Today Show with Sarah McInerney

Sir Guy who smiles · 31-07-2020 1:59pm

Infoanon wrote: »

Phones in certain departments are allowed ring out.

Certain departments within the department won't answer there phones to each other.

Maybe, that doesn't mean the VOIP problem doesn't exist.

You also have the phenomenon of people ringing lines that are not there to give a 9 to 5 phone presence. I know a department
official who was on the floor of the establishment he supervised from 7 until 10, then back in the office he got an earful on the phone from the then minister for agriculture, let's call him Livan Lates, because he wasn't sitting by the phone instead of actually doing his job.

31-07-2020 2:36pm

imme wrote: »

Is there any value to having columnists on the show.

Yes. To articulate an opinion and hopefully engage the listeners. Why else would she be there, with respect? What purpose would you prefer her to fulfil?

I sometimes think people believe all journalists are supposed to be impartial. They are not. Brown is not a news journalist, she is employed to ventilate a particular outlook on Irish social and political life.

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 3:27pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Yes. To articulate an opinion and hopefully engage the listeners. Why else would she be there, with respect? What purpose would you prefer her to fulfil?

I sometimes think people believe all journalists are supposed to be impartial. They are not. Brown is not a news journalist, she is employed to ventilate a particular outlook on Irish social and political life.

I wouldn’t amongst ‘those people’ Ty.

However, and I say this whilst admitting I didn’t fully listen to the show today, given that most discerning folk know the ‘form’ of journalists and which ‘side‘ they are batting from, one would expect the panel to be more balanced.

I mean constructing a panel of journalists like say, Vincent Browne, Gene Kerrigan’ Collette Browne and say Oliver Callan, I think even the most biased observer wouldn’t call that balanced.

Acute observers know well what would be expected from them, I would suspect.

Infoanon · 31-07-2020 4:49pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Didn’t hear it all, it seemed like a re run of a Vincent Browne prog.

That is, stacked deck + the presenter against one Govt. rep who handled things quite didn’t lie down and take the shït coming from Collette Browne and others including McInerney.

Govt need to get well informed pipe swingers to get in amongst these media dogs and take them on at their own game.

I thought Alan Farrell came across as obnoxious and condescending and if the other contributers listened there where falsehoods that he could easily have been picked up on.Personally I thought he was the wrong person to have on on if you have a government trying to prove that they are not disconnected.
Flippant comments such as no one is interested in Coveneys car and 'not a pay rise ' increased payments to super juniors do not play well with audiences.

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 5:45pm

Infoanon wrote: »

I thought Alan Farrell came across as obnoxious and condescending and if the other contributers listened there where falsehoods that he could easily have been picked up on.Personally I thought he was the wrong person to have on on if you have a government trying to prove that they are not disconnected.
Flippant comments such as no one is interested in Coveneys car and 'not a pay rise ' increased payments to super juniors do not play well with audiences.

I would have to disagree there, and what I heard played quite well with me.

At last a lad prepared to take on these people and stand up for the govt against what I saw as a stacked deck.

The people who it might have “not played well with” to paraphrase you, are those who whatever the govt does doesn’t ‘play well‘ with.

The kind of people who it doesn’t “play well with” probably are the people who criticize the Gardai for inspecting pubs who try to game the health regulation and put our population in danger.

The ‘Aaaaaah shure’ brigade who think regulations only apply to the ‘other people’ and are nowhere to be found when a surge in infection is traced to their premises.

They then expect the taxpayer and compliant folk to sort the mess out.

Sorry dude, those days are beginning to fade out.

Time to take responsibility, my friend, take the risk, pay the price.

M’kay

Infoanon · 31-07-2020 6:54pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I would have to disagree there, and what I heard played quite well with me.

At last a lad prepared to take on these people and stand up for the govt against what I saw as a stacked deck.

The people who it might have “not played well with” to paraphrase you, are those who whatever the govt does doesn’t ‘play well‘ with.

The kind of people who it doesn’t “play well with” probably are the people who criticize the Gardai for inspecting pubs who try to game the health regulation and put our population in danger.

The ‘Aaaaaah shure’ brigade who think regulations only apply to the ‘other people’ and are nowhere to be found when a surge in infection is traced to their premises.

They then expect the taxpayer and compliant folk to sort the mess out.

Sorry dude, those days are beginning to fade out.

Time to take responsibility, my friend, take the risk, pay the price.

M’kay

You are making a lot of assumptions in your reply.

I don't agree with your notion of a 'stacked deck' and as for 'a lad willing to take on these people' it was all bluster.Trump like politics will not work in this country.

The problem with bluster and falsehoods is that eventually you get caught out and endanger alienating your vote.

It's those potential FG voters whose today's bluster will not play well with.

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 7:30pm

Infoanon wrote: »

You are making a lot of assumptions in your reply.

I don't agree with your notion of a 'stacked deck' and as for 'a lad willing to take on these people' it was all bluster.Trump like politics will not work in this country.

The problem with bluster and falsehoods is that eventually you get caught out and endanger alienating your vote.

It's those potential FG voters whose today's bluster will not play well with.

Those “Potential FG voters” know the difference between the truth and bluster.

Infoanon · 31-07-2020 8:14pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Those “Potential FG voters” know the difference between the truth and bluster.

So everything that Alan Farrell said today was true ?
(He of expenses claims fame)

The PUP / Holidays has been an utter mess this week created by the Government - completely avoidable yet 'this lad' tried to defend it.
The pay increases for the super juniors was another mess self inflicted yet 'this lad' defended it with his 'mantra' that it was not an increase and kept interrupting other contributers.

If you think that bluster appeals to mainstream voters you are very much mistaking.

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 8:18pm

Infoanon wrote: »

So everything that Alan Farrell said today was true ?

Was it.... tell us all and enlighten us on this.

Infoanon · 31-07-2020 8:28pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Was it.... tell us all and enlighten us on this.

You are the one hailing your 'lad' - simple question was everything your 'lad' said today true ?

deiseindublin · 31-07-2020 8:51pm

Ah come off it, he came across as a right gombeen. He can call it what he wants but €16.5k extra is a pay rise, no matter how he explains it, and as for him bull****ting on about agreeing with equal pay for equal work, even though he it seemingly wasn't pay.............

He's self serving and will change with the wind depending on what they need any given day.

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 9:00pm

Infoanon wrote: »

You are the one hailing your 'lad' - simple question was everything your 'lad' said today true ?

You are the one implying that someone said “everything he said was true”

Who said that, and we can start from there.

Who said by implication from you “Everything he said was true”?

Infoanon · 31-07-2020 9:24pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You are the one implying that someone said “everything he said was true”

Who said that, and we can start from there.

Who said by implication from you “Everything he said was true”?

Did you not say that voters know the difference between the truth and bluster implying that your lad was telling the truth.

I don't think Alan Farrells contribution today was in anyway helpful - you have a different opinion.

31-07-2020 9:29pm

“You can't defend the indefensible - anything you say sounds self-serving and hypocritical.” The “lad” should have heard of that quote, and applied it to his performance today

Brendan Bendar · 31-07-2020 9:56pm

Infoanon wrote: »

Did you not say that voters know the difference between the truth and bluster implying that your lad was telling the truth.

I don't think Alan Farrells contribution today was in anyway helpful - you have a different opinion.

You inferred wrongly that that is what I said or meant.Nowhere next or near it.

Now I don’t mind insults, name calling, personal abuse, well used to it.

What I don’t like is folk trying to put words into my mouth.

Please don’t try a stunt like that on me again.

Appreciate that.

01-08-2020 3:29pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I wouldn’t amongst ‘those people’ Ty.

However, and I say this whilst admitting I didn’t fully listen to the show today, given that most discerning folk know the ‘form’ of journalists and which ‘side‘ they are batting from, one would expect the panel to be more balanced.

I mean constructing a panel of journalists like say, Vincent Browne, Gene Kerrigan’ Collette Browne and say Oliver Callan, I think even the most biased observer wouldn’t call that balanced.

Acute observers know well what would be expected from them, I would suspect.

I totally agree, Brendan — that would not be balanced. And whilst some of us would go out of our way to hear a panel of the socialist left "Dream Team" consisting of the people you've named, that isn't what happened here.

Alan Farrell, possibly the most economically right-wing backbencher of the Dáil in living memory, was there to counterbalance the views of a milquetoast socialist. I hadn't heard the exchange myself until this morning, but I submit there was a balance of views.

Infoanon · 01-08-2020 4:56pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You inferred wrongly that that is what I said or meant.Nowhere next or near it.

Now I don’t mind insults, name calling, personal abuse, well used to it.

What I don’t like is folk trying to put words into my mouth.

Please don’t try a stunt like that on me again.

Appreciate that.

Almost as patronising as your lad .

Didn't realise asking you to answer a simple question about your lad was a 'stunt'.

A question you still have not answered.

Championing Alan Farrell as the solution to perceived bias in the media is foolhardy.

djemba djemba · 02-08-2020 11:01am

When is the new permanent presenter being announced?

RayserSharp · 02-08-2020 12:43pm

I think she's very good. Quite tenacious in her questioning. Just one little gripe; she tends to interrupt the interviewee before the end of a sentence.

02-08-2020 6:13pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I totally agree, Brendan — that would not be balanced. And whilst some of us would go out of our way to hear a panel of the socialist left "Dream Team" consisting of the people you've named, that isn't what happened here.

Alan Farrell, possibly the most economically right-wing backbencher of the Dáil in living memory, was there to counterbalance the views of a milquetoast socialist. I hadn't heard the exchange myself until this morning, but I submit there was a balance of views.

Thanks! I learned a new word today, and what an excellent word it is. I will be using it at least once a day now - until another interesting and apposite word comes into my lexicon.

NIMAN · 03-08-2020 10:19am

Thats not Sarah today!

Edit: Marty? FFS.
Backfired on RTe today, with such big news to have MM at the helm.

PieOhMy · 03-08-2020 11:01am

Did brenda just refer to John Hume as 'Pat'?

NIMAN · 03-08-2020 11:04am

PieOhMy wrote: »

Did brenda just refer to John Hume as 'Pat'?

john's wife is Pat.

padd b1975 · 03-08-2020 11:04am

NIMAN wrote: »

Thats not Sarah today!

Edit: Marty? FFS.
Backfired on RTe today, with such big news to have MM at the helm.

Typical.

Rolled the dice on nothing happening on a bank holiday and lost.

PieOhMy · 03-08-2020 11:04am

NIMAN wrote: »

john's wife is Pat.

Ah gotcha- was very confused there!

serfboard · 04-08-2020 1:32pm

NIMAN wrote: »

Edit: Marty? FFS.
Backfired on RTe today, with such big news to have MM at the helm.

I only heard the very end of the programme, but Marty seemed alright to me.

But if you didn't like it, The News At One was a very well put together programme, I thought - an hour-long tribute to the man from all sorts of people, with lots of archival stuff as well. Now I know that some of it was in the Obit file that a lot of media organisations keep on well-known people, and particularly older ones, but it was still well done.

Cole · 06-08-2020 11:18am

Sarah's inconsistent 'tough' interviewing (for which she often gets credit) again. The students union rep. wanting the universities to hold their hand and provide everything for them...just bring your mask and wear the fecking thing...it took a texter to state the obvious. Sarah (yet again) picking and choosing who/what to challenge.

Tell me how · 06-08-2020 1:10pm

Cole wrote: »

Sarah's inconsistent 'tough' interviewing (for which she often gets credit) again. The students union rep. wanting the universities to hold their hand and provide everything for them...just bring your mask and wear the fecking thing...it took a texter to state the obvious. Sarah (yet again) picking and choosing who/what to challenge.

Is there any chance she sees things differently to you and what is the best way to approach an interview?

All interviewers adapt their style based on the topic, the interviewee and their personal views on the matter.

I wouldn't see it as a weakness unless it is obvious that an interview is a fluff piece purely being held to give the interviewee some free press (what Maria Bailey thought she was getting).

Infoanon · 06-08-2020 1:38pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Is there any chance she sees things differently to you and what is the best way to approach an interview?

All interviewers adapt their style based on the topic, the interviewee and their personal views on the matter.

I wouldn't see it as a weakness unless it is obvious that an interview is a fluff piece purely being held to give the interviewee some free press (what Maria Bailey thought she was getting).

While there is no doubt that the interviewer / Sarah does adapt different styles ,there has been a lack of challenging the interviewee over the last two days.

Cole · 06-08-2020 1:46pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Is there any chance she sees things differently to you and what is the best way to approach an interview?

I think there's a very good chance that many people see many things differently, but this is a radio forum for Sarah McInerney's show, where we offer out our views (positive and negative) on her show and how she interviews/handles issues. Isn't that the whole point?

Tell me how wrote: »

All interviewers adapt their style based on the topic, the interviewee and their personal views on the matter.

See that's where we clearly differ...and that's okay. Of course she can adapt her style based on the topic/interviewee, but I'm not so sure she should be bringing her personal views to most topics typically covered on this show.

Today's topic (Covid19/public health) is one where she has 'grilled' some guests (and maybe rightly so) but has let others completely off the hook. I think not challenging a student union rep, who was putting herself forward to pose some ridiculous (imo) questions on university policies related to public health/Covid19, is utterly inconsistent...like she did with Claire Daly a couple of months ago.

Infoanon · 06-08-2020 2:45pm

Imho letting Healy Rae talk yesterday was a good approach but when interviewing Tanya Arwey Sarah corrected Tanya on the travel guidance but didn't challenge Tanya on the key point of the interview - that the government had changed the greenlist - when Tanya should have been fully aware that the Government had always advised the list would change.

Just a suggestion - some of the research team may be away at the moment and hence Sarah is not as well briefed.

Tell me how · 06-08-2020 3:29pm

Cole wrote: »

I think there's a very good chance that many people see many things differently, but this is a radio forum for Sarah McInerney's show, where we offer out our views (positive and negative) on her show and how she interviews/handles issues. Isn't that the whole point?

See that's where we clearly differ...and that's okay. Of course she can adapt her style based on the topic/interviewee, but I'm not so sure she should be bringing her personal views to most topics typically covered on this show.

Today's topic (Covid19/public health) is one where she has 'grilled' some guests (and maybe rightly so) but has let others completely off the hook. I think not challenging a student union rep, who was putting herself forward to pose some ridiculous (imo) questions on university policies related to public health/Covid19, is utterly inconsistent...like she did with Claire Daly a couple of months ago.

Yes, but if her opinions were the same as yours, would you be posting here saying she shouldn't let them influence her style?

I don't think any host does not demonstrate their own views on occasion, and that is fine, but I do find it interesting that we often read on these threads posts where someone is judged somewhat for doing so while others are on occasion praised for 'telling it like it is'.

The behaviour of the presenter is the same in both cases except the views of the person making the post often dictate which way they feel about that behaviour.

Cole · 06-08-2020 3:48pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Yes, but if her opinions were the same as yours, would you be posting here saying she shouldn't let them influence her style?

Yes...when dealing with important issues that require balance and consistency, unless it's a (as you said) a"fluff piece" where it's not of much significance what Sarah's taste in movies or music is, for example.

Anyway, I didn't make any point about her opinions in the first place. My point was about inconsistency, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with her (perceived) opinions on the topic.

Brendan Bendar · 06-08-2020 5:30pm

Cole wrote: »

Yes...when dealing with important issues that require balance and consistency, unless it's a (as you said) a"fluff piece" where it's not of much significance what Sarah's taste in movies or music is, for example.

Anyway, I didn't make any point about her opinions in the first place. My point was about inconsistency, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with her (perceived) opinions on the topic.

Good call mr C .....now I didn’t hear today’s show due to important company business but your general points are ,imo , are good.

People need to be interviewed with similar style and attitude.

You can’t adopt an excoriating demeanor and bulldog approach to those in power and then adopt a powder puff demeanour to their opposition .

An approach well used by Vinnie when he was in his heyday.

Klonker · 07-08-2020 12:49am

I just want to say fair dues to John Halligan, he's no longer a TD but is still working to get legislation passed that he thinks will help people. I agree with his bill for the right to die but I have a feeling it'll be at least 10 years until such a bill would be passed in Ireland.

bossdrum · 07-08-2020 3:50am

Klonker wrote: »

I just want to say fair dues to John Halligan, he's no longer a TD but is still working to get legislation passed that he thinks will help people. I agree with his bill for the right to die but I have a feeling it'll be at least 10 years until such a bill would be passed in Ireland.

John Halligan announced in January he was retiring from political life. Unfortunately like most politicians he just can't keep a promise.

As for a right to die bill being passed in Ireland within 10 years, the recent abortion figures would show that life has very little value and any such bill will be heavily promoted as being compassionate.
In an ideal world many of us would like the option to end our lives if pain or quality of life was significantly impacted by illness. Unfortunately people cannot be trusted and the legislation would be used by some carers, relatives, medics etc. to put pressure on patients to request such a service.

07-08-2020 6:07am

bossdrum wrote: »

John Halligan announced in January he was retiring from political life. Unfortunately like most politicians he just can't keep a promise.

As for a right to die bill being passed in Ireland within 10 years, the recent abortion figures would show that life has very little value and any such bill will be heavily promoted as being compassionate.
In an ideal world many of us would like the option to end our lives if pain or quality of life was significantly impacted by illness. Unfortunately people cannot be trusted and the legislation would be used by some carers, relatives, medics etc. to put pressure on patients to request such a service.

Both my mum and my dad spent the last years of their long lives in a state of dementia or Alzheimer’s, both doubly incontinent, at times frightened and unsettled, incoherent and unknowing, robbed of their memories, unable to recognize their children and grandchildren, and finally in good care homes, where they passed away.

In his earlier years, my dad had said to me, of a friend of his whose mother was going through what he was unwittingly going to face himself in later life, “if I get like that, I wouldn’t want to live to an old age”.

Neither of my parents wanted to spend the last years of their life in the way they did. Nor, I can categorically assure you, do I.

I think that a well considered and proper debate needs to take place about dealing with the end of life in terminally ill and serious mental and cognitive situations. It’s mostly an ethical question. But let’s have an open discussion and avoid the histrionics. Not to have the discussion is the worst outcome, in my view.

Mad_maxx · 07-08-2020 4:16pm

bossdrum wrote: »

John Halligan announced in January he was retiring from political life. Unfortunately like most politicians he just can't keep a promise.

As for a right to die bill being passed in Ireland within 10 years, the recent abortion figures would show that life has very little value and any such bill will be heavily promoted as being compassionate.
In an ideal world many of us would like the option to end our lives if pain or quality of life was significantly impacted by illness. Unfortunately people cannot be trusted and the legislation would be used by some carers, relatives, medics etc. to put pressure on patients to request such a service.

Euthanasia is compassion, I abstained from the abortion referendum but would vote for the right to die without reservation

Maybe it's because I've lived with chronic pain on and off for year's, people in a much worse situation than me and with no chance of recovery, deserve to be allowed control their suffering

Bellbottoms · 14-08-2020 10:43am

Is the site on Sean McDermott Street that they are refering to the former Magdeline laundry?

Wasn't there some talk about turning it into a museum.

Edit: It is, Jesus. Imagine turning that into a hotel.

Cole · 17-08-2020 11:08am

Eoghan Corry and his views on Covid19 and travel advice...come on Sarah do your best combative, grilling interview thing.

neris · 17-08-2020 12:13pm

Cole wrote: »

Eoghan Corry and his views on Covid19 and travel advice...come on Sarah do your best combative, grilling interview thing.

He,d have the airplanes full and everyone on their way to 2 weeks in spain or dingle if he had his way.

Joe_ Public · 17-08-2020 12:18pm

Twas gas stuff from corry. Our green list policy is nonsense, we should be basing our policies on all the other European countries. But uk havent been doing great on this, have they? Ah, wouldn't mind them, i meant the other European countries we're politically aligned with. But france are having huge numbers of cases from increased travelling? Well, um...ah...but hungary, hungary or something. All over the shop as usual.

Cole · 17-08-2020 1:09pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Twas gas stuff from corry. Our green list policy is nonsense, we should be basing our policies on all the other European countries. But uk havent been doing great on this, have they? Ah, wouldn't mind them, i meant the other European countries we're politically aligned with. But france are having huge numbers of cases from increased travelling? Well, um...ah...but hungary, hungary or something. All over the shop as usual.

Stumbled and stuttered over his defence of Michael Cawley too...at least he kind of apologised for being "all over the shop" on that one.

elperello · 17-08-2020 2:23pm

E Corry is a travel expert. Good at his job and knows the industry inside out.

However, he is not a serious player on any issues outside his brief.

Infoanon · 17-08-2020 4:16pm

elperello wrote: »

E Corry is a travel expert. Good at his job and knows the industry inside out.

However, he is not a serious player on any issues outside his brief.

Eoghan Corry is a travel journalist - he edits a travel publication. Does that make him an expert ?

EC gets a lot of air time but today was challenged a bit more than usual and came undone.

Brendan Bendar · 17-08-2020 4:41pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Twas gas stuff from corry. Our green list policy is nonsense, we should be basing our policies on all the other European countries. But uk havent been doing great on this, have they? Ah, wouldn't mind them, i meant the other European countries we're politically aligned with. But france are having huge numbers of cases from increased travelling? Well, um...ah...but hungary, hungary or something. All over the shop as usual.

Lads....lads. I keep telling ye....vested interest.

Corry makes his crust from travel, does anyone take him seriously on the ‘travel versus health risks’ .

Of course not, he will always play the ‘travel is fine’card, that’s where he gets his moolah.

Regarding Cawley , he will always back him, from his days in FR, got the inside track from him..

Lads...... vested interest...... vested interest... that’s the first things you look for.

17-08-2020 4:51pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Lads....lads. I keep telling ye....vested interest.

Corry makes his crust from travel, does anyone take him seriously on the ‘travel versus health risks’ .

Of course not, he will always play the ‘travel is fine’card, that’s where he gets his moolah.

Regarding Cawley , he will always back him, from his days in FR, got the inside track from him..

Lads...... vested interest...... vested interest... that’s the first things you look for.

Cui bono?

Bellbottoms · 18-08-2020 10:11am

Is Charlie Birds head about to explode?

Infoanon · 18-08-2020 10:14am

Charlie is just ranting.

If he listened to what the Doctor said he would be able to back up his argument alas he's too busy ranting about 'throwing away the keys'

Joe_ Public · 18-08-2020 10:22am

I'm just stunned that charlie forked out 700 squid for 2 ryanair flights to somewhere. Thought people only ended up paying those sort of prices for last minute or emergencies.

Today Show with Sarah McInerney

Comments