The Pat Kenny Show Thread

mike65

and todays history lesson is Home Rule.

P. Breathnach

I'm interested in today's programme.

touts

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I'm interested in today's programme.

Well in that case the good news is you will get to hear most of it again on the "live" History Show in a few months.

P. Breathnach

touts wrote: »

Well in that case the good news is you will get to hear most of it again on the "live" History Show in a few months.

That's less of a burden to me than is the constant bitching here about any programme content that might have a history component.

JonathanAnon

A 70k a year Senator has to go out to RTE to read moth names from a book. bats? It certainly is.

constitutionus

Stop saying moth FFS !

It's like a kamakazi drinking game at this stage .

God Damn MLOD .

JonathanAnon

Christ was everybody in Bray on drugs yesterday? Or did Paddy just meet a few of his "regulars"?

padd b1975

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Christ was everybody in Bray on drugs yesterday? Or did Paddy just meet a few of his "regulars"?

I think the lads who were drinking in the street were winding Paddy up when they told him they were from Castleknock.

cunnifferous

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Christ was everybody in Bray on drugs yesterday? Or did Paddy just meet a few of his "regulars"?

Ha, not just yesterday, everyday of the week. Good interview with Charles Ferguson, although Myles sounds like hes just reading a list of pre-prepared questions.

JonathanAnon

Finlay on playing the poor mouth. I find it very hard to take his points seriously when

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfgbidgbqlgb/rss2/

BARNARDOS Provides services to children and families in need.
Chief executive: Fergus Finlay
Salary 2010: €113,315 (equivalent to 5th point on salary scale of HSE assistant national director). However, net cost to Barnardos is €88,000 because the chief executive contributes a minimum of €25,000 a year from fees earned through board memberships, speaking engagements and writing and broadcasting.
Salary 2011: No change

"We're all struggling".. Give me a break..

Callan57

Absolutely extraordinary interview with Ray Mouton on todays show ... I am truly in shock. Anyone who hasn't heard it please, please podcast

JonathanAnon

Callan57 wrote: »

Absolutely extraordinary interview with Ray Mouton on todays show ... I am truly in shock. Anyone who hasn't heard it please, please podcast

Was that the lawyer guy who said that everybody he defended was guilty and he knew they were... He seemed to be a little bit like the junior cert interviewed about their drinking habits..

Callan57

JonathanAnon wrote: »

Was that the lawyer guy who said that everybody he defended was guilty and he knew they were... He seemed to be a little bit like the junior cert interviewed about their drinking habits..

You should listen to the interview again ... your glib comment is very much a distortion of what he said

JonathanAnon

Callan57 wrote: »

You should listen to the interview again ... your glib comment is very much a distortion of what he said

I remember hearing him say that he didnt defend one person that he thought was innocent.... I assumed that Myles would correct him and say "surely you meant to say guilty?" but he didnt...

mike65

Tommy O'Gorman could play back tapes he recorded 20 years ago and apart from the bassy hiss of a battered C90 I doubt you'd able to tell.

Money for very old rope.

JonathanAnon

Cows and history... Pat better come back quick before his show is dead.. Myles has already been in his chair for what seems like an eternity.

SEPT 23 1989

TINA

JonathanAnon

I dont even have kids going to school, and I knew everything she told us today..

IvyTheTerrible

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I dont even have kids going to school, and I knew everything she told us today..

Oh yeah and the advice to "Start looking now at organising a book rental scheme".

Yep start organising a rental scheme a week before kids go back, that's going to work, alright.

Bits_n_Bobs

Can't turn on RTE without Terry Prone PR guru waffling and opinionising while her hubby is the chairman. Is there no concept of how bizarre this is????

JM Skipton

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Can't turn on RTE without Terry Prone PR guru waffling and opinionising while her hubby is the chairman. Is there no concept of how bizarre this is????

And don't forget her son holding a prominent presenting role on Today FM.
But all three of them never discuss any work issues over the dinner table:rolleyes:

Callan57

JM Skipton wrote: »

And don't forget her son holding a prominent presenting role on Today FM.
But all three of them never discuss any work issues over the dinner table:rolleyes:

And does the occsional nixer on RTE too :eek:

JonathanAnon

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Can't turn on RTE without Terry Prone PR guru waffling and opinionising while her hubby is the chairman. Is there no concept of how bizarre this is????

It's absolutely ridiculous.. Her advising Father Reynolds and her husband on the RTE board.. NOTHING had been made of this huge conflict of interest in the media. And they maintain there is no conflict of interest? Any proper PR agency would have said "We have a strong connections with RTE, (i.e. Tom is on the board, and Terry is frequently on their panels shows spouting nonsense) and it would not be right for us to represent Father Reynolds in this case."

serfboard

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Can't turn on RTE without Terry Prone PR guru waffling and opinionising while her hubby is the chairman. Is there no concept of how bizarre this is????

1. This is a small country.

2. The "Dublin media set" which includes PR agents is smaller still.

3. The purpose of having a PR person (or a journalist) on a programme is to have a dispassionate (was going to say disinterested ...) person on to talk about current events, who will be savvy and experienced enough to appreciate how certain things will go down with Joe Public, and who will come across well on radio.

4. Given all of the above, the pool of people to pick from is quite small, so it's no surprise that the same people crop up on certain shows from time to time.

If you were going for journalists and they had John Drennan or Michael O'Reagan or Mick Clifford on would you say they were over-exposed too?

And furthermore, the same woman pops up on Vincent Browne on TV3. Using your logic (that she's only on RTE because Tom is RTE chairman), how does she swing that?

Give us the names of three other people who should have been on instead, and who were available and willing to go on?

And if you're so confident that she is over-exposed, I suggest you start a "Terry Prone on RTE Watch" thread (in the style of the Mary O'Rourke one), so we can track it.

There are plenty of over-exposed people in the Dublin media circle. I take your point about her husband, but should that bar her from taking part when she's asked?

JM Skipton

serfboard wrote: »

1. This is a small country.

2. The "Dublin media set" which includes PR agents is smaller still.

3. The purpose of having a PR person (or a journalist) on a programme is to have a dispassionate (was going to say disinterested ...) person on to talk about current events, who will be savvy and experienced enough to appreciate how certain things will go down with Joe Public, and who will come across well on radio.

4. Given all of the above, the pool of people to pick from is quite small, so it's no surprise that the same people crop up on certain shows from time to time.

If you were going for journalists and they had John Drennan or Michael O'Reagan or Mick Clifford on would you say they were over-exposed too?

And furthermore, the same woman pops up on Vincent Browne on TV3. Using your logic (that she's only on RTE because Tom is RTE chairman), how does she swing that?

Give us the names of three other people who should have been on instead, and who were available and willing to go on?

And if you're so confident that she is over-exposed, I suggest you start a "Terry Prone on RTE Watch" thread (in the style of the Mary O'Rourke one), so we can track it.

There are plenty of over-exposed people in the Dublin media circle. I take your point about her husband, but should that bar her from taking part when she's asked?

She should stay out of the media full stop, so the answer to your question is yes.Run her PR company by all means as she is perfectly entitled to do however to advise Gay Mitchell for the presidential election and then accept invitations by tv and radio as an unbiased analyst on the election was ludicrous, that is just one example.The Kevin Reynolds situation I don't think sits easy with anyone.The over exposed part doesn't bother me that much its the continuing conflict of interest

hotmail.com

JM Skipton wrote: »

She should stay out of the media full stop, so the answer to your question is yes.Run her PR company by all means as she is perfectly entitled to do however to advise Gay Mitchell for the presidential election and then accept invitations by tv and radio as an unbiased analyst on the election was ludicrous, that is just one example.The Kevin Reynolds situation I don't think sits easy with anyone.The over exposed part doesn't bother me that much its the continuing conflict of interest

Surely that's the fault of programme producers that invite her on?

She's not going to refuse an appearance fee, it's up to the producers to not ask her.

padd b1975

JonathanAnon wrote: »

It's absolutely ridiculous.. Her advising Father Reynolds and her husband on the RTE board.. NOTHING had been made of this huge conflict of interest in the media. And they maintain there is no conflict of interest? Any proper PR agency would have said "We have a strong connections with RTE, (i.e. Tom is on the board, and Terry is frequently on their panels shows spouting nonsense) and it would not be right for us to represent Father Reynolds in this case."

Why the hell did Fr. Reynolds hire the likes of her??

Thats whats ridiculous.

JonathanAnon

serfboard wrote: »

1. This is a small country. 2. The "Dublin media set" which includes PR agents is smaller still.

I dont think these are good enough excuses. What generally happens with these public jobs is that they are given to old pals, and the whole concept of impartiality takes a back seat.. when impartiality should be paramount.

The investigation into Prime Time Investigates was lead by the BAI, who is headed by ex RTE head Bob Collins.... who was then put in the position of investigating the company he used to run, whose board is headed by Tom Savage... whose missus was advising the person who was slandered in the Prime Time Investigates program.

I wonder when they were all sitting down to engage in serious discussions about the case, did anybody ever get confused and think they were at a wedding.

Callan57

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I dont think these are good enough excuses. What generally happens with these public jobs is that they are given to old pals, and the whole concept of impartiality takes a back seat.. when impartiality should be paramount.

The investigation into Prime Time Investigates was lead by the BAI, who is headed by ex RTE head Bob Collins.... who was then put in the position of investigating the company he used to run, whose board is headed by Tom Savage... whose missus was advising the person who was slandered in the Prime Time Investigates program.

I wonder when they were all sitting down to engage in serious discussions about the case, did anybody ever get confused and think they were at a wedding.

And if it were anyone else Terry would be vocal on the perception of conflict of interest & she would be waxing lyricial about how if she were advising said person she would have advised about the importance of appearances.
It's all very incestous whatever way you dress it up.

stoneill

Does anyone remember the interview Plank Kenny had with Prionsias de Rossa and as PdR was struggling with defending a p-p-p-public p-p-p-private p-p-p-p-partnership venture the Plank comes in with a lovely "well that's easy for you to say" quip.