The Pat Kenny Show

Faugheen

realitykeeper wrote: »

Tell me how wrote: »

Why are you posting this on the Pat Kenny show thread? There are other threads on boards where discussions like this are taking place.

Ok lets talk about Pat Kenny. Should he reimburse RTE for they money they had to pay Sean Gallagher? He gets a good salary because of the ratings so should he not get a bill because of the suings?

Why should he have to? RTE fed that tweet to him and he did was he told to do by the producers.

Loafing Oaf

two wheels good wrote: »

Wonga were villified because:
- of their extortionate interest rate
- deliberately targeting financially vulnerable customers
- lending to customers who were unable to repay loans. (Hence the compensations claims Wonga had to pay out)
- sending letters from a fake legal firm to threaten their customers.

The late lamented Linda Smith had a brilliant routine about the daytime tv ads for these type of lenders:
These awful, tragic, hollow-eyed wraiths come on, telling you these awful stories - 'I'm up to my eyes in debt, and, curiously, no reputable company would give me another loan! Then I discovered Dodgy Bastards...

realitykeeper

Faugheen wrote: »

Why should he have to? RTE fed that tweet to him and he did was he told to do by the producers.

RTE feed an advertising service to those who are willing to pay for advertising yet the advertising revenue often sited as the reason for the presenter`s extraordinary reimbursement. If the profits of the show are used to garnish the presenter`s pay, surely any losses or reduction in that revenue resulting from something the presenter may or may not have contributed to, should also be taken into account.

In any case, I think the court ruling was about more than just the tweet and indeed about more than one TV programme but to answer your question, if you don`t ask you don`t receive. Perhaps RTE would be a little less flippant with the costs they accumulate if it was their own money they were wasting and not the licence payers. Needless to say, I favour putting the licence revenue out to tender.

dxhound2005

realitykeeper wrote: »

RTE feed an advertising service to those who are willing to pay for advertising yet the advertising revenue often sited as the reason for the presenter`s extraordinary reimbursement.

RTE do not publish any figures for advertising revenue for each programme or presenter. And I have never seen any claim from RTE that the pay of individual staff is linked to the amount of advertising they attract. Where did you get your evidence for this assertion?

realitykeeper

dxhound2005 wrote: »

RTE do not publish any figures for advertising revenue for each programme or presenter. And I have never seen any claim from RTE that the pay of individual staff is linked to the amount of advertising they attract. Where did you get your evidence for this assertion?

I assumed everyone knew that. I think the presenters themselves make this point linking their high salaries to advertising revenue whenever their salaries are questioned.

Also, on presenter`s salaries, I recall a few years ago there was some scandal across the water in the BBC about presenters registering as companies to reduce their tax bill. To contrast, isn`t that practice normal in this country?

quintana76

realitykeeper wrote: »

I assumed everyone knew that. I think the presenters themselves make this point linking their high salaries to advertising revenue whenever their salaries are questioned.

Also, on presenter`s salaries, I recall a few years ago there was some scandal across the water in the BBC about presenters registering as companies to reduce their tax bill. To contrast, isn`t that practice normal in this country?

It sure is in RTE. You have the staffers who are employees and have to pay ordinary income tax and PRSI and have to retire at 65. Then you have the "talent"who pay corporation tax and can stay until they gasp their last breathe (Marian soon, live on air). The BBC, due to the facts of the scam leaking into the media had to drop the scheme.
Such a result is almost impossible here as a result of the uniformity and collusion of our incestuous media.

Tell me how

quintana76 wrote: »

It sure is in RTE. You have the staffers who are employees and have to pay ordinary income tax and PRSI and have to retire at 65. Then you have the "talent"who pay corporation tax and can stay until they gasp their last breathe (Marian soon, live on air). The BBC, due to the facts of the scam leaking into the media had to drop the scheme.
Such a result is almost impossible here as a result of the uniformity and collusion of our incestuous media.

.......................................................Gemma???

padd b1975

Bill Clinton doesn't sound at all well.

Beechwoodspark

Not a bad interview but I would imagine his ppl vetted those questions, bit bland

mattser

Kenny hit 9.9 there on the cringe factor. What a piss poor fawning interview. Thankfully I didn't hear most of what Clinton said. You'd need an interpreter.

Tell me how

padd b1975 wrote: »

Bill Clinton doesn't sound at all well.

He doesn't. And hasn't for quite a while.

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Not a bad interview but I would imagine his ppl vetted those questions, bit bland

Yeah, whenever there's an exclusive interview, it's a sure sign the power lies with the interviewee.

Only thing I felt was significant was his "observation"on the Presidential office in Ireland and how it had served to represent us very well on the international stage over the years.

Translation "it's not a place for reality TV stars or conspiracy theorists".

Technocentral

Sounds like a nightmare, what happened to just doing your work and getting paid at end of the week?

hotmail.com

Pat has signed a new 2 year contract with Newstalk keeping him there til 2020, according to the Journal.

No sign of retiring just yet.

Ursus Horribilis

Good for him! Pat's an excellent current affairs broadcaster. It's a shame he went to Newstalk which is a bit low rent but I'm glad he's still on air.

emo72

hotmail.com wrote: »

Pat has signed a new 2 year contract with Newstalk keeping him there til 2020, according to the Journal.

No sign of retiring just yet.

Sure he's only a young fella!

Loafing Oaf

hotmail.com wrote: »

Pat has signed a new 2 year contract with Newstalk keeping him there til 2020, according to the Journal.

No sign of retiring just yet.

Id say he’d be bored silly in retirement. Doesn’t seem to have much going on in his life other than work and family

jippo nolan

I reckon his parents tied a bone around his neck so as the dog would play with him!

zell12

Cllr Ciaran Cuffe wonders if Pat Kenny is a Mamil discussing 30kph speed limits

alaimacerc

zell12 wrote: »

Cllr Ciaran Cuffe wonders if Pat Kenny is a Mamil discussing 30kph speed limits

I often wonder if he's even a mammal, quite frankly!

alaimacerc

Faugheen wrote: »

Why should he have to? RTE fed that tweet to him and he did was he told to do by the producers.

Pat reads out some questions his researchers have rounded up for him, and his fans go ga-ga about his "tremendous breadth of knowledge". Lands the national broadcaster on the hook to the Catholiban for alleged defamation... ... suddenly he's Ron Burgundy.

alaimacerc

alaimacerc wrote: »

Pat reads out some questions his researchers have rounded up for him, and his fans go ga-ga about his "tremendous breadth of knowledge". Lands the national broadcaster on the hook to the Catholiban for alleged defamation... ... suddenly he's Ron Burgundy.

Did you just insult our Pat on the PK thread?

This is Pat's Temple and it is a holy place :eek::eek::eek:

alaimacerc

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Did you just insult our Pat on the PK thread?

This is Pat's Temple and it is a holy place :eek::eek::eek:

It's sorta my USP here, donchaknow. Well, maybe not quite "U" per se.

This thread does definitely act as a forward operating base, where Patfans strike out various other targets, beyond the show per se. (How rubbish Claire Byrne is, bring back the Plank. Etc.)

Mind you, if I get threadbanned for these crimes of lèse-Kenné , I can always just stick to commenting on him on the SO'R thread. They're like parallel streams, where the one keeps making meta-observations on the other!

Henry McKean, understated as ever, shouting into the phone from a portaloo as he braves the stiff breeze at the Ploughing Match.

Calm down, Henry.

serfboard

The 70-year-old Pat Kenny talks about "Job-Blockers" - people who won't retire to let younger people advance - without even a hint of irony.

Dick Swiveller

Is Pat Kenny a journalist or a campaigner? I just heard him say Trump was insulting a "sexual abuse survivor". Does he have any journalistic standards? None of us know if this woman is a sexual abuse survivor. At the moment she is a complainant. He really has gone off the wall in terms of bias in recent years.

Hurrache

As night follows day, you'll get whingers on this thread each time Trump is discussed.

mattser

serfboard wrote: »

The 70-year-old Pat Kenny talks about "Job-Blockers" - people who won't retire to let younger people advance - without even a hint of irony.

He's not alone there. RTE are full of these hypocrites.

Stoolcup wrote: »

Is Pat Kenny a journalist or a campaigner? I just heard him say Trump was insulting a "sexual abuse survivor". Does he have any journalistic standards? None of us know if this woman is a sexual abuse survivor. At the moment she is a complainant. He really has gone off the wall in terms of bias in recent years.

He can't hide his disdain for anything Trump.

kneemos

Stoolcup wrote: »

Is Pat Kenny a journalist or a campaigner? I just heard him say Trump was insulting a "sexual abuse survivor". Does he have any journalistic standards? None of us know if this woman is a sexual abuse survivor. At the moment she is a complainant. He really has gone off the wall in terms of bias in recent years.

Doesn't matter if she's for real or not,she made the claim and Trump saw fit to abuse her.
To any abuse survivors watching all they saw was another survivor being ridiculed by the President of all people.

Dick Swiveller

kneemos wrote: »

Doesn't matter if she's for real or not,she made the claim and Trump saw fit to abuse her.
To any abuse survivors watching all they saw was another survivor being ridiculed by the President of all people.

I just love the selective outrage here. Saturday night live did a skit a few days ago mocking Kavanaugh, a person who is INNOCENT until proven guilty, and Trump makes a few funny comments about a Complainant and the Trump derangement syndrome starts kicking in again.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Not even Kavanaugh is disputing that she's a survivor of sexual assault, just that it was he who carried it out. The SNL skit lampooned his behaviour on the stand, and almost everyone else in room, if it'd been ten minutes of Matt Damon sitting there going "ooh I'm a big raper, waaa I like raping, ber der derp rape rape" it'd be comparable to what Trump did.