RTE fail us yet again.

Einhard · 27-11-2010 06:11PM

Biggins wrote: »

Well first in reply to above, its the first more better organised nations protest where people are being organised professionally, to come from all corners.

Since when does running a well organised event make equate to it being a national day of anything?

...Because of you check buses have been organised by the unions from all said corners of Ireland to take people to our capital!!!
As for "small numbers" - what you you want? Numbers now have to reach over a certain quota now to be representative?

Big whoop on the buses. I've organised buses from across the country for various things in the past. It doesn't mean it was a national event.

* Its not a huge story? Are you for real? Ok, its so minor that only other nations stations are actually running it!
* Its not going to be reported in "full" - sound-bites is not "full".
* It don't have to be broadcast live!

And RTE will cover it too. If RTE refused to cover the march I'd see your point. But they will. And more extensively than the foreigh channels.

Indicentally, those foreigh channels are news providers. They will fill their air tme with anything. The fact they they are covering the march does not mean that it is of any greay signficance. Sky and the BBC both covered a polar bear reunion last weekend for example.

...And you should watch RTE for 25 years plus and then you will get a better picture picture of just how much our government has RTE by the balls and does with it, what it continuously does openly and slyly and has being doing for decades.

I watch the Frontline every now and then. I watch the week in Politics. And RTE news. And various other current affairs programmes. I can honestly say that I've never considered them to be pro-FF in any way. Indeed, wasn't there anger within the government recently at the hostility they perceived from RTE?

I think people are angry and want to lash out at the moment. RTE are seen as part of the establishment and thus a legit target for people. Doesn't make their notions any less illusory though.

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:11PM

Einhard wrote: »

I don't really understand where you are getting that from. I've seen plently of criticism of FF and the government on RTE, and particaulry over the past few weeks? Maybe you're watching the wrong programmes.

They cut a national broadcast at the point when strong critisicm from vincent browne was directed at fianna fail, whys that?

Einhard · 27-11-2010 06:17PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

They cut a national broadcast at the point when strong critisicm from vincent browne was directed at fianna fail, whys that?

Because Vincent Browne isn't on their staff.

Because VB wasn't asking searching, probing or important questions, but rather rabble rousing to boost his own image and show. As Gareth Fitz said later to him, there's no need to rant so much Vincent, it detracts from the issues. I s'pose Fitzgerald is a FF shill now eh?

And lastly, RTE had extsneove cover age and commentary that night on the conference. They had two members of the opposition on an extended WinP, and they were allowed a voice to air their criticisms. I really can't see how that can be construed as being a mouthpiece for FF.

BeefJerkyX · 27-11-2010 06:19PM

Just came on here to rant in the March thread about RTE and see this thread. I'm stunned. I really am.

When they cut off Vincent Browne the other day, people were saying it was censorship. I didn't believe it was deliberate (I know, naive). But then, yesterday, there was this story on their site - http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1125/politics.html Reading it, it seems the big thing should been the dissatisfaction with the plan. The headline? Plan is a 'pathway to recovery'. What?! Of all that they reported in that story, that Cowen quote is what they choose for a headline?

And now the reporting on the march.

A muddled story, figures half that of the Guardian and the reporting of why the people were marching is really confused, and all about the unions. I was there and, yes, the unions were out in force but the message was REALLY clear - people aren't happy with the IMF coming in because the public are being forced to pay for private debt. The Guardian got that. Why couldn't RTE?

Unless it was absolutely deliberate.

Of course after they apologised for reporting the NEWS over that Cowen painting a while back, I shouldn't be surprised. But I am. I'm appalled to be honest.

conti · 27-11-2010 06:27PM

I'm with the OP on this. I couldn't make it to Dublin and when I turned on my TV today I was shocked that RTE had nothing. I was expecting aerial shots from helicopters showing the masses of people and live footage of the speeches and performances.

For anyone saying that 'RTE isn't a 24 channel', they have cancelled programs to show live feeds of WAY less important stuff than the most relevant protest of our lifetime, so that arguement is pointless.

FF sympathising fµckwits

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:27PM

Einhard wrote: »

Because Vincent Browne isn't on their staff.

Because VB wasn't asking searching, probing or important questions, but rather rabble rousing to boost his own image and show. As Gareth Fitz said later to him, there's no need to rant so much Vincent, it detracts from the issues. I s'pose Fitzgerald is a FF shill now eh?

And lastly, RTE had extsneove cover age and commentary that night on the conference. They had two members of the opposition on an extended WinP, and they were allowed a voice to air their criticisms. I really can't see how that can be construed as being a mouthpiece for FF.

OH seriously now ffs your telling me that your serious in telling me that rte cut off the most important broadcast in recent years because the guy asking qeustions at the time wasnt on their staff???

Your telling me that they also cut the broadcast because vincent wasnt asking relevant qeustions, so rte should decide what is a relevant question. Asking the government do they feel responsible isnt a relevant question?

You follow up with the winning idea that because rte "allowed" the oppisition to have a voice they are not biased, that is thier job ffs!!

MagicSean · 27-11-2010 06:33PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

OH seriously now ffs your telling me that your serious in telling me that rte cut off the most important broadcast in recent years because the guy asking qeustions at the time wasnt on their staff???

Your telling me that they also cut the broadcast because vincent wasnt asking relevant qeustions, so rte should decide what is a relevant question. Asking the government do they feel responsible isnt a relevant question?

You follow up with the winning idea that because rte "allowed" the oppisition to have a voice they are not biased, that is thier job ffs!!

They cannot be seen to have any opinion on the matter or to allow one side of a political debate to get more time or coverage than another.

Einhard · 27-11-2010 06:33PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

OH seriously now ffs your telling me that your serious in telling me that rte cut off the most important broadcast in recent years because the guy asking qeustions at the time wasnt on their staff???

Your telling me that they also cut the broadcast because vincent wasnt asking relevant qeustions, so rte should decide what is a relevant question. Asking the government do they feel responsible isnt a relevant question?

You follow up with the winning idea that because rte "allowed" the oppisition to have a voice they are not biased, that is thier job ffs!!

No. I'm telling you that Vincent Brown's rabble rousing, self-indulgent questions, weren't part of what made it the most important broadcast in our history! The coverage wasn't supposed to be about VB, and RTE chose not to make it about him. They focused on what Cowen had to say, and then later they allowed critical analysis and criticism from opposition politicans.

BeefJerkyX · 27-11-2010 06:33PM

super_furry wrote: »

The simple fact is that the march isn't big enough or significant enough to warrant exceptional coverage.

Certainly not if you believe RTE's figures. RTE news website: up to 50,000. Guardian website: more than 100,000. Hmmm... who do I trust more? Absolutely disgraceful.

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:36PM

k_mac wrote: »

They cannot be seen to have any opinion on the matter or to allow one side of a political debate to get more time or coverage than another.

?????

anne doyle "strong performance from brian"

Cut a national brodcast early.

Donal Og O Baelach · 27-11-2010 06:39PM

Lads, leave RTE alone - think of Jean Byrne.

Einhard · 27-11-2010 06:40PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

?????

anne doyle "strong performance from brian"

Cut a national brodcast early.

It was a strong performance. Just because RTE aren't critical of every single aspect of the government doesnt make them a government cipher. You don't want RTE to be non-biased, you want them to share your biases. There's a big difference.

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:42PM

Einhard wrote: »

No. I'm telling you that Vincent Brown's rabble rousing, self-indulgent questions, weren't part of what made it the most important broadcast in our history! The coverage wasn't supposed to be about VB, and RTE chose not to make it about him. They focused on what Cowen had to say, and then later they allowed critical analysis and criticism from opposition politicans.

you see that is a matter of opinion, in broadcsting you dont cut at a certain moment because in your opinion the questions were not relevant, a large number of people found what vincent said relevant. why should rte cut the national broadcast because they dont find question relevant? Why did they have to cut it at all?

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:43PM

Einhard wrote: »

It was a strong performance. Just because RTE aren't critical of every single aspect of the government doesnt make them a government cipher. You don't want RTE to be non-biased, you want them to share your biases. There's a big difference.

is the bit in bold a matter of opinion?

hotmail.com · 27-11-2010 06:46PM

Sky News didn't provide rolling coverage of the protest, for starters.

If RTE opted to broadcast this protest, would they be obliged to broadcast every single protest that happens in the Capital? Of course not.

We will get good coverage of the event on the 6.1 and the 9. I'm a critic of RTE, but some things have to be kept in perspective.

Einhard · 27-11-2010 06:48PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

you see that is a matter of opinion, in broadcsting you dont cut at a certain moment because in your opinion the questions were not relevant, a large number of people found what vincent said relevant. why should rte cut the national broadcast because they dont find question relevant? Why did they have to cut it at all?

There were many other journalists there, all of whom asked questions. TV3 didn't broadcast them. Are TV3 guilty of censorship? They cut their broadcast as RTE did afterall. Also, you seem to be under the apprehension that somehow Vincent Brown was part of the event. He wasn't.

steddyeddy wrote: »

is the bit in bold a matter of opinion?

It's both opinion, and self-evident. It was a stong performance. Something on which most other media outlets, including the British ones which I follow, concurred. People seem to think that not having a go at FF is the same as propogandising for FF. It's not. He delivered a stong, confident rhetorical performance. Stating that is not promoting him or backing him, especiaally when commentators on the same channel are attacking and criticising him on his record.

HarryPotter41 · 27-11-2010 06:57PM

BeefJerkyX wrote: »

Certainly not if you believe RTE's figures. RTE news website: up to 50,000. Guardian website: more than 100,000. Hmmm... who do I trust more? Absolutely disgraceful.

50,000 was actually the estimate from the gardai conducting the operations around the march today. So I would tend to trust them rather than a Guardian journalist, and obviously RTE do too

Biggins · 27-11-2010 06:58PM

Einhard wrote: »

Since when does running a well organised event make equate to it being a national day of anything?

...Aaa - when all aspects of the Irish people happen to turn up in protest?

Big whoop on the buses. I've organised buses from across the country for various things in the past. It doesn't mean it was a national event.

Well it don't mean its just a local one other does it?

And RTE will cover it too. If RTE refused to cover the march I'd see your point. But they will. And more extensively than the foreign channels.

Indeed they will. All maybe 5/10 minutes of it.

Incidentally, those foreign channels are news providers. They will fill their air time with anything. The fact they they are covering the march does not mean that it is of any great significance. Sky and the BBC both covered a polar bear reunion last weekend for example.

...Maybe - but not with such urgency, repentance and importance!
That point alone don't wash!

I watch the Frontline every now and then. I watch the week in Politics. And RTE news. And various other current affairs programmes. I can honestly say that I've never considered them to be pro-FF in any way. Indeed, wasn't there anger within the government recently at the hostility they perceived from RTE?

* You haven't seen the guests that were pulled then from the likes of the Late Late Show a number of times when it came about that a minister was to appear and someone else opining them was supposed to be on it to - only to be denied their chance to question said ministers live on air and speak for the public!
* You haven't then seen the many edited versions of news events over the years that were shown in a more FF light that was very obvious!
* You haven't see a number of times news stories were not fully covered and in fact in cases RTE pulled off the air when they got a phone call from someone in FF headquarters! The last one of this particular kind was when RTE for a phone call from a PR rep for the clowns and the Cowen picture story was not only pulled but RTE openly apologised for mentioning it! Christ!!!

I think people are angry and want to lash out at the moment. RTE are seen as part of the establishment and thus a legit target for people. Doesn't make their notions any less illusory though.

...And just sometimes it don't make what they see to be any LESSER true either!

See bold replies above.

Clearly your seeing one thing and I'm seeing another (possible with having to experience their antics for a few more years than yourself) so we will have to agree to disagree - otherwise I'll just go on annoying you in having a difference of opinion.

..And I don't want to fall out with you over RTE - they are not worth it!

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 06:59PM

Einhard wrote: »

There were many other journalists there, all of whom asked questions. TV3 didn't broadcast them. Are TV3 guilty of censorship? They cut their broadcast as RTE did afterall. Also, you seem to be under the apprehension that somehow Vincent Brown was part of the event. He wasn't.

It's both opinion, and self-evident. It was a stong performance. Something on which most other media outlets, including the British ones which I follow, concurred. People seem to think that not having a go at FF is the same as propogandising for FF. It's not. He delivered a stong, confident rhetorical performance. Stating that is not promoting him or backing him, especiaally when commentators on the same channel are attacking and criticising him on his record.

self evident to who?

Einhard · 27-11-2010 07:27PM

Biggins wrote: »

so we will have to agree to disagree - ..And I don't want to fall out with you over RTE - they are not worth it!

I don't agree to that!!:pac:

Biggins · 27-11-2010 07:28PM

Einhard wrote: »

I don't agree to that!!:pac:

Thats all.

flynnlives · 27-11-2010 07:35PM

Einhard wrote: »

There were many other journalists there, all of whom asked questions. TV3 didn't broadcast them. Are TV3 guilty of censorship? They cut their broadcast as RTE did afterall. Also, you seem to be under the apprehension that somehow Vincent Brown was part of the event. He wasn't.

It's both opinion, and self-evident. It was a stong performance. Something on which most other media outlets, including the British ones which I follow, concurred. People seem to think that not having a go at FF is the same as propogandising for FF. It's not. He delivered a stong, confident rhetorical performance. Stating that is not promoting him or backing him, especiaally when commentators on the same channel are attacking and criticising him on his record.

Would you be one of these people that say "sure there all the same etc"

back up to mount street with you!

Mister men · 27-11-2010 07:42PM

Any talk of less than 100,000 at the protest today is a nonsense.

Einhard · 27-11-2010 07:57PM

flynnlives wrote: »

Would you be one of these people that say "sure there all the same etc"

No, I'd be one of those people who say "sure they're all the same etc".:D

cml387 · 27-11-2010 08:11PM

Imagine you are news editor at RTE.

Especially in the last two weeks,you are getting hourly calls from gov press office:

"Listen,the fate of the country is hanging by a thread.You are the national broadcaster.If people really knew whats going on there would be widespread panic and civil disorder.I wouldn't want to be the man responsible for that.
Just consider your position."

steddyeddy · 27-11-2010 08:42PM

cml387 wrote: »

Imagine you are news editor at RTE.

Especially in the last two weeks,you are getting hourly calls from gov press office:

"Listen,the fate of the country is hanging by a thread.You are the national broadcaster.If people really knew whats going on there would be widespread panic and civil disorder.I wouldn't want to be the man responsible for that.
Just consider your position."

If people then found out the extent of the story coupled with the fact the national broadcster covered it up then things would get a lot worse

Poly · 27-11-2010 08:44PM

cml387 wrote: »

Imagine you are news editor at RTE.

Especially in the last two weeks,you are getting hourly calls from gov press office:

Indeed, imagine you are the news editor, you are getting paid by the tax payer to report the news objectively and accurately, any calls from government to censor the news should be reported also.

If you don’t have the balls to stand up to them, resign, but don’t feed us ****e and think you are going to get way with it!

The License fee boycott is coming.

BeefJerkyX · 27-11-2010 08:58PM

Mister men wrote: »

Any talk of less than 100,000 at the protest today is a nonsense.

I've got to hold my hands up and say I'm not the best judge of crowd numbers. But some people are saying reports were that 100,000 people were at that Iraq march some February some years back. I don't know if those numbers are right or not. But, whatever the figures, I'm pretty sure there were more people here today.

Princess Peach · 27-11-2010 10:08PM

Another fail for RTE- Aertel is experiencing technical difficulties.

My Saturday night is ruined.

starbelgrade · 27-11-2010 10:17PM

1 percent of the population had a little protest march in one of the country's cities today.

Hardly worth rescheduling the a whole day's programming for, in fairness.

RTE fail us yet again.

Comments