nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Claire Byrne Live (RTE1)

bazermc

RTE.ie on front page says 9:35pm

EPG says 10:35pm

I guess as long as Claire knows what time she is on at........:P

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

horseburger

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I remember that episode-it was bizarre, to say the least. The speakers were very haphazardly selected. One side, was an actress and parent. The other was a doctor, Maria Steen, and parent. The doctor was prepared, the actress wasn't
When it cut to the people in the audience-one had given a quote that he claimed to not have made, yet if you googled it-it's exactly what he said.
Him trying to row back on it made him look a lot worse. Especially since Maria Steen could cite it.

It felt very unprepared by one side of the discussion, like the actress was speaking from experience, but that's one person's experience, it's not a group. It's not a statistic. On the other hand, the doctor had statistics, she knew what she was talking about, she knew the studies.
That's the biggest problem I have with CB Live-you get a clear disparity between the sides of discussion-like they have no idea of what they're talking about. I may have disagreed, at times, with Maria Steen, but she made her point so well that I was like 'okay, she won the debate'. Seems like Claire Byrne was trying to prevent those who were on opposite sides to Steen from looking foolish.

Indeed, I thought more time should have been given to exploring the issues and letting the school representatives, of the schools with a religious ethos, in the audience, speak without interruption, when they were about to detail, the issue of their schools enrolment processes, in cases where there are limited spaces.

Someone put it up on youtube at the time, which is handy, as it is no longer on the RTE Player.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO5vsJv5Xgs

Here is a bio of Maria Steen:

https://www.catholicireland.net/event/evangelium-conference-young-catholics-18-25-maynooth/

It includes the following detail:

"Maria Steen is married with four children. Formerly an architect and barrister. Maria is also a speaker for the Iona Institute. She has appeared on National Television and Radio media on numerous occasions discussing topics such as Surrogacy, Children’s Rights, religion in society, Marriage and Family and issues".

Here is an item on The Iona Institute website about the Journal fact check which originally suggested that she was incorrect, in what she stated on The Claire Byrne show, but later re-assessed the details, and found she was accurate in what she said.

It includes the statement that she sent to The Journal, about the earlier conclusion it made in its fact check item, regarding the statements she made on the Claire Byrne Show.

http://www.ionainstitute.ie/journal-ie-takes-aim-at-maria-steen-and-misses/

alan partridge aha

Lbn

horseburger wrote: »

Indeed, I thought more time should have been given to exploring the issues and letting the school representatives, of the schools with a religious ethos, in the audience, speak without interruption, when they were about to detail, the issue of their schools enrolment processes, in cases where there are limited spaces.

Someone put it up on youtube at the time, which is handy, as it is no longer on the RTE Player.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO5vsJv5Xgs

Here is a bio of Maria Steen:

https://www.catholicireland.net/event/evangelium-conference-young-catholics-18-25-maynooth/

It includes the following detail:

"Maria Steen is married with four children. Formerly an architect and barrister. Maria is also a speaker for the Iona Institute. She has appeared on National Television and Radio media on numerous occasions discussing topics such as Surrogacy, Children’s Rights, religion in society, Marriage and Family and issues".

Here is an item on The Iona Institute website about the Journal fact check which originally suggested that she was incorrect, in what she stated on The Claire Byrne show, but later re-assessed the details, and found she was accurate in what she said.

It includes the statement that she sent to The Journal, about the earlier conclusion it made in its fact check item, regarding the statements she made on the Claire Byrne Show.

http://www.ionainstitute.ie/journal-ie-takes-aim-at-maria-steen-and-misses/

Really like Maria very sharp lady.

horseburger

alan partridge aha wrote: »

Lbn

Really like Maria very sharp lady.

What I thought was interesting, in the comments under the fact check item on The Journal website, was the way some posters just assumed she was in the wrong, perhaps because of their own prejudices against anyone who holds a different view to them, on issues like religion.

One poster, tried to suggest that she had no basis for saying what she said about the ESRI report - a report which was endorsed by Educate Together - regarding the attendance in schools, of students who are Travellers.

This person, in the comments, named Reg, complained that no one on the show, challenged Maria Steen on what she had stated about the ESRI report, regarding attendance in schools, of pupils who are Travellers. This person, Reg, complained that no one on the show, challenged Maria Steen on what she stated about the statistics, that detail the backgrounds, of students who attend schools with a religious ethos, and schools with no religious ethos.

This person, who doubted what she said, seemingly didn't even know that she quoted statements included in the ESRI / Educate Together report, which were endorsed by Educate Together.

I guess neither did the 41 people who liked Reg's post.

This poster, Reg, described as "Someone with an opinion", stated:
"It made me laugh wgen Steen tried to use travellers as an example of increased diversity in catholic schools and nobody picked her up on during the programe."

https://twitter.com/TPMC67

Maria Steen had read out exactly what was in the ESRI / Educate Together report. regarding attendance of pupils.

It wasn't as if Maria Steen was claiming anything, that wasn't already stated in the report, which was endorsed by Educate Together.

She stated, to Paul Rowe of Educate Together:

"This is directly from your survey, that you have published: “Most multi-denominational schools did not have any traveller pupils. Catholic schools were more likely to have greater numbers of traveller pupils compared to minority faith schools”. That’s from your report".

She had referenced the item, on page 41, under the heading Traveller Pupils, that:

"As a next step, we focussed our analysis on Traveller pupils in all primary schools (see Figure 5). The results showed that the proportion of such pupils in the primary schools was relatively small (74% of all schools did not have any Traveller pupils). Most multi-denominational schools did not have any Traveller pupils. Catholic schools were more likely to have greater numbers of Traveller pupils compared to minority faith schools. A significant association was found between DEIS status and the proportion of Traveller pupils in the school (p<.000). Disadvantaged schools were more likely to have a higher proportion (3%+) of Travellers compared to non-DEIS schools (32% and 11% respectively). The numbers of Traveller pupils attending Gaelscoileanna were modest – 91 per cent of these schools reported having no Travellers among their pupil population (p<.006)".

https://www.esri.ie/pubs/BKMNEXT221.pdf
https://www.esri.ie/news/new-report-on-diversity-in-primary-schools-in-ireland/
https://www.esri.ie/publications/school-sector-variation-among-primary-schools-in-ireland/

Another person, Eimhin Walsh, writes of being disappointed with The Journal for giving in "to Steen/Iona on this", saying "Very disappointing to see The Journal give in to Steen/Iona on this".

The only way to reply to that, is to observe, that if The Journal was so sure of the original conclusion, made in the fact check, well then, it wouldn't have edited the fact check, and changed its conclusion.

http://www.thejournal.ie/catholic-primary-schools-diversity-divestment-facts-ireland-3252590-Mar2017/

EPAndlee

Jaysus here we go now

Atlantic Dawn

I'd say we are one step away from a tool decision to make a carriage of the trains women only.

BillyBobBS

This is pathetic. God help us all if these people are shaping opinions.

Atlantic Dawn

Meanwhile Harry Styles gets sexually assaulted by his own "fans"...

http://www.thejournal.ie/harry-styles-groped-3659994-Oct2017/

[Deleted User]

Wow katherine thomas looks wretched like she's aged 10 years since I last saw her on TV.

EPAndlee

Surely Joe will stand up for the men

BillyBobBS

It's getting to the stage where you'd be afraid to chat up a woman or compliment them.

#allmenarentsexualpredators

RayM

BillyBobBS wrote: »

It's getting to the stage where you'd be afraid to chat up a woman or compliment them.

#allmenarentsexualpredators

If your idea of chatting up or complimenting a woman means whistling at her or shouting "nice tits, love!" then yes, it's getting to the stage where you'd be afraid to chat up or compliment a woman.

EPAndlee

Just employ a sexual harassment panda

Atlantic Dawn

What if you rang the parish priest and told him the compliment you were going to make and if he was ok with it you could use it?

retro:electro

Stop the world and let me off.

thomas 123

These are the real issues!

EPAndlee

https://youtu.be/0XXNASaCsMM

AnneFrank

No mention of intimidating groups of women, like hen parties every weekend, more men bashing. #metoohatemen

Utopia Parkway

Always bizarre on this show how they come back from an ad break for 30 seconds and then end the show straight into another ad break.

FrancieBrady

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Always bizarre on this show how they come back from an ad break for 30 seconds and then end the show straight into another ad break.

Vinnie and his replacement show do it too. Must be lucrative.

sligojoek

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Always bizarre on this show how they come back from an ad break for 30 seconds and then end the show straight into another ad break.

They learned from the master, Joe Duffy. Get the ads in before people start switching over to something else.

RabbleRouser2k

BillyBobBS wrote: »

It's getting to the stage where you'd be afraid to chat up a woman or compliment them.

#allmenarentsexualpredators

The worrying thing is the regular, normal guy will actually worry about chatting up a girl.

The violent yob doesn't care. They won't ask for permission-no matter their gender.

Has Claire spoken about her almost contract violation?

http://www.irishmirror.ie/showbiz/irish-showbiz/rte-say-theyre-disappointed-claire-11391613

RayM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

The worrying thing is the regular, normal guy will actually worry about chatting up a girl.

This kind of crap is hilarious. As long as the "regular, normal guy" isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then why on earth should he worry about chatting to a woman (as opposed to "chatting up a girl", which sounds like something a teenager would do)?

sligojoek

RayM wrote: »

This kind of crap is hilarious. As long as the "regular, normal guy" isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then why on earth should he worry about chatting to a woman (as opposed to "chatting up a girl", which sounds like something a teenager would do)?

My mother is in her 70s. She still goes out with the "girls".

RabbleRouser2k

RayM wrote: »

This kind of crap is hilarious. As long as the "regular, normal guy" isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then why on earth should he worry about chatting to a woman (as opposed to "chatting up a girl", which sounds like something a teenager would do)?

I was referencing teenagers...as in when most are learning about girls.

quintana76

Note that they had to patronisingly smilingly indulge the Commitments, beforehand, to show that they had a sense of humour

RayM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I was referencing teenagers...as in when most are learning about girls.

And if a teenage boy isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then what does he have to worry about?

RabbleRouser2k

RayM wrote: »

And if a teenage boy isn't pushy or obnoxious, and is capable of backing off if someone isn't interested in him, then what does he have to worry about?

He won't even try is what I am getting at.

quintana76 wrote: »

Note that they had to patronisingly smilingly indulge the Commitments, beforehand, to show that they had a sense of humour

Was that a very poorly done 'remembering Sean Hughes' moment, maybe?

RayM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

He won't even try is what I am getting at.

Why? Because he's worried? What's he got to worry about? You're being ridiculous, tbh.

RabbleRouser2k

RayM wrote: »

Why? Because he's worried? What's he got to worry about? You're being ridiculous, tbh.

Each to their own.

AnneFrank

why was there more women on the panel than men ?? Call the police