Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Complaint upheld against Derek Mooney for 'supporting same-sex marriage' on air

Options
1…1112141617…24

Comments

  • Options
    #392
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,769 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    jimgoose wrote: »
    My problem is that the ability to effectively silence the broadcast media on certain issues at the flick of an email is something that should not exist. The only people who are inclined to use it are those who are inclined to abuse it.

    Well that's a whole lot of generalities.


  • Options
    #393
    Barely There
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,481 ✭✭✭Barely There


    jimgoose wrote: »
    What I am saying is that it should not be illegal for a broadcaster to give his/her opinion on a matter such as this on the air, while stopping short of actually trying to influence voters.

    I wouldn't have a problem with this, but in that case, one should be campaigning against the Act itself.
    Most people commenting on this issue are directing their ire against either the BAI or specific 'interest groups'.


  • Options
    #394
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,177 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Barely There wrote: »
    I wouldn't have a problem with this, but in that case, one should be campaigning against the Act itself.
    Most people commenting on this issue are directing their ire against either the BAI or specific 'interest groups'.

    Well, in my view it's a pretty good example of why this particular law is an ass. :D


  • Options
    #395
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Riskymove wrote: »
    my point is that climate change can be set out in terms of fact and figures etc while many other issues cannot

    One could rationally decide not to allow someone who is debating agaist fact have a voice on your station. But not allowing someone an opinion is different

    That means that it is OK and says there is no evidence that SSM will have negative consequences for anyone. Often we see groups like this who are debating against facts. Its not different to climate change.


  • Options
    #396
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,177 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Well that's a whole lot of generalities.

    There I go, abstracting from specific again!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #397
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    logik wrote: »
    21% of bordies agree with the complaint being upheld... please one of you explain.

    I didn't vote

    but as mentioned, they viewed him as breeching their guidleines and so the complaint was upheld

    I haven't seen anyone show otherwise

    the problem is that people are looking at the topic and implying the BAI must be taking sides in the topic

    I disagree

    I also believe that if Mooney had said "I hope ye all vote FF" or "I hope we never have abortion in ireland" that the judgement would be the same......but I believe the figures in the poll would be very different


  • Options
    #398
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    It is, of course, a light afternoon magazine show, but when the presenter deliberately and very clumsily wades into current affairs. He's gonna be in trouble.

    Ah so they have cleverly ascribed wishing gay people to get married to being a political view not a well wish. So he cannot comment gay people marrying in a positive light...


  • Options
    #399
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    efb wrote: »
    Ah so they have cleverly ascribed wishing gay people to get married to being a political view not a well wish. So he cannot comment gay people marrying in a positive light...

    At least not without immediately giving air time to one of the usual shower citing debunked studies and predicting the fall of civilisation.


  • Options
    #400
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Originally Posted by jimgoose
    My problem is that the ability to effectively silence the broadcast media on certain issues at the flick of an email is something that should not exist. The only people who are inclined to use it are those who are inclined to abuse it.

    but the media is not silenced

    rather they have to operate in a certain way

    there is nothing stopping Mooney or anyone else having a discussion on same-sex marriage once it operates in a balanced way


  • Options
    #401
    StudentDad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,495 ✭✭✭StudentDad


    efb wrote: »
    Ah so they have cleverly ascribed wishing gay people to get married to being a political view not a well wish. So he cannot comment gay people marrying in a positive light...

    Shhhh you might foster discussion. Can't have that. Next you'll be advocating people should think for themselves :)

    SD


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #402
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    Grayson wrote: »
    Do you think he'd be wrong to state that global warming is real?

    No, I don't.

    But climate change is not about to be the subject of a referendum.

    And I would support anyone's right to complain to the BAI if they felt he had behaved inappropriately.


  • Options
    #403
    FloatingVoter
    Registered Users Posts: 6,133 ✭✭✭FloatingVoter


    The logistics of finding someone opposed to same-sex marriage is impossible, You'll find the odd crackpot but quickly find that they also believe Elvis is living in Leitrim and the anal probe that the Martians gave him was quite relaxing really.
    Getting balanced opinions is important for political debate - no point in having Paisley on ranting without Adams spouting nonsense at the same time.
    The Broadcasting Complaints would maybe need a few TV producers or people who have actually been involved in a debating society at secondary school on board.
    What will happen next - a Holocaust survivor not allowed to share their experiences unless a card carrying Nazi is also present. Jeremy Kyle would take that as a pitch but it doesn't mean anyone would watch it.


  • Options
    #404
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    No, I don't.

    But climate change is not about to be the subject of a referendum.

    And I would support anyone's right to complain to the BAI if they felt he had behaved inappropriately.

    The ruling has nothing to do with it being a referendum. Referendum rules only apply after the vote is announced and campaigning officially begins.

    The rule allows this to be applied to ANY subject of public debate


  • Options
    #405
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    efb wrote: »
    Ah so they have cleverly ascribed wishing gay people to get married to being a political view not a well wish. So he cannot comment gay people marrying in a positive light...

    He can, of course, but he can't say:



    "I hope it does come in"

    With regard to a pending referendum.


  • Options
    #406
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2014/08/15/gay-couples-not-allowed-appear-on-radio-without-a-bigot-rules-bai/

    Good old WW


  • Options
    #407
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    Mooney said:



    Clearly indicating his preference for the result of next years referendum.

    He was wrong to do this on his radio show.

    To be fair I can see where you're coming from but if people are having trouble distinguishing between Mooney's own opinion and the official position of RTE by a fairly innocuous remark he made at the end of an interview on his show then they are fairly lacking in the grey matter department.


  • Options
    #408
    GLaDOS
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 23,223 Mod ✭✭✭✭GLaDOS


    http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2014/08/15/gay-couples-not-allowed-appear-on-radio-without-a-bigot-rules-bai/


    Edit: dammit efb

    Cake, and grief counseling, will be available at the conclusion of the test



  • Options
    #409
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    He can, of course, but he can't say:




    With regard to a pending referendum.

    I heard DJs give opinion on Blasphemy without challenge and there is a pending referendum on that- where now the BAI???


  • Options
    #410
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    P_1 wrote: »
    To be fair I can see where you're coming from but if people are having trouble distinguishing between Mooney's own opinion and the official position of RTE by a fairly innocuous remark he made at the end of an interview on his show then they are fairly lacking in the grey matter department.

    RTE shouldn't have an official position on SSM and Derek should have kept his to himself.

    It was a mistake on his part, and he's been given a slap on the wrist from the BAI for it.


  • Options
    #411
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    efb wrote: »
    I heard DJs give opinion on Blasphemy without challenge and there is a pending referendum on that- where now the BAI???

    Anyone is free to make a complaint to the BAI.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #412
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    SpaceTime wrote: »
    The ruling has nothing to do with it being a referendum. Referendum rules only apply after the vote is announced and campaigning officially begins.

    while outside the rules for when the referendum is actually going on, what Mooney said is related to an upcoming referendum, which imo politicised his comments


  • Options
    #413
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    Anyone is free to make a complaint to the BAI.

    You'd have to be a special kind of crackpot to do so though.


  • Options
    #414
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    And know how to play the system.


  • Options
    #415
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    RTE shouldn't have an official position on SSM and Derek should have kept his to himself.

    It was a mistake on his part, and he's been given a slap on the wrist from the BAI for it.

    Ah in fairness, broadcasting would be an awfully boring thing if the presenters were to keep their opinions to themselves. Now I'm not proposing a Fox News type of sham but we also want to avoid a sterile 'here are the facts with me passing no comment one way or the other' type of show either. A healthy middle ground should always be strived for.


  • Options
    #416
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    P_1 wrote: »
    To be fair I can see where you're coming from but if people are having trouble distinguishing between Mooney's own opinion and the official position of RTE by a fairly innocuous remark he made at the end of an interview on his show then they are fairly lacking in the grey matter department.

    but that is exactly what all this rules and guidelines are about

    Broadcasters have a voice, an inflience and an audience, and a duty to be balanced


  • Options
    #417
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,888 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    efb wrote: »
    I heard DJs give opinion on Blasphemy without challenge and there is a pending referendum on that- where now the BAI???

    did you submit a complaint?


  • Options
    #418
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    TerrorFirmer wrote: »
    That's so ridiculously vague and nothing like the situation under discussion.

    People don't seem to realize that the issue is with current affairs content and objectivity and nothing whatsoever to do with gay people. The same thing could have, and has in the past, have happened if he did the same thing with any other imaginable current affairs topic.

    So if he had said, on September 11th 2001, that the attack was a despicable atrocity against innocent civilians, would the BAI have upheld a complaint that his statement lacked objectivity? :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #419
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Should all gay couples be kept off air until after the referendum incase it's seen as undue influence????


  • Options
    #420
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Some might say people are using the rules to "hide the gays"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #421
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    RTE shouldn't have an official position on SSM and Derek should have kept his to himself.

    It was a mistake on his part, and he's been given a slap on the wrist from the BAI for it.

    RTE give a platform to people to speak on the radio. If I make a comment here about marriage, does that make it an official position of Boards?
    This particular paradigm when applied to the media is in my view one of the most insidious. The provider of a platform is not responsible for what people use that platform for.


Advertisement