dxhound2005 wrote: » It's not. Using HSE services and radio listening are not comparable. I can tune to dozens of stations and I can recognise whether I dislike a particular programme. The sensible thing is not to listen again. Unless I just wanted to gather material to complain about the programme on the internet.
dxhound2005 wrote: » Did she get some sort of cure for her coughing and wheezing? I haven't seen it mentioned on the thread for a while. I don't listen to her myself, because I don't like her.
Beechwoodspark wrote: » Fergus feckin Finlay again. Is that fella ever off the air??
elperello wrote: » He is retiring from Barnardo's this year so he will have even more time to do radio. That is unless he gets a better gig - http://www.thejournal.ie/fergus-finlay-presidential-election-3965983-Apr2018/
humberklog wrote: » Not really bizarre. I love radio and that includes following the good and the bad. It's not about switching over to find something I like. At that time on Saturday there's little for me. So I occasionally listen in to MF on the national broadcaster. I'm usually knocking about in the car or apartment at that time and I like listening to live radio at that time. On here - a radio forum- I do compliment shows as much as I criticise. Surely a radio forum on a chat board would be more bizarre if there was no critique of radio shows good or bad? If I was complaining on a MF fan site I'd understand your confusion but this isn't. It's a Radio forum to air ones views on what's being broadcast. Also through the banality of Nevin Maguire telling you how to fry an egg on a stone you can occasionally get something interesting like Gerald Keane (he of the trough) being allowed to slander Sgt. McCabe (who the pigs want to scare). I don't want to switch off everything I don't like. Sometimes it's interesting for all the wrong reasons. That's radio How you don't understand that- I find bizarre.
humberklog wrote: » Bit overly simplified. With RTE being the national broadcaster I find it's interesting to hear what the nation is paying to be told. I'd go easier on Newstalk as they're not getting money off me in license fees. That makes a flipping huge difference. Gerald Keane has had more air time on Marian Finucane talking about Sgt. McCabe than any non partisan panelist who would be in the know in 2014. Pat Hickey's family solicitor had more time talking (without questioning) about the Brazil incident than any Sports journalist. This is Ireland's public broadcaster and MF is paid a fortune. If there's a forced agenda such as attempting to disgrace a decent public servant such as McCabe then I think if you're interested in current affairs and in radio it's interesting to listen in to MF's show occasionally.
splinter65 wrote: » What I find bizarre is posters coming along to a thread about a radio show and expecting to find no posts criticizing that show. We pay our license fee and we are entitled to hold the radio station to a certain standard. The attitude “if you don’t like it then don’t listen” is the same to me as saying “ if you don’t like Clonmel hospital then don’t go there, go somewhere else”.
dxhound2005 wrote: » They are putting out hundreds of hours of material every day on radio and TV. None of us should expect to have our individual tastes catered to in every broadcast. I listen to and look at what I like. Some of the things I don't like are very popular with the general public, and I have no problem with that. I won't waste my time listening to things I don't like to satisfy some perverse notion of getting value for money from my licence fee.
DickSwiveller wrote: » If a person is interested in current affairs they will listen to a show like Finucane's, where the stories of the week are discussed. I don't see why you can't listen while also critiquing what you don't like about the programme. Isn't that what this thread is for?
Technocentral wrote: » You make zero sense, e.g. I hate Tubridy and Ivan Yates, never listen to their shows, listening to a presenter you hate is demented. You're saying you've nothing to do but listen to this show that you hate?
dxhound2005 wrote: » I won't waste my time listening to things I don't like to satisfy some perverse notion of getting value for money from my licence fee.
humberklog wrote: » Huh? There's lots I ignore on radio. I'm generally positive on this forum. My posts are there to be read. MF's show was caught out to the tune of 180k blips not so long ago for allowing one of her trough pals (Gerald K) to attempt to put down Sgt. McCabe. A show that lets their dogs loose on a decent bloke and couldn't give an F as to what cost (MF's salary plus 180k) is certainly worth a listen and worth criticising. Hardly perverse.
dxhound2005 wrote: » I read some of your posts and you are in no way positive about MF. For instance last year you posted this in reply to a mention of her salary not being justified by the amount of work she does.She used to excuse that away by claiming that this didn't account for hours and days of research she put into the show. That might have been true in the distant past but for at least the last 6 years she's been ringing the show in without doing a tap and showing little interest in changing that approach. The show is dull as dish water, the presenter is uninterested, bored and cranky, the guests are mostly irrelevant old hacks and the format is jaded. Why RTE have held onto her in that slot for so long past its sell by date is beyond me. It reeks of the civil service of old- a biligerant, lazy clock watcher put in the backroom with light filing duties, her knitting and stack of Caribbean cruise brochures.
dxhound2005 wrote: » I read some of your posts and you are in no way positive about MF. For instance last year you posted this in reply to a mention of her salary not being justified by the amount of work she does.She used to excuse that away by claiming that this didn't account for hours and days of research she put into the show. That might have been true in the distant past but for at least the last 6 years she's been ringing the show in without doing a tap and showing little interest in changing that approach. The show is dull as dish water, the presenter is uninterested, bored and cranky, the guests are mostly irrelevant old hacks and the format is jaded. Why RTE have held onto her in that slot for so long past its sell by date is beyond me. It reeks of the civil service of old- a biligerant, lazy clock watcher put in the backroom with light filing duties, her knitting and stack of Caribbean cruise brochures. If that was me I would never tune in again, but if people want to inflict suffering on themselves, go ahead. You are a bit exercised about the €180K, but it will not make any difference to how much you pay in the licence fee. And I expect you did not know anything about it between the broadcast in 2014 and the court settlement this year. So it should not have made you tune in during that time.
dxhound2005 wrote: » You are a bit exercised about the €180K, but it will not make any difference to how much you pay in the licence fee.
alaimacerc wrote: » That makes her salary 0.1% of RTE's total public funding. So surely he's at least entitled to 16c worth of grumbling about her! Sure, if MF quit tomorrow, he'd not get a rebate of a thousandth of his licence fee: they'd just have to think of some other way of spending it, whether better or worse. Mind you, while my own past and present bêtes noires on the roster are numerous, I'm sure they'd also defend their salaries on the basis of the chunk of RTE's commercial revenue that they bring in...
quintana76 wrote: » She used to be on a whopping 570k for the 3 and a bit hours she broadcasts. It think it was called sharing out the loot amongst those on the inside track.
thesandeman wrote: » Brendan O'Connor today.
quintana76 wrote: » Irish woman who lives in Guatamala is asked by Brendan why are so many Americans living there. To get away from Trump and avoid their student debt she replies. The first part is pathetic in so many ways and sounds like a sanctimonious excuse for the second part. They are somehow claiming they are political dissidents who are refugees from evil daddy Trump instead of middle class kids having a good time and putting off responsibility. The sheer non reflective groupthink is typical of many anti-Trumpsrers. You would think that Trump was some kind of dictator who oppressed and locked up his opponents. Bet they never even voted. It's because of the likes of them that he got elected in the first place and has a good chance of doing so again.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » quintana76 wrote: » Irish woman who lives in Guatamala is asked by Brendan why are so many Americans living there. To get away from Trump and avoid their student debt she replies. The first part is pathetic in so many ways and sounds like a sanctimonious excuse for the second part. They are somehow claiming they are political dissidents who are refugees from evil daddy Trump instead of middle class kids having a good time and putting off responsibility. The sheer non reflective groupthink is typical of many anti-Trumpsrers. You would think that Trump was some kind of dictator who oppressed and locked up his opponents. Bet they never even voted. It's because of the likes of them that he got elected in the first place and has a good chance of doing so again. In my opinion she came across as a grade A arsehole. Sorry for being so direct, but that’s how it seemed to me.
