Too much religion on RTE?

sudzs

Anyone else think there's far too much religion on RTE?

Quite apart from the angelus that's blasted out every day we get a constant stream of god blesses and religious references from Joe Duffy, we recently had a full hour of Brian Darcy on the Marianne Finucane show and at the moment there's an ex drug addict going on and on about how she found Jesus and was saved from drugs. :rolleyes:

Must we be subjected to all this delusion from the national broadcaster????

Dirigent

Couldn't agree more. Wall to wall Godology some days.

But let's face it, it'll be wall to wall Soccer in a few weeks time. Yawn.

squonk

Must we be subjected to all this complaining from people trying to push atheism on boards? If you don't like it you are free to listen to another station or even use the off button. Radio 1 caters for an older age group who would be a bit more attuned to religion than the 2FM/Today FM age group (my opinion). In any case, why can't atheists just be happy to be what they are? I don't complain when I see Richard Dawkins getting airtime. I've never gotten the concept of not believing in something but going on a campaign to ensure that others don't also believe in anything with you. Sounds like the exact same mindset as those who head off on crusades to ensure that others believe in the same god as they do.

I'm a Mac user. I firmly believe it's the best all-round OS and hardware package out there. Lots of people blindly use windows and sub par hardware and some use Linux. I don't agree with their choices however it's up to them what they use. Ads for Windows and software to run on Windows or other PC brands don't bother me too much, nor do interviews with Bill Gates or other MS bigwigs. Be happy in your choices and let the rest of the world do it's thing.

I should add finally that I'm not overly religious so and, apart from just finding Brian Darcy annoying as a human being, I have no great objection to presenters signing off with 'God Bless', 'Praise Allah', or anything else they might care to throw in either.

Bard

Like it or not, whether you as one person think religion is "delusion" or not, the majority of the population don't and over 80% declared themselves as Catholic in the census. They're a public service broadcaster with a remit to offer programming that services the entire population fairly so it's only natural that there would be a certain degree of religious coverage on the national broadcaster. If you don't like it, switch to a station that doesn't have such a requirement built into their very foundation - i.e.: switch to a commercial station like Newstalk or Today FM.

Incidentally, it's not like these programmes really take up much time in the schedule anyway... you quote the Angelus - which takes 1 minute... you quote Joe Duffy saying "God bless" (OMG, you don't like religion so you object to a clearly religious man wishing someone well in his own way? - would there be a problem with another presenter saying "go n'éirí an t'ádh leat" if you didn't like Irish?), and you quote a programme on Father Brian D'arcy (1 hour out of the whole week)... whose story is a fairly current one as he was censured by the Vatican recently.

Sure, some people idealise the situation where there's a complete separation of church and state, but that situation isn't (yet) the reality of life in Ireland. Many people here are religious, and the national broadcaster has to cater for them under the terms of their public service remit. That's just the way it is! If you don't like it... well there'll be programmes there that suit you too. RTÉ Radio 1 isn't supposed to be like Newstalk or any other station - they have a very specific code that they have to stick to. The same is true, to some degree, of community stations - who generally have an obligation to provide programming for as wide a cross-section of the community they target as possible.

Again, if you don't like that, there are other broadcasters you can listen to, - other broadcasters who will happily conform to your way of thinking and not feel the need to cover all bases... but that's not very likely to change much with RTÉ any time soon.

vard

squonk wrote: »

Must we be subjected to all this complaining from people trying to push atheism on boards? If you don't like it you are free to listen to another station or even use the off button. Radio 1 caters for an older age group who would be a bit more attuned to religion than the 2FM/Today FM age group (my opinion). In any case, why can't atheists just be happy to be what they are? I don't complain when I see Richard Dawkins getting airtime. I've never gotten the concept of not believing in something but going on a campaign to ensure that others don't also believe in anything with you. Sounds like the exact same mindset as those who head off on crusades to ensure that others believe in the same god as they do.

I'm a Mac user. I firmly believe it's the best all-round OS and hardware package out there. Lots of people blindly use windows and sub par hardware and some use Linux. I don't agree with their choices however it's up to them what they use. Ads for Windows and software to run on Windows or other PC brands don't bother me too much, nor do interviews with Bill Gates or other MS bigwigs. Be happy in your choices and let the rest of the world do it's thing.

I should add finally that I'm not overly religious so and, apart from just finding Brian Darcy annoying as a human being, I have no great objection to presenters signing off with 'God Bless', 'Praise Allah', or anything else they might care to throw in either.

Sure Mac users are a bigger cult than those mad christians.

europa11

Well, if they just got rid of the Angelus I could put up with the "god bless/my gods/Dia is Muire leat" from Joe, the Maid et al.

If you've ever been in the company of a foreigner when the Angelus comes on radio (they probably think the angelus is a five minute nuclear or flood alert warning) and then feel so embarrased that, instead of telling them what the bells represent you prefer to say it's something like the Irish Liberty Bell - that it's an old tradition for them to be struck at noon and six- and has been broadcast for years.......then making a quick exit hoping no-one in your company starts crossing themselves and muttering prayers.

Anyway, it's long past time they were gotten rid of.

Dirigent

Bard wrote: »

and over 80% declared themselves as Catholic in the census.

Come on, the only way that number was achieved was by putting in a doctored question eliciting a particular response. And it reflects very badly on the professionalism of the CSO.

This is the clearly biased question:

Lapin

I'm with the OP on this one, especially with regard to Joe Duffy's constant references to God (and God related nonsense) where it isn't called for in the context of what is being discussed.

Take the recent debate concerning taxi drivers and the green lights, stickers etc. Joe casually asked if there is a law prohibiting the display of rosary beads in taxis. Why? What had that got to do with anything.

I also found the item following Manchester City's victory in the Premier League to be in very poor taste. The sub current of the discussion appeared to suggest that their success was a miracle because some woman caller prayed for it to happen and because City Manager Roberto Mancini visited Medjugorje a while back. I actually found this somewhat offensive.

If your God is a God who fixes football matches for some praying woman down in Tipperary, then you're welcome to him. I'm sure the starving kids in sub saharan Africa are delighted with Manchester City's success too.

I'm anti theist myself but I don't try to push my opinions about religion on others as someone suggested above. I'm happy to live and let live.
And I'm well aware of the off button on my radio but that option is a bit drastic, I simply react to the state broadcaster's midday call to prayer by switching over to secular Newstalk.

DavyD_83

europa11 wrote: »

Well, if they just got rid of the Angelus I could put up with the "god bless/my gods/Dia is Muire leat" from Joe, the Maid et al.

If you've ever been in the company of a foreigner when the Angelus comes on radio (they probably think the angelus is a five minute nuclear or flood alert warning) and then feel so embarrased that, instead of telling them what the bells represent you prefer to say it's something like the Irish Liberty Bell - that it's an old tradition for them to be struck at noon and six- and has been broadcast for years.......then making a quick exit hoping no-one in your company starts crossing themselves and muttering prayers.

Anyway, it's long past time they were gotten rid of.

Cos that's not as weird as it being a hangover from the days the Church effectively ran Ireland :pac:

miketv

Lapin wrote: »

I'm with the OP on this one, especially with regard to Joe Duffy's constant references to God (and God related nonsense) where it isn't called for in the context of what is being discussed.

Take the recent debate concerning taxi drivers and the green lights, stickers etc. Joe casually asked if there is a law prohibiting the display of rosary beads in taxis. Why? What had that got to do with anything.

I also found the item following Manchester City's victory in the Premier League to be in very poor taste. The sub current of the discussion appeared to suggest that their success was a miracle because some woman caller prayed for it to happen and because City Manager Roberto Mancini visited Medjugorje a while back. I actually found this somewhat offensive.

If your God is a God who fixes football matches for some praying woman down in Tipperary, then you're welcome to him. I'm sure the starving kids in sub saharan Africa are delighted with Manchester City's success too.

I'm anti theist myself but I don't try to push my opinions about religion on others as someone suggested above. I'm happy to live and let live.
And I'm well aware of the off button on my radio but that option is a bit drastic, I simply react to the state broadcaster's midday call to prayer by switching over to secular Newstalk.

Well put Lapin,
If you have not already seen this, check it out for a giggle http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/

Manach

Given its importance and cultural import, perhaps not enough religious discussion is taking part on the media.

vard

Manach wrote: »

Given its importance and cultural import, perhaps not enough religious discussion is taking part on the media.

Discussion would be great; that's a two way thing, however religious folk rarely discuss and tend, instead, to preach.

Whenever a discussion starts the wall goes up. Offensive, militant atheists at it again! Insert silly generalisation here.

I'd prefer that RTE introduce more - actual - religious discussion!

fryup

Lapin wrote: »

I also found the item following Manchester City's victory in the Premier League to be in very poor taste. The sub current of the discussion appeared to suggest that their success was a miracle because some woman caller prayed for it to happen and because City Manager Roberto Mancini visited Medjugorje a while back. I actually found this somewhat offensive.

well said

i found it border-line vomit inducing, it this day and age our national broadcaster is promoting this superstitious nonsense is really nausiating

you know, i can't get my head around Duffy sometimes...he quite rightly highlights the wrong doings of the rc church in relation to child abuse but a week later he's they're leading cheerleader its like he's doing some kind of balancing act

Troper

What particular brand of RTE 'religion' are you listening to? It's rare on RTE.
Try BBC Radio 4 if you want to hear religious broadcasting for MATURE ADULTS!

sudzs

vard wrote: »

Discussion would be great; that's a two way thing, however religious folk rarely discuss and tend, instead, to preach.

I would welcome discussion but at the moment people are on air talking about guardian angels, miracles (I'd forgotten about the Man City miracle coverage! :rolleyes:) and other such wonders as if it is reality. Yes I know it is a kind of "reality" for some but the notions are completely unchallenged, never even a slight hint that it all should possibly taken with a pinch of salt.

squonk

sudzs wrote: »

I would welcome discussion but at the moment people are on air talking about guardian angels, miracles (I'd forgotten about the Man City miracle coverage! :rolleyes:) and other such wonders as if it is reality. Yes I know it is a kind of "reality" for some but the notions are completely unchallenged, never even a slight hint that it all should possibly taken with a pinch of salt.

I think in that case Joe Duffy's target audience are an older generation. Like it or not they grew up at a time when the church was pretty powerful and their beliefs are engrained to a degree that I don't think a younger generation could appreciate. You only have to look at the Liveline megathread to see that religious references are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to hatred of Joe Duffy on here. Personally I'd have rolled my eyes and switched channel.

I actually had an OMG moment reading the post where the poster claims to let on to his international friends that the Angelus is a Liberty Bell. Seriously, get over yourself. It's the Angelus and while I don't say 10 decades of the rosary every time I hear it (which isn't often) I'd be sorry to see it go also. Not for any religious attachment but it's a tradition at this point. Muslims are happy to acknowledge their call to prayer and I don't see why those who are committed catholics should somehow feel embarrassed by a call for prayer and reflection twice a day. The majority of the population class themselves as catholic and I don't buy that line about the question being biased. The census isn't like being stopped on the street and being asked a loaded question like 'Do you think Ireland should endure 20 years of poverty or vote YES to the Fiscal Tready'. Now that's a loaded question. You are either of a religious persuasion or not. If you're not, you say you're not and if you are, you state what denomination. Simple as that.

Where I think RTE could improve is by encompassing all religions and none more. BBC R2 has a thought for the day type slot that's regularly hosted by representatives of all major religions. I'm not sure if atheists get represented but it hardly seems worthwhile as I'm assuming that the point of being atheist is to look to science to explain most aspects of life.

Dirigent

I don't want to go off topic, so this is just a brief comment.

A poster used the figure of 80% of the population declaring themselves as RC in the census. But the question was deliberately phrased to maximise this response. It should have been phrased like: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it Red, Green or Blue". Instead it was phrased, "Is Red your favourite colour Y/N. If N, is it Green or Blue."

And that's not even getting picky about hiding the "No religion" option under the write-in, and the capitilised "write in your RELIGION" to catch the eye.

No other question on the census form was phrased in that way. See http://www.census.ie/The-Census-Form/Each-question-in-detail.109.1.aspx

Off topic rant over.

Yakuza

Dirigent wrote: »

I don't want to go off topic, so this is just a brief comment.

A poster used the figure of 80% of the population declaring themselves as RC in the census. But the question was deliberately phrased to maximise this response. It should have been phrased like: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it Red, Green or Blue". Instead it was phrased, "Is Red your favourite colour Y/N. If N, is it Green or Blue."

And that's not even getting picky about hiding the "No religion" option under the write-in, and the capitilised "write in your RELIGION" to catch the eye.

No other question on the census form was phrased in that way. See http://www.census.ie/The-Census-Form/Each-question-in-detail.109.1.aspx

Off topic rant over.

The image you linked doesn't read like that to me.

It clearly states "What is your religion"? Not "Is your religion Roman Catholic"

RC is listed first (and the order seems to be based on the values declared in previous censuses) and I don't think you can infer there was a preferred answer.

What would have been an unbiased question in your opinion? Listing them in alphabetical order? Putting the no religion option first?

jhegarty

Dirigent wrote: »

A poster used the figure of 80% of the population declaring themselves as RC in the census. But the question was deliberately phrased to maximise this response. It should have been phrased like: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it Red, Green or Blue". Instead it was phrased, "Is Red your favourite colour Y/N. If N, is it Green or Blue."

Well that's just not true.

The question is clearly:

What is your favourite colour ?

Red
Green
Blue
Other......
No Favourite Colour

Dirigent

jhegarty wrote: »

Well that's just not true.

The question is clearly:

What is your favourite colour ?

Red
Green
Blue
Other......
No Favourite Colour

But it should be: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it ..."

Yakuza

Dirigent wrote: »

But it should be: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it ..."

Most people in this country do have a (nominal) religion, whether they be devout practitioners or not, so by phrasing the question your way, you're making the vast majority of respondents answer two questions, not one, which in my opinion is a worse question design than the one that's there.

Chicken1

One film on the angelus on RTE TV that make me squirm is the one with the woman in the high rise office and when the angelus comes on you see all of the staff putting on the coats and heading out while she she is the last to go. Whats all that about paddy heading for the pub!!!!!!!!!!

squonk

I thought she was the only one there at the time. I didn't take any meaning from it. It was six PM and time to be going home anyway. The lady took some time to reflect. That's all.

squonk

Dirigent wrote: »

But it should be: "Do you have a favourite colour Y/N. If Y is it ..."

Most people have a religion of some sort that they identify with, even if not regular worshippers. The question was about religion, If you haven't a religion you're down the end because the question doesn't apply to you.

Again, what's the problem? You've no religion you subscribe to. That's fine. Why are you bothered about others claiming to be part of something? Like it or not we're all adults and can make our own decisions. Nobody was standing over my shoulder when I filled out my census return and there were no consequences for a 'wrong' answer. Just because the result doesn't suit your outlook is neither here nor there. Why do you care?

Chicken1

squonk wrote: »

I thought she was the only one there at the time. I didn't take any meaning from it. It was six PM and time to be going home anyway. The lady took some time to reflect. That's all.

Look at it the next time and you will see other people putting on the coats and going.

Lapin

miketv wrote: »

Well put Lapin,
If you have not already seen this, check it out for a giggle http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/

Cheers Mike, I must get a hold of that somewhere.

I love Bill Maher's take on things. His interviews with the late Christopher Hitchens on Real Time are Priceless. Check them out on You Tube.

This is one of my favourites !

Bard

Dirigent wrote: »

This is the clearly biased question:

Are you suggesting it's biased towards people with religion or towards Catholics? And just how is it biased?

ahnowbrowncow

squonk wrote: »

Must we be subjected to all this complaining from people trying to push atheism on boards? If you don't like it you are free to listen to another station or even use the off button. Radio 1 caters for an older age group who would be a bit more attuned to religion than the 2FM/Today FM age group (my opinion). In any case, why can't atheists just be happy to be what they are? I don't complain when I see Richard Dawkins getting airtime. I've never gotten the concept of not believing in something but going on a campaign to ensure that others don't also believe in anything with you. Sounds like the exact same mindset as those who head off on crusades to ensure that others believe in the same god as they do.

I'm a Mac user. I firmly believe it's the best all-round OS and hardware package out there. Lots of people blindly use windows and sub par hardware and some use Linux. I don't agree with their choices however it's up to them what they use. Ads for Windows and software to run on Windows or other PC brands don't bother me too much, nor do interviews with Bill Gates or other MS bigwigs. Be happy in your choices and let the rest of the world do it's thing.

I should add finally that I'm not overly religious so and, apart from just finding Brian Darcy annoying as a human being, I have no great objection to presenters signing off with 'God Bless', 'Praise Allah', or anything else they might care to throw in either.

People pay their tv licence and surely they should be allowed to voice their discontent if their money is being wasted, in their opinion, on religion without being told to turn it off or switch to today fm which they don't fund.

And unlike you I believe that mac users are the blind ones thinking they've better software (for years saying the os can't get viruses when in fact windows security has been proven to be far better) and better hardware when they pay hugely inflated apple prices for sup par hardware. But this isn't the forum to be talking about that.

europa11

Not listing the religions in alphabetical order on the Census form is a bit odd, if an election ballot was presented in that manner it would be rejected.

Also, by not asking the question "Are / do you belong to a religion" first of all, and only then if people answered yes would they progress onto the list of sects to tick accordingly.

Don't think its any kind of bias tbh, just laziness.

ahnowbrowncow

squonk wrote: »

I actually had an OMG moment reading the post where the poster claims to let on to his international friends that the Angelus is a Liberty Bell. Seriously, get over yourself. It's the Angelus and while I don't say 10 decades of the rosary every time I hear it (which isn't often) I'd be sorry to see it go also. Not for any religious attachment but it's a tradition at this point. Muslims are happy to acknowledge their call to prayer and I don't see why those who are committed catholics should somehow feel embarrassed by a call for prayer and reflection twice a day.

It's a state broadcaster, for all the people in Ireland not a broadcaster just for the catholics. What is so hard to understand about that? Do you not understand what a secular state is?

squonk

I can see RTE becoming more secular over time but change like this happens slowly. Religion is a funny thing. It's a big jump to go from not being that bothered to not being religious full stop. I can see it being 2-3 generations before that type of secularisation happens.

squonk

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

People pay their tv licence and surely they should be allowed to voice their discontent if their money is being wasted, in their opinion, on religion without being told to turn it off or switch to today fm which they don't fund.

You're entitled to your opinion of course. I consider sports coverage to be a complete waste of time and a trivial use of my licence. In my RTE there'd be no Champions League, Rugby coverage or Euro 2012 coverage. Once euro 2012 comes around though, what are my options? You'll find they're largely the same as yours are at the moment. Sport is an appalling waste of money for leagues and matches that, ultimately, just don't matter as it'll all be played out again next year, the year after that, and the year after that and the world will not progress because of it's existence. The question is though, do I campaign to deprive those in the majority who are interested in sport or do I just turn to a DVD or BoxSet for the duration of the events? Sometimes you just gotta bite the bullet.

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

And unlike you I believe that mac users are the blind ones thinking they've better software (for years saying the os can't get viruses when in fact windows security has been proven to be far better) and better hardware when they pay hugely inflated apple prices for sup par hardware. But this isn't the forum to be talking about that.

No, it's not the forum for it but you're very wrong, however I'm quite happy to listen to your opinions and readilly realise that you have a much different outlook on the computing world than I have.

ahnowbrowncow

squonk wrote: »

You're entitled to your opinion of course. I consider sports coverage to be a complete waste of time and a trivial use of my licence. In my RTE there'd be no Champions League, Rugby coverage or Euro 2012 coverage. Once euro 2012 comes around though, what are my options? You'll find they're largely the same as yours are at the moment. Sport is an appalling waste of money for leagues and matches that, ultimately, just don't matter as it'll all be played out again next year, the year after that, and the year after that and the world will not progress because of it's existence. The question is though, do I campaign to deprive those in the majority who are interested in sport or do I just turn to a DVD or BoxSet for the duration of the events? Sometimes you just gotta bite the bullet.



No, it's not the forum for it but you're very wrong, however I'm quite happy to listen to your opinions and readilly realise that you have a much different outlook on the computing world than I have.

Never mind about the software aspect cause I doubt we'd agree but apple having better hardware is just plain wrong.
http://store.apple.com/ie-business/configure/MC560B/A for €2500 using two generation old cpu's and graphic cards. Talk about crazy, I could get 3 pcs with better hardware for that price. So please tell me how I'm wrong because I'm beginning to think you know very little about computer hardware

promethius42

Your paying an extra thousand just for the apple logo essentially.

squonk

I don't think of it as just hardware. Besides, the MacPro is a 'throw cash at it' kind of product. I'll give you that they're pretty bad value for the average guy. I wouldn't go near a MacPro because, if I'm in the market for something like that, then there are going to be other considerations. The MacPro is the runt of Apple's litter right now. Not many buy them.

I'm a software guy so I don't religiously follow hardware. Last time I purchased however I specced out my machine and had a look at what Dell and a few more were offering. By the time I specced out everything to exactly what I was getting with the iMac at the time, there wasn't a lot in it, a small saving EXCEPT that I was missing out on a nice tidy machine, a decent screen, good software and the ability to run all of the major OSs natively. You want to talk hardware, talk hardware but, like everything in life, it's not that simple. I don't want to derail this thread further but we are coming from two very different viewpoints on this and I can't really see us agreeing any time soon.

ahnowbrowncow

squonk wrote: »

I don't think of it as just hardware. Besides, the MacPro is a 'throw cash at it' kind of product. I'll give you that they're pretty bad value for the average guy. I wouldn't go near a MacPro because, if I'm in the market for something like that, then there are going to be other considerations. The MacPro is the runt of Apple's litter right now. Not many buy them.

I'm a software guy so I don't religiously follow hardware. Last time I purchased however I specced out my machine and had a look at what Dell and a few more were offering. By the time I specced out everything to exactly what I was getting with the iMac at the time, there wasn't a lot in it, a small saving EXCEPT that I was missing out on a nice tidy machine, a decent screen, good software and the ability to run all of the major OSs natively. You want to talk hardware, talk hardware but, like everything in life, it's not that simple. I don't want to derail this thread further but we are coming from two very different viewpoints on this and I can't really see us agreeing any time soon.

Dell are nearly as bad as apple when it comes to pricing though but their monitors are among the best out there. And yeah I think we should agree to disagree before we derail the thread

DB21

Wait, how did a thread about religion end up about Macs? :pac:

Jester252

is apple now a religion?

Yakuza

Jester252 wrote: »

is apple now a religion?

More of a cult
(The irony of my posting this on my iPad is not lost on me )

Lapin

Jester252 wrote: »

is apple now a religion?

Only when Eve eats them.

popebenny16

Jester252 wrote: »

is apple now a religion?

Yakuza wrote: »

More of a cult
(The irony of my posting this on my iPad is not lost on me )

people putting post its to steve jobs when he died on the windows of apple stores, taking pics with their i-phones and posting them sounds religious/cultish to me.

back on whats left of the topic, meanwhile, i cannot see the op's problem with the sort of "god bless" thing that Joe and Marian say. its not like anyone else of the several dozen radio presenters rte has do it, and not even Joe and Marian do it all the time. It more of a plesentary, i often say ot without thinking, usually when i have finished talking to a client on the phone in a bad situation. Its just a way of wishing well.

Its almost like people on the athiest forum taking umbridge with boards.ie for having a religious forum.