Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

xl500 wrote: »

Just Watching RTE 6-1 News

What in the name of God is Cathtriona Perry doing in London Do we not have our London correspondent there for that

to make matters worse she ended up interviewing him which she could easily have done from the Studio in Dublin

Its this kind of frivilious use of Taxpayer Funds that causes them to have very poor image

There is absolutely no excuse for having her in London how much did this cost

In case you haven't been following the news this election is very important for Ireland as well as being a major turning point for our nearest neighbour.

They are trying, with limited resources, to do it justice.

As for the cost, return fare, couple of days overseas subsistence and a few nights in a hotel. A couple of grand should cover it.

elperello wrote: »

In case you haven't been following the news this election is very important for Ireland as well as being a major turning point for our nearest neighbour.

They are trying, with limited resources, to do it justice.

As for the cost, return fare, couple of days overseas subsistence and a few nights in a hotel. A couple of grand should cover it.

What role do you play in RTE, is it your job to defend them on all social media sites.
As soon as anyone says anything negative about RTE, your out to defend them straight away.

elperello wrote: »

In case you haven't been following the news this election is very important for Ireland as well as being a major turning point for our nearest neighbour.

They are trying, with limited resources, to do it justice.

As for the cost, return fare, couple of days overseas subsistence and a few nights in a hotel. A couple of grand should cover it.

Still absolutely no need to send her there are already plenty of RTE People in London

xl500 wrote: »

Still absolutely no need to send her there are already plenty of RTE People in London

In your opinion.
You will find however that lot's of us politics watchers will appreciate the extra attention to this really big story.

elperello wrote: »

In your opinion.
You will find however that lot's of us politics watchers will appreciate the extra attention to this really big story.

Still could have interviewed from Dublin I see no benefit in having her in London

xl500 wrote: »

Still could have interviewed from Dublin I see no benefit in having her in London

OK you fret about a few grand and I'll sit back and enjoy the coverage.

Expunge wrote: »

It's not normal when the company is bust.

it's normal full stop.
and the company isn't actually bust, but is losing money while it's costs are rising. so down the line the public service which is expected to be both public service and commercial at the same time may indeed end up bust.
either way, public service national networks do seem to have some sort of presence outside the capital city of their country.

Expunge wrote: »

The station is 100 per cent funded by licence fee but has 2 millionaire presenters in it's lineup, neither contributing much to 'arts and culture'.

what station is 100% supported by the license fee?
whatever station it is, who cares unless it's 2fm?
even if it has 2 millionair presenters, so what? they did well for themselves and earned their money, whether you agree with it or not.
and it's in your opinion that they contribute little to arts and culture, others may not share such an opinion. others may not be bothered as long as the service provides what they want.

Expunge wrote: »

Out of the rest of the lineup of presenters and producers, salaries apparently range from 60 to 90 thousand Euro.

that's a non-issue really. only a small few are likely to be on those salaries and it will be based on length of service and what they bring in no doubt.

Expunge wrote: »

They have done really well for themselves alright compared to, say, most of the staff of Live 95fm or anyone else in the independent radio sector. No wonder they are squalking loud and hard.

it's up to staff in the independant sector to organise themselves and try and get better pay where they are, or try and get into rte or another broadcaster abroad if it's viable for them to do so.
it's not rte's fault that their pay may not be what they actually deserve.

Expunge wrote: »

As a listener to both Classic FM and Radio 3, as well as some other European and US similar radio services, it's very hard to tell where the unique expertise is in Lyric.

your judge of expertese may be different to another's. that is ultimately the issue. one person's expertese is another's clueless.

Expunge wrote: »

The word 'chancer' comes to mind when I hear some of them. And now we're supposed to believe that the world of the arts and serious music will shudder to a halt without 'em?

no, we are not supposed to believe that the world of the arts and serious music will shudder to a halt without "them" because nobody suggested as such apart from you suggesting that is what they were trying to say.
so chancer wouldn't really come to mind here, tbh.

Expunge wrote: »

They might have convinced you, a myriad of vested interest hangers on and some local politicans but I'd prefer the service to get better and become more credible. That actually might happen with some focused cutbacks.

convinced me of what?

elperello wrote: »

Will you relax?
They are not accountable to you personally.

If we pay taxes that help subsidise their income and pay for TV licences that help subsidie their income, then, yes, they are accountable to us.

end of the road wrote: »

but what will a tv audience view? that is the problem. different people want different things, so providing this return probably isn't hugely possible.
it's also not the job of rte to be profitable, the expectation that it should be is exactly what i focuses on commercial activities at the expence of more public service content.
to sell it to any organisation who think they could make any areas of it profitable would mean quite likely a lot more commercial programming at the expence of ps content, probably even a removal of ps content altogether. as we can see from virgin media and others, that is the worst idea possible given the absolute tripe pumped out.

There's plenty of deadwood in RTE television. Some of them seem happy not to move with the times, their jobs untouchable. I'm not talking about presenters on big money here. They made a smart move a couple of years ago to outsource their childrens TV content, someone made a good decision for once. In 2019 viewers have more and ever-increaing ways to watch television online. Last week Amazon broadcast a full weeks Premier League program and will do the same in 2 weeks. RTE television are not moving with the time. They upgraded the content on the player when the main problem with it is the coverage and buffering issues across the country. I hear you on the public service broadcasting but what public service TV would you class as essential broadcasting and how much of it could be done online and cheaper rather than in Montrose?

GreenandRed wrote: »

There's plenty of deadwood in RTE television. Some of them seem happy not to move with the times, their jobs untouchable. I'm not talking about presenters on big money here. They made a smart move a couple of years ago to outsource their childrens TV content, someone made a good decision for once. In 2019 viewers have more and ever-increaing ways to watch television online. Last week Amazon broadcast a full weeks Premier League program and will do the same in 2 weeks. RTE television are not moving with the time. They upgraded the content on the player when the main problem with it is the coverage and buffering issues across the country. I hear you on the public service broadcasting but what public service TV would you class as essential broadcasting and how much of it could be done online and cheaper rather than in Montrose?

sure, but what moving with the times do you want them to engage in?

GreenandRed wrote: »

If we pay taxes that help subsidise their income and pay for TV licences that help subsidie their income, then, yes, they are accountable to us.

Please see previous reply above.

NIMAN wrote: »

I heard Matt Cooper mention RTE and how 81 of its 'contractors' are about to get made into RTE employees?
I think thats what they hinted at.

So is that the likes of Joe Duffy etc? So RTE was paying them as contractors wrongly all along? Should they have been getting employed by RTE and paid as an RTE employee?

I would guess these folk preferred to do this as it allowed them to take advantage of some tax break or other?

Sound like revenue needs to audit these "contractors" too .

elperello wrote: »

Of course RTE should be accountable but not to you personally because you think
you have the right to dictate how they cover an important story.

44c a day is just to watch the telly.

26c a day for Netflix, see what you get for that.