Ray D'arcy on RTE Radio 1 **Mod Warning post 1, 1263, 1610**

bobbyss

L1011 wrote:

Can't keep himself on-air, turns in Partridge-lite at times, can't stop himself sighing when he doesn't agree with a guest, reliant on a few regular prop-topics to keep the show going. All extremely valid complaints.

Brendan Bendar wrote:

Surely Ray should have checked the prononciation of Killimordaly before interviewing Shannon Keady?

Brendan Bendar wrote:

It's the small things that find him out.

I didn't hear the program but this annoys me a lot. A newsreader would (and should) prepare the news by getting any tricky pronunciations correct. (Remember the Icelandic volcano a few years ago? ). It's symptomatic that Ray would do that. A lack of professionalism. I suppose he played on it? It's a mark of respect to get those things right. I don't think that's a small thing at all.

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

Why do you both feel the need to endorse and use the term "non-entity", to describe someone, who might not be as high profile a celebrity as you'd like to see on the show?

Non entity is described in

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/nonentity

as "a person or thing with no special or interesting qualities; an unimportant person or thing".

Just because the participants might not be as high profile type of celebrities, as you consider acceptable, doesn't mean they can be described as "a person or thing with no special or interesting qualities; an unimportant person or thing".

Do you consider yourselves "non-entities" on the basis that you might not be celebrities?

Do you see any distinction between the CELEBRITY Operation Transformation and Operation Transformation participants? If not, there is no point explaining things further to you as you're being deliberately obtuse and it's there for all to see

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Do you see any distinction between the CELEBRITY Operation Transformation and Operation Transformation participants? If not, there is no point explaining things further to you as you're being deliberately obtuse and it's there for all to see

There is a difference, in that the celebrity Operation Transformation includes participants who have appeared in television before, on other shows, in talk shows, radio, or in newspapers, or in music, comedy, and other areas, but I still wouldn't call people who you consider not to be some high profile level of celebrities as "non-entities".

Do you consider the participants of the non celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities".

Would you describe them as "a person or thing with no special or interesting qualities; an unimportant person or thing".

If you don't, then why do you describe people who participate in Celebrity Transformation as "non-entities", just because they might not be as high profile a celebrity, as you think should be on the show?

If you have not heard of most of the participants on the celebrity Operation Transformation, and you know nothing about them, well then, how can you state with any authority, that they are "non-entities"?

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

There is a difference, in that the celebrity Operation Transformation includes participants who have appeared in television before, on other shows, in talk shows, radio, or in newspapers, or in music, comedy, and other areas, but I still wouldn't call people who you consider not to be some high profile level of celebrities as "non-entities".

Do you consider the participants of the non celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities".

Would you describe them as "a person or thing with no special or interesting qualities; an unimportant person or thing".

If you don't, then why do you describe people who participate in Celebrity Transformation as "non-entities", just because they might not be as high profile a celebrity, as you think should be on the show?

If you have not heard of most of the participants on the celebrity Operation Transformation, and you know nothing about them, well then, how can you state with any authority, that they are "non-entities"?

I do not consider the participants of the non celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities".

I do consider the participants of Celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities"

Is this now clear to you ?

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

I do not consider the participants of the non celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities".

I do consider the participants of Celebrity Operation Transformation as "non-entities"

Is this now clear to you ?

It is very clear to me that you hold that viewpoint, but what's also clear to me, is that you have nothing to back up your opinion, if you know nothing about the participants.

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

It is very clear to me that you hold that viewpoint, but what's also clear to me, is that you have nothing to back up your opinion, if you know nothing about the participants.

Since it is my viewpoint it is entirely valid to me.

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Since it is my viewpoint it is entirely valid to me.

A viewpoint with nothing to back up that viewpoint.

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

A viewpoint with nothing to back up that viewpoint.

Of course it does. The very definition of words entirely supports it.

Your difficulties seem to stem from your inability to understand the term 'celebrity'.

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Of course it does. The very definition of words entirely supports it.

Your difficulties seem to stem from your inability to understand the term 'celebrity'.

The issue is why you feel that you can deem people that you don't even know, as "non-entities".

Brendan Bendar

horseburger wrote: »

It is very clear to me that you hold that viewpoint, but what's also clear to me, is that you have nothing to back up your opinion, if you know nothing about the participants.

The boy Oxo is perfectly correct, you seem to be anxious to confront everyone on every bit of prose they input here, rightly or wrongly?

People who want to stay on topic will be carded for this unfairly, could you concentrate on the thread topic please ?

Brendan Bendar

Jaysus, lad is jumping out of his skin with a U2 new effort,have t heard him so animated for a while.

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

The issue is why you feel that you can deem people that you don't even know, as "non-entities".

I feel I can because I can and have done so. Simple as that. QED

horseburger

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The boy Oxo is perfectly correct, you seem to be anxious to confront everyone on every bit of prose they input here, rightly or wrongly?

People who want to stay on topic will be carded for this unfairly, could you concentrate on the thread topic please ?

I did not confront everyone. I asked you and the other poster why you both feel that it is ok to refer to people, that neither of you know much about, as "non-entities", and neither of you, have given an answer to justify calling people "non-entities".

hullaballoo

Moderator: Brendan Bendar, Jobs OXO, horseburger (and anyone else involved,) please stop derailing this thread with the discussion of celebrities/non-entities.

goochy

horseburger - you must have ate too much of them or are related to Farcy ? remember this is national radio not local radio and hes getting paid about 400k between tv show and radio show - he should be a pro. but hes most definitely not

PeterTheNinth

Ray did all his research on Wikipedia as usual.

Ray: "Your daughters are 10 and 8.."
David: "You are working from old notes, they are 15 and 13, Ray".

mountain

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Ray did all his research on Wikipedia as usual.

Ray: "Your daughters are 10 and 8.."
David: "You are working from old notes, they are 15 and 13, Ray".

Very poorly prepared, again

mountain

Ask me some thing interesting Ray, for gods sake,

400k a year and even the guest is frustrated

thesandeman

Ray: "You wrote it 20 years ago".
David: "19".
Ray: "But you wrote it 20...."
David: "No, 19".

horseburger

goochy wrote: »

horseburger - you must have ate too much of them or are related to Farcy ? remember this is national radio not local radio and hes getting paid about 400k between tv show and radio show - he should be a pro. but hes most definitely not

No, not related.

You don't have to be related to him to notice that people are criticising him for the sake of it, at every opportunity, including on things like the guests he has on the show, by making ignorant comments about the guests on the show.

Jobs OXO

thesandeman wrote: »

Ray: "You wrote it 20 years ago".
David: "19".
Ray: "But you wrote it 20...."
David: "No, 19".

Why does he have to be so ignorant ? Can he just not accept when he is wrong?

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Why does he have to be so ignorant ? Can he just not accept when he is wrong?

All he was asking was that the music might have been recorded a good few months, perhaps the year before, before it was officially released on the album. That's all.

For example, according to the entry on wikipedia, White Ladder was re-released on another label, following it's first release on David Gray's own label.

On the All Music page, there is a listing of the different releases of the album, and it states that there was a release of the album in March 1999.

According to the All Music entry there were two subsequent releases of the album in 2000, on two different labels, RCA and ATO, after it was first released on IHT Records in 1998.

http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/white-ladder-9-track-import-mr0001498018

and then a release of the album in 2000 on a different label:

http://www.allmusic.com/album/white-ladder-mw0000055318/releases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Ladder

"White Ladder is the fourth studio album by English folk singer-songwriter David Gray. It was first released in November 1998 through Gray's own record label, IHT Records, but failed to chart. On 1 May 2000, the album was re-released by Dave Matthews' label ATO Records and debuted at number 69 on the UK Albums Chart, before climbing to number one on 5 August 2001, more than a year later. White Ladder produced five singles, including the hit "Babylon", which ignited interest in the album and shot Gray to worldwide fame".

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

All he was asking was that the music might have been recorded a good few months, perhaps the year before, before it was officially released on the album. That's all.

For example, according to the entry on wikipedia, White Ladder was re-released on another label, following it's first release on David Gray's own label.

On the All Music page, there is a listing of the different releases of the album, and it states that there was a release of the album in March 1999.

According to the All Music entry there were two subsequent releases of the album in 2000, on two different labels, RCA and ATO, after it was first released on IHT Records in 1998.

http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/white-ladder-9-track-import-mr0001498018

and then a release of the album in 2000 on a different label:

http://www.allmusic.com/album/white-ladder-mw0000055318/releases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Ladder

"White Ladder is the fourth studio album by English folk singer-songwriter David Gray. It was first released in November 1998 through Gray's own record label, IHT Records, but failed to chart. On 1 May 2000, the album was re-released by Dave Matthews' label ATO Records and debuted at number 69 on the UK Albums Chart, before climbing to number one on 5 August 2001, more than a year later. White Ladder produced five singles, including the hit "Babylon", which ignited interest in the album and shot Gray to worldwide fame".

Why can't he just accept the first clarification ? Does he not believe his guest? Why does he feel the need to be right ALL THE TIME?

thesandeman

He wasn't asking him. He was telling him. That's the problem.

goochy

If I made as many **** ups as he did I wouldn't get away with it and I don't earn any where near what he does.
We are intitled to expect professionalism for that money - if the news reader made numerous mistakes everytime they read news it would be tolerated so why should we out up with it with Ray.

his voice is his supposed skill and yet he says the wrong thing all the time.

SEPT 23 1989

horseburger wrote: »

No, not related.

You don't have to be related to him to notice that people are criticising him for the sake of it, at every opportunity, including on things like the guests he has on the show, by making ignorant comments about the guests on the show.

We end up behind bars if we dont pay for this cr@p

horseburger

thesandeman wrote: »

He wasn't asking him. He was telling him. That's the problem.

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Why can't he just accept the first clarification ? Does he not believe his guest? Why does he feel the need to be right ALL THE TIME?

He didn't tell him. He asked him.

After David Gray played Babylon live, Ray D'Arcy said "It's hard to believe, so you would have recorded that 20 years ago, because it was released in 1998, would you have? Does that make sense?"

David Gray replied "19 years ago".

Ray D'Arcy said "Yeah, but did you record it the year before?"

David Gray said "No".

Ray D'Arcy said "Right, OK".

He just asked him when the White Ladder album was recorded. Ray D'Arcy did not question David Gray, or contest, or challenge David Gray's answer, in the way that you are both suggesting.

He just asked David Gray when the music was recorded, in relation to when it was released in 1998.

I think what Ray D'Arcy was doing, when he asked him when Babylon - and the album White Ladder - was recorded, was simply starting the interview to discuss how successful an album it was for David Gray.

I think he asked the question about when it was recorded, in a good natured way, to expand on how successful the album was for David Gray. He wasn't trying to catch David Gray out.

Later in the interview, Ray D'Arcy asked David Gray if he was considering doing a tour to mark the 20th anniversary of the release of the White Ladder album, and David Gray responded positively.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_21229688_19148_06-09-2017_

Here is a Newstalk item about the album
http://www.newstalk.com/Cultural-Toolbox:-David-Grays-White-Ladder-to-success

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

He didn't tell him. He asked him.

After David Gray played Babylon live, Ray D'Arcy said "It's hard to believe, so you would have recorded that 20 years ago, because it was released in 1998, would you have? Does that make sense?"

David Gray replied "19 years ago".

Ray D'Arcy said "Yeah, but did you record it the year before?"

David Gray said "No".

Ray D'Arcy said "Right, OK".

He just asked him when the White Ladder album was recorded. Ray D'Arcy did not question David Gray, or contest or challenge David Gray's answer, in the way that you are both suggesting.

He just asked David Gray when the music was recorded, in relation to when it was released in 1998.

I think what Ray D'Arcy was doing, when he asked him when Babylon - and the album White Ladder - was recorded, was simply starting the interview to discuss how successful an album it was for David Gray.

I think he asked the question about when it was recorded, in a good natured way, to expand on how successful the album was for David Gray. He wasn't trying to catch David Gray out.

Later in the interview, Ray D'Arcy asked David Gray if he was considering doing a tour to mark the 20th anniversary of the release of the White Ladder album, and David Gray responded positively.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_21229688_19148_06-09-2017_

Here is a Newstalk item about the album
http://www.newstalk.com/Cultural-Toolbox:-David-Grays-White-Ladder-to-success

He aggressively told him TWICE. Darcy almost sounded angry. I think his ego took a blow that he was wrong. He really should be used to it at this stage given the amount of mistakes he makes

horseburger

Jobs OXO wrote: »

He aggressively told him TWICE. Darcy almost sounded angry. I think his ego took a blow that he was wrong. He really should be used to it at this stage given the amount of mistakes he makes

You really are exaggerating. I think that you know that you are exaggerating.

There was no aggression at all. The interview was good natured throughout.

If Ray D'Arcy had displayed aggression, David Gray wouldn't have been so chatty and responsive in his answers.

What does "almost sounded angry" mean? Either someone is angry or they are not.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_21229688_19148_06-09-2017_

Jobs OXO

horseburger wrote: »

You really are exaggerating. I think that you know that you are exaggerating.

There was no aggression at all. The interview was good natured throughout.

If Ray D'Arcy had displayed aggression, David Gray wouldn't have been so chatty and responsive in his answers.

What does "almost sounded angry" mean? Either someone is angry or they are not.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_21229688_19148_06-09-2017_

Tending towards angry. Getting to boiling point. Just managed to catch himself before he exploded.

You seem very poor at picking up on these things.