement, just phasing them back.

Hopefully that is the end of a shameful period in Irish media history.

Faugheen

elperello wrote: »

I noticed that.

No fanfare, no announcement, just phasing them back.

Hopefully that is the end of a shameful period in Irish media history.

It was announced a couple of weeks ago. All the major outlets, including the IT themselves, ran a story on it.

elperello

Faugheen wrote: »

It was announced a couple of weeks ago. All the major outlets, including the IT themselves, ran a story on it.

Sorry I missed that.

The new broom has swept clean.

Has it been discussed on Newstalk, or just announced?

Now that Bauer owns the station, there shouldn't be a barrier against discussing the policy, or even talking about Denis O'Brien beyond the context of his charity work.

EmmetSpiceland

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Has it been discussed on Newstalk, or just announced?

Now that Bauer owns the station, there shouldn't be a barrier against discussing the policy, or even talking about Denis O'Brien beyond the context of his charity work.

You’d wonder will they cover that “scholarship” where some kid gets to study aboard all expenses paid? That was an odd bit until O’Brien’s name was “dropped”.

Faugheen

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Has it been discussed on Newstalk, or just announced?

Now that Bauer owns the station, there shouldn't be a barrier against discussing the policy, or even talking about Denis O'Brien beyond the context of his charity work.

I didn't hear it discussed on air but I imagine it was mentioned as a 'oh by the way...' and nothing too indepth. I think it's a case of it being a stupid situation for everyone in Communicorp to be involved in and they very much want to put it behind them.

I've heard Conor Pope on a couple of times and Paul Cullen was on with Kieran Cuddihy one of the days as well. Think everyone involved knows the score and don't want to make more of it now the antagonist is gone.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

I didn't hear it discussed on air but I imagine it was mentioned as a 'oh by the way...' and nothing too indepth. I think it's a case of it being a stupid situation for everyone in Communicorp to be involved in and they very much want to put it behind them.

I've heard Conor Pope on a couple of times and Paul Cullen was on with Kieran Cuddihy one of the days as well. Think everyone involved knows the score and don't want to make more of it now the antagonist is gone.

I can understand that, but now is the time for questions to be asked. The former regime has ended, I think they should probably take this opportunity to express any dissatisfaction they had with the ban.

If I were a journalist, I think I'd want to take this opportunity to distance myself from the ban.

Moncrieff did that pretty cleverly, as outlined above. If the rest of them have respect for their own profession, I think they ought to speak up now.

These people have mortgages, nobody expected them to be martyrs. But there's an opportunity here.

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

You’d wonder will they cover that “scholarship” where some kid gets to study aboard all expenses paid? That was an odd bit until O’Brien’s name was “dropped”.

What's this about Emmet? Didn't hear about any scholarship, haven't paid much attention to O'Brien at all.

I know there was a bit of controversy in UCD about O'Brien having the entire science faculty named after him. There's something odd about getting a degree from a faculty named after a man whom Michael McDowell has described, in court, as having a "casual relationship with the truth”.

EmmetSpiceland

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

What's this about Emmet? Didn't hear about any scholarship, haven't paid much attention to O'Brien at all.

I know there was a bit of controversy un UCD about O'Brien having the entire science faculty named after him. There's something odd about getting a degree from a faculty named after a man whom Michael McDowell described, in court, as having a "casual relationship with the truth”.

I can’t remember the full story but Pat had a young woman on talking about the scholarship she got, I think she was in China. Talked about how great it was and all the doors it opened for her. Just seemed like a weird “piece” to cover but then she thanked Mr. O’Brien and it became apparent why it was on.

Never liked McDowell, not arguing with him or anything but he’s an odious individual himself.