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

RTE Radio 1: Late Debate

Rubik.

The best thing that happened to Newstalk's Breakfast Show was Claire Byrne leaving it. Why would anyone in Montrose think that it would be a good idea to get her to present a current affairs programme? Its not a programme a lot of people listen to, but still, there are any number of more suitable presenters knocking around RTE.

http://blog.marketing.ie/?p=4652

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

serfboard wrote: »

Vincent Browne was good but was, by all accounts, a "difficult" person to work with, and certainly on his television programme, he seemed to have a few peatas who he treated very easily compared to others.

On the first point: with the height of respect, so what? Browne apparently was a little intimidating to his staff, back when that kind of thing was allowed. Ok.

The listener needn't worry himself with speculation as to the feelings of Browne's acolytes, many of whom have progressed to very impressive careers in newspapers.

On the point about Browne having a bias, this was probably more a feature of his TV3 work (as it then was) than his work on Late Debate or in newspapers.

I first got interested in radio in my teens by doing a menial job while listening to Vincent Browne eviscerate his guests on Late Debate, or, on the same programme, delve into policy debates in a really meaningful way — consulting experts on matters of economic planning, local government, ethics, etc.

There is so much scope here for a really excellent, public-service programme. The programme producers ought to try and live up to the standard set by Vincent Browne.

Good loser

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Yep, correct and right.

So we are bunched, is that what you are saying?

'Hope springs eternal'

Up to recently the debate on housing was carried out with studious avoidance of reference to costs. At least recently there has been some mention of these.
For instance I have heard it said the State could over 10/15 years only fund about one third of the money required - this seems about right. Also John Moran knows what he is talking about. When the Left are cornered on costs (rarely) they refer to this O Cuallan scheme - they reckon 50,000 houses can be built on the basis of the costings of a single, small (and exceptional) scheme built 5/10 years ago.

Good loser

serfboard wrote: »

I think Katie does a very good job here too.

Let's compare her to two other occupants of the slot - Cormac O hEadhra and Vincent Browne. Cormac used to stir the pot to such an extent that all the contributors ended up shouting over one another and Cormac lost control.

Vincent Browne was good but was, by all accounts, a "difficult" person to work with, and certainly on his television programme, he seemed to have a few peatas who he treated very easily compared to others.

To me, Katie has the right approach in asking difficult questions in a way that a) we can hear the answers and b) some information is conveyed. Shouting and roaring in a radio studio makes for a poor listening experience.

Katie is better than the other two clowns, although Gara is somewhat better on Drivetime than he was before - less bullish and mulish, more rational.
Always felt Browne was 'full of sound and fury signifying nothing', boorish, outrageously biased and seriously partial towards his favourites.
Katie is limited, not very efficient with time or language and generally is not well researched. RTE would do well to get Kieran Cuddihy from Newstalk.