Iona vs Panti

Penn · 31-01-2014 05:46PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

might have cost them 10 grand. which is a bt cheaper than fighting a slander case through the courts.
people are complaining about their taxpayer's money being used to fund litigation for iona; if using taxpayer funds wisely is an important part of RTE's job, there's an argument to be made there that - fiscally - they chose the wsie course.

As Senator Averil Power asked in the Seanad though, did RTE put forward any alternatives such as giving Iona/Waters a right to reply, or why did they choose the amount of money they gave out? Were they advised it was a sufficient amount? Did Iona/Waters request a certain amount? etc.

The fact that RTE have provided no reasoning or information behind the payout, nobody has any idea if they did choose the wisest course.

Daith · 31-01-2014 05:48PM

Penncil Dick wrote: »

As Senator Averil Power asked in the Seanad though, did RTE put forward any alternatives such as giving Iona/Waters a right to reply, or why did they choose the amount of money they gave out? Were they advised it was a sufficient amount? Did Iona/Waters request a certain amount? etc.

The fact that RTE have provided no reasoning or information behind the payout, nobody has any idea if they did choose the wisest course.

Plus IONA will no doubt get a right to reply this Saturday! So a right to reply and a payout?

Unless Iona are not on this Saturday's show which is doubtful.

P_1 · 31-01-2014 05:54PM

Sarky wrote: »

Surely if anyone could interfere in RTE-based litigation it's the minister for communication?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think RTE are supposed to act independently of the Government. Don't get me wrong, in this instance it is hard to swallow but a government has no right to be interfering with the workings of the state broadcaster. Another example of Iona working the system but the system is there for a good reason.

Sarky · 31-01-2014 05:56PM

Didn't realise they had that level of autonomy. Given the amount of brown-nosing RTE does I contend that it's an easy mistake to make.

Daith · 31-01-2014 05:58PM

P_1 wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think RTE are supposed to act independently of the Government. Don't get me wrong, in this instance it is hard to swallow but a government has no right to be interfering with the workings of the state broadcaster. Another example of Iona working the system but the system is there for a good reason.

Yes it's like the whole Irish Water thing and Phil Hogan.

Having saying that the minister basically just said "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" which is pretty good.

P_1 · 31-01-2014 06:03PM

Daith wrote: »

Yes it's like the whole Irish Water thing and Phil Hogan.

Having saying that the minister basically just said "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" which is pretty good.

Knowing Iona though it wouldn't surprise me if they're currently on the phone to see if they can get another legal letter drawn up. Surely they're not that insane though?

diddlybit · 31-01-2014 06:03PM

They have to be accountable to some body, especially if they are using public funds.

P_1 · 31-01-2014 06:05PM

diddlybit wrote: »

They have to be accountable to some body, especially if they are using public funds.

I think that body would be the BAI.

robindch · 31-01-2014 06:05PM

diddlybit wrote: »

The rumour is that is was 30k (or52k) for Waters and 11k each for the members of the Iona Institute. That's a substantial amount.

If any of that shower had any shred of decency, then, on receipt of the offer, they'd have passed the money onto some charity. They might do it yet, but the PR horse has well and truly bolted at this point.

Sarky · 31-01-2014 06:06PM

P_1 wrote: »

I think that body would be the BAI.

Not if I'm reading my response from complaints@bai.ie correctly:

The statement provided during the programme broadcast on the 25th January is the only element of the complaints received that the BAI can address. The other issues relate to operational decisions made by RTÉ or relate to content held online. In both cases, the BAI has no regulatory role and these are matters for RTÉ and its Board of Management. Regarding Mr. John Waters, please note that Mr. Waters is no longer a serving member of the BAI. The BAI issued a statement following his resignation and this can be viewed here: http://www.bai.ie/?p=4290.

magicbastarder · 31-01-2014 06:07PM

P_1 wrote: »

I think that body would be the BAI.

are the BAI responsible for ensuring that RTE is well run, or that what it broadcasts does not violate common decency and sensibility?

J_E · 31-01-2014 06:08PM

diddlybit wrote: »

The rumour is that is was 30k (or52k) for Waters and 11k each for the members of the Iona Institute. That's a substantial amount.

Correction; current speculated figure at 30k for waters, then 2 sets of 11k = 52k

It was never confirmed.

The Public Accounts Committee would be the body that could confirm this.

Daith · 31-01-2014 06:08PM

P_1 wrote: »

I think that body would be the BAI.

BAI is only responsible for content. Not litigation aspects.

diddlybit · 31-01-2014 06:08PM

P_1 wrote: »

I think that body would be the BAI.

I don't think it would be their remit, they monitor the content of broadcasts.

david75 · 31-01-2014 06:09PM

Do we know for sure that right to reply wasn't a demand of of the factions that claimed?

Daith · 31-01-2014 06:11PM

I'm def going to PantiBar this Saturday

P_1 · 31-01-2014 06:11PM

Hmm in that case then I don't think they have any body other than the courts and the judge on the day who would have any say in how they run their legal affairs.

Daith · 31-01-2014 06:14PM

david75 wrote: »

Do we know for sure that right to reply wasn't a demand of of the factions that claimed?

I think what people are saying on Twitter is something like this (could be wrong!)

1) Rory said something which is his opinion
2) Iona/Waters weren't there to respond/defend themselves
3) RTE can schedule another show allowing the "injured" parties the right to defend themselves
4) This show and the Rory show are considered the same show and thus we have balance

I could be wrong here but it would seem to suggest they didn't have to pay out at all and just given the program as a balance?

david75 · 31-01-2014 06:19PM

Dying to know who is gonna be debating.
Please let it be the wicked witch O Brien

She was her own undoing in the radio the other night. And Rory would make sh!te of her, or Quinn in a debate.

Daith · 31-01-2014 06:20PM

david75 wrote: »

Dying to know who is gonna be debating.
Please let it be the wicked witch O Brien

She was her own undoing in the radio the other night. And Rory would make sh!te of her, or Quinn in a debate.

I'd love to see Colm O'Gorman debate as he is a father (I thinK!) and it kinda knocks back alot of their arguments about the proper way to raise children etc.

diddlybit · 31-01-2014 06:22PM

Colm O'Gormon was great the other night. I wonder when they will be releasing the names of the particpants?

P_1 · 31-01-2014 06:25PM

david75 wrote: »

Dying to know who is gonna be debating.
Please let it be the wicked witch O Brien

She was her own undoing in the radio the other night. And Rory would make sh!te of her, or Quinn in a debate.

I'd imagine a certain reluctance in RTE to inviting O'Neill back to be honest.

Peregrinus · 31-01-2014 06:27PM

Cabaal wrote: »

Pussy Riot;s appearance on the show could really hurt Iona, at the end of the day Pussy Riot will be likely talking about religion taking hold in Russia and how this is crushing people's rights which resulted in jail time for them,

I don't think that's Pussy Riot's shtick at all, is it? My understanding is that PR's case is that the (Russian) church is cosying up to an authoritarian state in a way which a church should not.

david75 · 31-01-2014 07:06PM

Peregrinus wrote: »

I don't think that's Pussy Riot's shtick at all, is it? My understanding is that PR's case is that the (Russian) church is cosying up to an authoritarian state in a way which a church should not.

A not altogether unrelated parallel though in our case it's the last twitching of a corpse and its not even the church doing it, just some suspiciously funded god botherers called iona, making a fabulous living off their US overlords.

goose2005 · 31-01-2014 07:17PM

Jernal wrote: »

Hard pressed does not mean impossible, just statistically rare. Look hard enough and you'll find people who believe the world is flat.

Out of the next hundred gays you meet in random encounters find one who opposes gay marriage. Out of the next 470 find one who opposes

Ah but where would BB have 'random encounters' with gay men, he wouldn't be at all that way inclined

david75 · 31-01-2014 07:24PM

I always wonder about that in the naysayers. 'The lady doth protect too much' and all that.

Links234 · 31-01-2014 07:31PM

david75 wrote: »

I always wonder about that in the naysayers. 'The lady doth protect too much' and all that.

There's definitely a well established precedent for that, but to be honest, it just feels like a dig when people bring it up in a debate specifically to discredit the opposing side. Not that I'm not suspicious in the extreme of people who are obsessive in their opposition to LGBT rights, given the numerous Ted Haggards and George Rekers out there, the former giving rise to the term "Haggard's Law" for precisely this. It's just that we should be able to debate the opposing side's position and arguments without relying on casting aspersions on their sexual inclinations.

In short, it's low-hanging fruit.

Bannasidhe · 31-01-2014 07:35PM

There has been a suggestion that a Gays against Marriage group be formed which will argue against marriage itself and the danger of aping hetro-normative social norms.

The thinking it is will provide an anti-marriage for gays and straights perspective and cut into Iona's position as 'go-to' opposition spokesperson.

I was only contacted briefly about it about an hour ago and I am not sure what I think at this point - still trying to sort out a pro/con list (surrounded by dramatic weather just to add atmosphere....)

What do you guys think?

PopePalpatine · 31-01-2014 07:36PM

Such a group reminds me of Samuel L Jackson's character in Django Unchained.

amdublin · 31-01-2014 07:41PM

Who's going on sunday?

My banner is going to say something along the lines of:

Iona - stop getting your panti's in a twist about other people's lives.

or else just a simple fek off iona institute!

Iona vs Panti

Comments