Newstalk Sept 1st interview

Grizzly 45

Anyone complain to Newstalk about this?It is utterly one sided and just a mouthpiece for a Carmody rant.There is absolutely no balance in it at all.

Would suggest we fire off a few emails telling Newstalk what we think of it,and maybe balanced news would be grand for a change? Its the main reason most people listen to them to avoid RTE https://www.newstalk.com/news/bird-populations-facing-bloodbath-as-open-seasons-order-passes-aran-1246108

spaceHopper

No you'll only get into a fight and slagging match.

I don't hunt but I've been know to cast a fly and after hunting they'll move onto fishing.

Grizzly 45

"Dignified silences" dont get us anywhere either.

Cass

The very definition of a waste of time, complaining that is.

They don't want to hear complaints and will duely file any in the rubbish bin. They have an agenda and bias which they won't allow to be challenged hence the bias in the air time. Plus sometimes giving a thing air time gives it more life than it deserves. Better to let it die off without a fuss than to highlight it and cause a problem. The Streisand effect.

Barber2021

complaints are never a waster of time.

social media clatters all day long with an anti hunting agenda.

to leave it unanswered is to allow a view that there is no answer to take root.

solarwinds

The topic was also discussed on the lunchtime programme. The anti spent his time just repeating the same old buzz words "murder, massacre, bloodbath, destruction of the countryside". Two lads came on to say there piece and done there best to counter his argument but every time the anti spoke what they said was ignored and he continued to repeat his same buzz words. One poor guy came on, not a hunter, to highlight studies conducted in the UK and the US on the effect household cats have on wild birds, he was laughed at by the presenter and that was the last we heard from him.

The two lads done their best but you can not debate with someone who no matter what you say is ignored, all he cared about was painting hunters as murderers and questioned what was wrong with a person who gets enjoyment from blasting a living thing out of the sky with a weapon. It is the antis words that will be remembered from the interview and not the reasoned arguments from the hunters. He had his soapbox and used it to great effect with no challenge from the presenter to verify, prove or disprove what he was saying.

And 90% of the people who rang and texted in "have lived in the countryside all their lives and hate hunting and think it should be banned and it does not go on in our area". I would doubt the credentials of a lot of those people. One lady text in to say there were cars coming into her area at night shining lights all over the place and firing lots of shots, and in the morning the place is littered with beer bottles and cans, now hunters are drink drivers with weapons, apparently "this madness has to stop".

To listen to the anti we are all out 24/7 murdering anything with a pulse like a scene from Apocolypse Now.

Now I must go and refuel the chopper I have just received a report about a few troublesome bunnies.

Grizzly 45

I'm in two minds about this anymore. Taking Cass's point about the Streisand effect and "dignified silences" into consideration that's fine if it was going to be a balanced debate.as this wasn't in any shape or form it violates the BAI standards on programming and is worth a complaint.

I hark back to the two hatchet jobs "Slime time" did on gun ownership and hunting, and we were expecting more of the same on the deer hunting in a programme this spring, and we were pleasantly surprised to get a balanced report,more or less. It might have had something to do with over 80 complaints received by the BAI on the 2015 hatchet job on gun ownership and the 10 complaints in 2006?on the hatchet job done with an agenda back then.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil.

solarwinds

It does not matter how intelligent you're debate, how factually correct you're points are. The only thing that will be remembered is "murder, bloodbath, massacre and destruction". It is this that the public will remember.

The two lads were highlighting how much money is put into conservation by the different organisations, how much personal time is put in by the local man, all this was ignored the response being "a hunter is dishonest, will always lie and is never to be trusted". A reasoned debate can not be had with an individual like that.

Grizzly 45

Did they actually get to speak on the programme?Or were those texts?

solarwinds

The two hunters were speaking but their very valid points were largely ignored.

Cass

You'll never beat a moral argument with facts as the "won't someone think of the children" cannot be reasoned with, nor do they want to. They stand upon their soapbox, confident in their moral superiority.

However don't let that stop anyone from lashing off an e-mail. I never said not to complain, I merely pointed out the fruitlessness of such an endeavor given past experience with previous "articles/segments" from much larger broadcast media platforms.

Grizzly 45

"No I don't care about the children,and quite frankly neither do you" is how you defuse that tactical nuke of an arguement ender.Its a lazy arguement,and now about as effective as calling someone a Fascist/Nazi these days,and one that you can go all Jordan Peterson or Ben Sharpio on no bother.Firing off an email has to have a sting in the tail."Respond to me or Im taking it higher as I am offended" is how you play it.Do not have any qualms about using our enemies own weapons against them either.

While it might not have a effect on the programne content,it put s them on notice that they are being watched and to play nice in future on this topic.

Cass

Go for it. Its only an email. Won't cost you anything bar a little time.

Grizzly 45

Been and done!😀

yubabill

Looked back and see that I complained to them when Carmody was on Ciara Kelly show in nov 2017. Got an interpretation of the interview, is all, but at least caused them a bit of inconvenience.

Carmody gets on there too much when they talk about hunting and the interviewers give him too much leeway. In the interest of balance they need someone from the hunting side of the argument, but I think it's really just clickbait on a slow news day.

Mississippi.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117849748#Comment_117849748

To newstalk or BAI ?

Grizzly 45

Got to complain to the programme/station first and give them time to respond.ASFIK doesn't say any particular time frame. So 7/10 working days should be sufficient? After that, you can complain to BAI.

Grizzly 45

"Kelly describes herself as a soi-disant "intellectual"

A "self-proclaimed" intellectual then...??... Oh dear...🙄

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciara_Kelly

Cass

Hah.

Feisar

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117853123#Comment_117853123

Dunning–Kruger effect in full swing there.

Edit - she's a qualified medial doctor, so fair balls. More intellectual than me anyway, not that that's any great boast.

Grizzly 45

Academic qualifications are in many cases a sure sign of a lack of common sense.

As Bill Gates said "I wasn't very good at passing exams, a friend of mine became a qualified and brilliant engineer. He works for Microsoft, and I own Microsoft."

Grizzly 45

Update...It can take ,according to BAI ,up to 30 days for a complaint to be responded to by a media group.

Cass

If they hold true, it'll be day 30 before you get a reply. Keep the updates coming though.

Grizzly 45

I see Mr John"streaker" Carmody is getting some more media coverage in the Limerick Post,[about as influential as the old Skibbereen Eagle]. Now wants hunting and gun mags up on the top shelf with the,what passes for porn selection,in our newspaper shops.🤣

https://www.limerickpost.ie/digital/2021/2021-09-11/

BSA International

Comments by Mehole Martin in last few days on RTE about firearm licensing reviews etc in light of recent events are worrying when we look at the recent past.

JP22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117874284#Comment_117874284

Yep, whats new, same same old drivel and horse shite spewed out by those who think they know better.

and NOT a single comment on the 19 arrested in Limerick and other illegal firearms confiscated in past week.

Grizzly 45

NEWSTALK responds.

Thank you for getting in touch.

 

I have reviewed the audio in question with your comments in mind. The piece discussed the beginning of the open hunting season. John Carmody, from Animal Rights Action Network, was the guest. He was clearly identified as an advocate of animal rights and said he was a ‘bird lover.’ He outlined his opposition to the hunting season as he doesn’t want to see animals shot. Co-host Ciara Kelly challenged this view and put it to him that there are those who advocate for the season, for reasons such as culling. At the end of the piece, Ciara asked the listeners for their opinions. We read a number of texts in opposition to the comments made by John Carmody. For example, three texts on the topic were read at approximately 8.35, all of which advocated for hunting and the hunting season. Also, at the end of the show, a text was read out which once again advocated for hunting and highlighted that many gun clubs purchase birds to replenish the population. While not the exact projects you mention in your email, it was similar in tone in that it highlights some of the projects gun clubs and members undertake.

 

As outlined in the BAI guidelines, balance can be achieved across a number of items and in a number of ways, including through challenging guests and hearing and airing opposing views. It is not necessary to have a guest in direct opposition or opposing views at the same time. As outlined above, we feel that there was balance provided across the show to the discussion and there was no breach of BAI guidelines.

 

Kind Regards,

Eric

 

 

 

Eric Moylan

Senior Editor

T: +353 1 644 5107  

Marconi House, Digges Lane, Dublin 2, D02 TD60

 

BSA International

I'm so surprised at that response........NOT !

solarwinds

That was the breakfast show interview with Ciara Kelly they are referencing. There was also a second interview on the Lunchtime Live show with Andrea Gilligan.

Grizzly 45

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117893987#Comment_117893987

Hmmm.

Rescueme0007

It strikes me that John Carmody has the perfect face for radio. Anyone that that has had the misfortune to see him, would immediately know that he's an attention seeking, virtue signaling,! Unfortunately he probably fits in with the noisy, minority of ultra liberals to whom what passes for a government in this country, listens.😔

Cass

Moderator Note

Folks can I just remind people that this forum is public and defamation laws exist as the FB case from a few years back proved. IOW mind the posts, the content and any "suggestions" contained within.

Zxthinger

Anyone that listened to that would have been able to determine that the arguments were emotional driven. Gamekeepers up and down the land were insulted and wildlife conservation was touted as acceptance of orgy of birds running a muck as being ok on the speakers mind..

The only murder I see when out shooting is a murder of crows..

The opinions of this individual were off the wall..

Obiviously this scaremongering is what makes good radio these days.. lol

Cass

As is always the case the vast majority wouldn't know the "agenda" of those involved and take what is said as Gospel. Only those in the shooting community would understand the bias and be insulted by it.

Just look at the tree hugger crowd that "free" animals and the destruction it causes afterwards. They only highlight the "victory" for "animal rights", but the years, if not decades, of damage that is created is never mentioned or discussed.

People don't want to know, and others have the attention span of a Gnat. In a world of instant everything a long discussion, however valid, cannot beat the "won't someone think of the children" moral argument.

Grizzly 45

"Think of the Children"[AKA The Helen Lovejoy Law of debate] is now as misused that it is heading for a 2nd Godwins law ruling.

When used as a plea for pity, this appeal to emotion can constitute a potential logical fallacy, while when used as an appeal for sympathy for weaker members of society, or the social good of the long-term health and viability of a society, it can constitute an argument for social justice generally accepted as appropriate.

Claiming to do something for the benefit of children is not a fallacy of itself, but if used to avoid logical debate, it is a thought-terminating cliché. Ethicist Jack Marshall described "think of the children!" as a "tried-and-true debate-stopper" used by "misty-eyed crusaders" to promote government policies and societal actions intended to alleviate the suffering or promote the well-being of children of improvident, impoverished, or otherwise flawed parents, which harms society by removing an important incentive for prudent behavior and by encouraging non-eugenic breeding by the type of person who has "fathered more kids than he can possibly support":

Wikipedia: "Think of the children"

"Think of the children!" is a tried-and-true debate-stopper, but more often than not one that succeeds because of its ability to inhibit rational thought. Children routinely have to suffer the consequences of adult incompetence, recklessness, stupidity, dishonesty and irresponsibility, and if preventing that biologically-dictated result is humanity's priority, then society needs to abolish the enforcement of laws, the obligation to support one's own family, and common sense. [...] [U]nless society sticks to principles that require adults to be responsible regarding the welfare of children in their charge, the "Think of the children!" reflex will suffocate order and justice.

So the quickest way to difuse this tactical nuke of argument enders is simply going Jordan Peterson on the espouser with."No I don't really care about "the Children"[air quote gesture optional] and quite frankly neither do you in reality,as your argument seems to have run out of logical points and you are now appealing to emotionalism ." I want to see the reaction to that MOAB being used in real life.