Media coverage – Page 11

Sean O’Rourke’s continuing support for the Government

I wrote the other day about the disgraceful bias shown by RTE presenter Sean O’Rourke during a discussion between Socialist Party TD Paul Murphy and Suzanne Lynch, Irish Times European Correspondent in Athens.

It is clear to even the most uninformed observer that O’Rourke supports the Government/establishment side in the ongoing Water Tax war.

O’Rourke doesn’t seem the least bothered about his unprofessional behaviour and, it also seems, RTE management have no problem with his bullyboy tactics when interviewing those who are opposed to his obvious pro-establishment opinions.

He puts great effort into steering discussion in favour of his own political opinion and, when necessary, he uses the tactic of interrupting those opposed to his views in support of those who are of the same mind as his.

His bullyboy tactics against Paul Murphy were again used in a ‘discussion’ between Labour Senator Mary Moran and Cllr. Michael O’Brien of the Anti-Austerity Alliance.

O’Rourke made it very difficult for Cllr. O’Brien to discuss the reason for the protest. Neither was Senator Moran interested in discussing the substantial issue, she simply kept expressing outrage at what she perceived was an attack on democracy and agreeing with Sean O’Rourke as he attacked the protester’s ‘thuggery’.

Here’s the relevant section of the discussion which centred on the throwing of a cone at a Guard.

Cllr. O’Brien: I don’t stand over the throwing of objects whatsoever but, there’s another side to this…

…interrupted by Sean O’Rourke.

O’Rourke: You don’t stand over it. Would you care to put it a little bit more strongly, maybe think about condemning it?

This is bullying. In O’Rourke’s poliltical opinion Cllr O’Brien was not strong enough in his reaction to the alleged incident.

Cllr. O’Brien: I’m opposed to the throwing of objects. The point I was going to make Sean was the Guards drew batons on people and I saw people from the community I represent with injuries inflicted upon them by the Guards.

Later when O’Brien was getting the better of Senator Moran, O’Rourke again interrupted, changing the direction of the discussion.

O’Rourke: What do you say to Alan Shatter the former Justice Minister, a representative of the people of Dublin South saying that he had abusive insults hurled at him, his car was thumped and kicked by some protesters, it was a clear example of thuggery.

Senator Moran: It was, absolutely.

O’Rourke is clealy showing bias here. He begins with a quesiton and ends by expressing his own strong political opinion. Senator Moran was clearly delighted with O’Rourke’s strong support.

O’Rourke: Do you condemn thuggery or do you accept that it was thuggery?

Cllr. O’Brien attempts to make his point but again O’Rourke interrupts.

O’Rourke: Are you saying you do not condemn the violent actions of some people who showed up last evening?

Cllr. O’Brien: Yes, I am opposed to the throwing of objects, spitting…

…interrupted again by O’Rourke.

O’Rourke: Do you condemn them?

Cllr. O’Brien: Yeah, I’m opposed to that.

O’Rourke: There’s a difference between being opposed to something and condemning it?

Cllr. O’Brien: Well, I do condemn the throwing of objects and conduct of that fashion.

As Cllr. O’Brien tries again to discuss the reason for the protest he is, yet again, interrupted by O’Rourke.

O’Rourke: Were you not in a position last night to appeal to people to restrain themselves, to cooperate with the Gardai?

Cllr. O’Brien explained that protesters were asked by organisers not to allow themselves be provoked by Gardai because a violent response would be used by media to discredit water protesters.

And of course, that’s exactly what Sean O’Rourke and RTE were doing. It’s odd that RTE management don’t seem to be aware of the massive damage such bias is doing to the station’s credibility.

Copy to:
Sean O’Rourke/RTE

Sean O’Rourke: No bias allowed – except RTEs

Once again we witness a blatant and unprofessional example of bias by RTEs Sean O’Rourke.

Socialist Party TD Paul Murphy was debating the Greek crisis with Suzanne Lynch, Irish Times European Correspondent in Athens.

Murphy was getting the better of Lynch which did not sit well with O’Rourke so he blatantly intervened not just to defend Lynch but to speak on her behalf.

Here’s the relevant section of the debate with my comments.

Paul Murphy: I think Suzanne Lynch’s articles have been consistently biased and taking the side of the so-called creditors. In a recent article she referred to Tspirias as a self-styled Che Guevara figure. That’s not unbiased journalism, it’s taking the line of the establishment and repeating the propaganda here…

…Interrupted by Sean O’Rourke.

O’Rourke: Hold on, before you go any further I want Suzanne Lynch to come back on that if she wishes – Suzanne?

Suzanne Lynch: I think I’ll just leave that actually, Sean.

Murphy continues but is immediately interrupted by Lynch as she thinks of a defence.

Lynch: That was an analysis piece that I wrote and in the Irish Times there’s a strong division between news and analysis and I’m not going to get into a defence of my work with Paul Murphy on radio.

This is a weak and ridiculous defence. Bias can, and frequently does, appear in both news and analysis.

Discussion continues with Paul Murphy tearing strips from both Lynch’s point of view and Juncker’s speech until O’Rourke again interrupts him.

O’Rourke: Come back to the point, you’ve dealt with that now and Juncker’s speech at some length. What about the points Suzanne Lynch made and, by the way, I don’t think it’s right for you to accuse somebody of bias. I think Suzanne Lynch is a professional, honest journalist reporting things as she sees them and by the way to describe your man as a self-styled Che Guevara is a complement.

Clearly, O’Rourke felt that Lynch was not performing well so, abandoning all semblance of professional impartiality, he intervenes, not only to castigate Murphy for accusing Lynch of being biased, but to deliver his personal, glowing assessment of Lynch’s honesty and professionalism.

If Lynch wasn’t in tatters after Murphy’s deconstruction of her arguments then surely she was in the realm of humiliation as she listened to O’Rourke’s well intentioned but utterly patronising and unasked for assistance in arguing her case.

Here’s the truth of the matter.

O’Rourke did not intervene in support of Lynch because he thought it was unfair of Murphy to accuse her of being biased. Accusing somebody of being biased is a common and accepted norm, particularly during political debate.

O’Rourke intervened because he clearly holds the same political views as Lynch and, as Murphy dismantled her arguments brick by brick, he felt compelled to intervene and help her out.

Everybody is biased to one degree or another but professional broadcasters are trained to conduct a debate without listeners ever getting a hint of where they stand on the issue under discussion. This training has just one aim – to maintain the credibility of the broadcasting station.

It is clear from this and previous incidents (here and here) that O’Rourke has permission not only to take sides but to blatantly intervene in support of those who are at one with his views and, presumably, those of RTE management.

Copy to:
Sean O’Rourke/RTE

Journalist Sinead Ryan: Not an informed journalist

Journalist Sinead Ryan writes here about her decision not to join Shane Ross’s political group.

She describes herself as an informed journalist. She is no such thing. Ms. Ryan is a conservative, establishment, living in a bubble of unreality journalist.

Why?

Because any objective, properly informed journalist, writing without an agenda (conscious or not) would find it totally impossible to write a 700 word article on Irish politics without referring to the core reason for the catastrophic events of recent years – political corruption.

Brian Lenihan documentary: A ruling elite propaganda exercise

I’ve just watched the RTE documentary on the late Brian Lenihan and it was difficult going. It was difficult because the production was little more than a propaganda broadcast on behalf of the Lenihan family and those who see themselves as the ruling elite in Ireland.

On a personal basis Brian Lenihan seems to have been a likeable and intelligent man, an intellectual. But he was also a traitor to his country.

When I say ‘traitor’ I don’t mean in the strong sense as when somebody provides information to an enemy that results in severe and immediate consequences for fellow citizens, including death.

Lenihan was a traitor in the sense that loyalty to his country was the least of his priorities. As a member of the ruling elite his priorities were as follows:

Himself and his family dynasty.
Himself and his social class.
Himself and his political party.
Himself and his country on the condition that the financial and political interests of the above were not in any way undermined.

Lenihan was a leading member of what is, in effect, an Irish aristocracy. Practically all other politicians are either members of this ruling elite, court followers or parasites endlessly kowtowing to their ‘betters’ in the hope of being thrown a few crumbs.

The churches, the legal community, big business and super-rich moguls, among others, support this ruling elite. They are also loyally supported and defended by a disturbingly large percentage of the media.

The first and most important principle of the ruling elite is – loyalty to each other. Severe consequences are imposed on anyone who betrays this principle. Former junior minister Roisin Shortall, for example, was immediately ejected from the club when she had the temerity to put personal integrity before loyalty to the ruling political class.

When a member of the elite dies, retires or resigns, all sins, crimes and betrayals are wiped from the record and, with unstinting support from a loyal mainstream media, their political careers are rewritten and manipulated to a point where any questioning of their pedigree is seen as vulgar and extreme.

Bertie Ahern, for example, was forced to resign in disgrace when he was caught lying under oath at the tribunal but the mainstream media rarely mentions this uncomfortable fact. Instead, we are subjected to a constant stream of drivel about the Peace Process and Ahern’s ‘courage’ in returning to the talks after his mother died.

The corrupt politician Haughey is another example. When the criminal died he was given a state funeral at which the liar Ahern told us that Haughey was a patriot to his fingertips. A liar politician stating that a criminal politician is a patriot is not at all seen as bizarre in the insulated bubble inhabited by the ruling elite and their media supporters.

And that’s what the Lenihan documentary was all about. It’s part of the now well-established strategy of rewriting the history of those who gave life-long loyalty to themselves and their class at the expense of Ireland and its people.

Happily, we are living through the dying days of this corrupt ruling elite.

Copy to:

RTE
Fianna Fail

Berkeley: Time for calmness and measured respect

Ok, somebody has to say it.

The Berkeley deaths were horrific, tragic and the victims and their families deserve a compassionate and appropriate response.

But some of the reaction is over the top and far from appropriate.

Here’s a recent comment:

It’s such a tragedy. It’s not a plane crashing; it’s not something like the guy with the gun in America last week. It’s a tragedy that could have been avoided.

What would the family and friends of the nine people shot to death in Charleston have to say in response to this comment?

What would the family and friends of the 150 people who died in the recent plane crash in the Alps have to say in response to this comment?

There is not the slightest doubt that the person who made the comment did not in any way mean to cause offence.

But the suggestion, and sometimes outright claim, that the Berkeley deaths were somehow more tragic than other horrifying incidents is not only disrespectful of the people involved in those incidents but is also disrespectful of the Berkeley victims and their families.

It’s time for calmness and measured respect.

Eoghan Harris: A ‘journalist’ with little integrity

In response to the ongoing Siteserv scandal Sunday Independent columnist Eoghan Harris has effectively admitted that he’s a coward and a man/journalist of little integrity.

On prudent reflection, I decided to take the advice of the Kerry sage, Tommy the “Kaiser” Fitzgerald: Don’t say anything, and don’t write anything, because when you put the black on the white, you are fucked boy.

What a sad end for a man who, wielding a razor sharp brain, used to tear strips from the hypocritical, arrogant and corrupt gangsters who misrule our country.

Now he’s a fully signed up toady of the rotten culture he once so brilliantly challenged. Whatever dulled his rapier like pen over the years has also dulled his mind to a state of stupidity where he effectively admits that he’s an intellectual slave to Denis O’Brien.

At least his many colleagues at ‘Independent’ Newspapers, also toadies to the master, make some effort, no matter how pathetic, at journalistic integrity.

The rest of Harris’ article accurately reflects the only ‘talent’ he still possesses – chief cheerleader for the establishment’s anti-Sinn Fein propaganda campaign. He begins this section of his article with the words:

Let me turn to a safer topic.

Propaganda is, of course, always a safe topic for a journalist because there’s no need for truth or honesty but how sad to witness any journalist actually write, in black and white, the words ‘let me turn to a safer topic’.

Copy to:
Eoghan Harris
Independent Newspapers

Journalists living in the bubble of the old regime

Sean O’Rourke, Harry McGee and Elaine Byrne are all establishment journalists who have little or no awareness of the extent or source of the ongoing and dramatic shift taking place across the Irish political landscape.

This is clearly evident from the content and tone of their analysis surrounding the emergence of the new political party involving TDs Catherine Murphy, Stephen Donnelly and Roisin Shortall.

Speaking on Today with Sean O’Rourke the journalists wondered who might join the new party, where the party might place itself on the political spectrum. Why, asked O’Rourke, would an independent want to join a political party and lose their appeal as an independent – riveting stuff.

Harry McGee spoke about the dangers of an independent losing status by joining a party. Elaine Byrne spoke about the fragmentation of Irish politics and wondered who would be the leader of the new party – scintillating analysis.

She did mention that Ireland has an unusually high number of independent representatives but she didn’t seem interested in the reason for this phenomenon – the absolute disgust and rejection by ordinary citizens of the politics of corruption that’s rampant within the mainstream parties.

O’Rourke asked his fellow journalists how they thought the independents would get on with each other on a personal basis – I was on the edge of my seat in anticipation as McGee and Byrne responded to this crucial line of analysis.

The entire discusson possessed about as much relevance to reality as three crew members of Titanic discussing the prospect of a pay rise as the ship sank beneath the icy waters of the Atlantic.

None of these establishment journalists seem to be aware that traditional Irish politics has been sinking in credibility and relevance for decades and in particular since the criminal politician Haughey began the process of infecting the body politic with the disease of corruption.

Elaine Byrne in particular, who has actually written a book on political corruption, doesn’t seem to be aware that the electorate is in the midst of a dramatic shift away from the old regime in reaction to the devastating consequences visited upon the country by political corruption.

All three journalists speak and analyse the political scene as if the rise of Sinn Fein, independents and the emergence of new political parties was simply an interesting but minor development within the old corrupt system rather than a force that has risen in response to the corruption of that regime and will almost certainly replace it.

The rise of Sinn Fein, the rise of Independents, the formation of new political parties are all directly related to the betrayal of Ireland and its people by the old, corrupt regime.

The emergence of a new politics is directly related to the fact that the old regime (Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour) has, over many decades, loyally served the corrupt political culture of clientelism, gombeenism and stroke politics rather than building a functional, properly accountable democracy.

It really is fascinating to observe journalists like O’Rourke, McGee and Byrne speak and analyse the current political scene through a mindset that evolved exclusively within the old, dying, political system.

If these journalists were aware of the reality of what’s happening on the ground in politics the conversation would have gone something like the following:

O’Rourke: Harry, what do you make of this latest fragmenation of politics which has obvious connections with political corruption?

McGee: Clearly that’s the case Sean. The global financial crisis of 2008 exposed Ireland for what it is, a backwater republic misgoverned by a mainly corrupt political regime. The proliferation of independents, the rise of Sinn Fein and now the emergence of new political parties are all indications that Irish citizens have at last rejected the old regime and are desperately searching for politicians who will serve the people and the country rather than the interests of bankers, property developers and billionaire moguls.

O’Rourke: Would you go along with that view Elaine?

Byrne: Absolutely. What we are witnessing is the culmination of a long era of corruption that began when Haughey came to power in 1979. This Fine Gael/Labour government is just the latest manifestation of that culture of corruption that has done untold damage to Ireland and its people. We are, I believe, in a transition period between the fall of the old regime and the rise of a genuine, democratic type of politics. Politicians like Roisin Shortall, Catherine Murphy, Stephen Donnelly and indeed Sinn Fein are leading the way in responding to what is, in effect, a rebellion by a large percentage of the people.

Copy to:
Sean O’Rourke, Harry McGee, Elaine Byrne

Reaction to (fake) media legislation

Here’s the reaction of Irish Examiner columnist Alison O’Connor to Communications Minister Alex White’s interview on Drivetime.

It seems absolutely daft that he could keep a straight face during that interview. You know, here’s what we’ll do, here’s how it will be and yet the elephant in the room is the fact that we already have the incredibly dominant force in Irish media in the figure of Denis O’Brien.

O’Connor goes on to make a very relevant point which further confirms the fakery of this legislation.

What’s going to happen when somebody is refused a merger? Surely they’re going to point to the overwhelming percentage of media already held by O’Brien and claim – what about him, look at all the media he’s been allowed to buy up.

Government introduces fake legislation on media mergers

I wrote recently about how our state is populated by fake regulatory authorities created to give the impression that Ireland is a functional democracy while at the same time allowing white-collar criminals free rein to plunder and rob at will.

Another device employed by our corrupt political/administrative system is the creation of fake legislation to give the impression that fake regulators have the power to bring white-collar criminals to account.

The latest, and most blatant example of this legislative fakery; is the recent announcement of plans to regulate the area of media ownership.

A report in the Irish Times tells us all we need to know about the fakery of this legislation.

The report reveals:

One: The legislation is based on guidelines. In other words, powerful media moguls will be presented with the guidelines and politely asked to abide by the non-enforceable principles contained in them.

Two: The guidelines will not be retrospective. This means that the enormously powerful and dangerous media mogul Denis O’Brien can retain the massive power and influence he already wields in the media sector.

Three: The 20% limit on ownership of media outlets is a joke. The Minister tells us that the like of O’Brien would find it more difficult to carry out mergers. ‘More difficult’ is a meaningless measure that will be laughed at by the likes of O’Brien.

Four: The guidelines are expected to say it is ‘undesirable’ for one person to hold excessive influence. Again, this is an utterly meaningless measure. Again, it will be laughed at by the likes of O’Brien.

Five: In an RTE interview (Drivetime, 49′) the Minister, Alex White, peddled the lie that it was not possible to make legislation retrospective, that to do so would raise very, very significant constitutional obstacles.

Six: In the same interview, as the Minister insulted and patronized the intelligence of listeners, he announced that it will be the minister who will make the final decision on whether a merger may go ahead or not.

It is this last aspect of the legislation that really makes it fake. Alex White operates within a corrupt political system that places the interests of powerful people far above the interests of the country or its citizens.

Copy to:
Minister White

Independent Newspapers: Not so independent anymore

Last Saturday, almost every newspaper in the land covered the constitutional crisis triggered by Denis O’Brien’s ruthless arrogance. The story was so big, so important that global media outlets such as the New York Times and the Guardian gave it top billing.

The only media outlet that practically ignored the issue was the Denis O’Brien controlled Irish Independent.

Buried deep in the issue on page 22 ‘Journallist’ John Downing outlined in an article of only 402 words a series of sentences and quotes surrounding what is one of the most imortant political stories of recent decades. There was no analysis whatsoever.

When asked about this on RTEs Saturday View Downing, with great indignance, repsonded:

There is coverage and there is a photograph of Catherine Murphy and I personally wrote this and was very careful to give fair ball to everybody.

He then adopted the same strategy as Denis O’Brien’s lacky James Morrissey of throwing a bucket of red herrings to avoid criticising his master.

Libel laws, legal compensation industry, conflict between judges and polilticians and ended his rant with this bizarre question:

Which brings us back to the question, why is there only one Monopolies Commission?

The increasingly desperate struggle by ‘journalists’ in Independent Newspapers to portray themselves as objective and professional is really becoming a bit sad.