The Meaning of Life next week

Hotblack Desiato

Because her book mentions gayness, she wasn't allowed talk about it without an 'opponent' (:rolleyes:) being present

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/bai-ruling-on-marriage-equality-comments-stifles-ongoing-debate-1.2029836

I’ve spent two years working on it [her book] and I’m very proud of it. Now comes the time to talk about it. In light of these two BAI rulings, that’s the tricky bit. I have been told by national radio stations that in order to discuss this history book, there must be someone present who opposes rights for gay people. These are not editorial decisions. They are instructions from above. The utterly normal issue of civil marriage is being treated hysterically, and stations can’t risk getting another black mark from the BAI.

She is saying what broadcasters told her. In what way does her personal testimony of what happened to her need to be 'backed up' ?

expectationlost

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Because her book mentions gayness, she wasn't allowed talk about it without an 'opponent' (:rolleyes:) being present

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/bai-ruling-on-marriage-equality-comments-stifles-ongoing-debate-1.2029836



She is saying what broadcasters told her. In what way does her personal testimony of what happened to her need to be 'backed up' ?

she didn't name the broadcasters, and I think the Radio stations were misinterpreting the rules. I inherently disbelive anything any columnist writes particularily her as she's made mistakes in the past a refused to admit them.

Pherekydes

expectationlost wrote: »

she didn't name the broadcasters, and I think the Radio stations were misinterpreting the rules. I inherently disbelive anything any columnist writes particularily her as she's made mistakes in the past a refused to admit them.

She mentioned it was on Mooney Goes Wild, which I believe is on RTE 1.

expectationlost

Pherekydes wrote: »

She mentioned it was on Mooney Goes Wild, which I believe is on RTE 1.

no she mentioned Mooney Goes Wild she didn't say that was the programme she wanted to discuss her book on

Hotblack Desiato

expectationlost wrote: »

she didn't name the broadcasters

There are not very many national radio broadcasters.
We can rule out 2FM and probably TodayFM
4FM is a maybe.
But almost certainly she is talking about RTE Radio1 and Newstalk - she gives examples of feckwitted BAI decisions applicable to each of them in the article.

, and I think the Radio stations were misinterpreting the rules.

Perhaps, but it's up to the BAI to provide rules which are workable and don't unnecessarily restrict their editorial freedom. The broadcasters interpreted the rules in the light of the (bizarre) BAI decisions mentioned in the article.

I inherently disbelive anything any columnist writes

There's a big difference between opinion pieces and factual pieces, this is a factual piece as she is describing events she says happened to her. So are you saying she is lying and what is your evidence if so?

expectationlost

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

There are not very many national radio broadcasters.
We can rule out 2FM and probably TodayFM
4FM is a maybe.
But almost certainly she is talking about RTE Radio1 and Newstalk - she gives examples of feckwitted BAI decisions applicable to each of them in the article.




Perhaps, but it's up to the BAI to provide rules which are workable and don't unnecessarily restrict their editorial freedom. The broadcasters interpreted the rules in the light of the (bizarre) BAI decisions mentioned in the article.




There's a big difference between opinion pieces and factual pieces, this is a factual piece as she is describing events she says happened to her. So are you saying she is lying and what is your evidence if so?

Opinion http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/bai-ruling-on-marriage-equality-comments-stifles-ongoing-debate-1.2029836 i'd like her to provide some corroborating evidence

Hotblack Desiato

Well perhaps we can put her on the rack and see if she'll recant

It's certainly plausible given the BAI decisions, and it's a little odd that a fairly well-known journalist launching a book on a topic of much current interest would not be interviewed about it on the radio, obviously the author and publisher benefit from it but it's very cheap radio for the broadcaster and helps them fill up their 'current affairs' quota and maybe stir up the angry texter brigade too - win win - so why didn't it happen?

expectationlost

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Well perhaps we can put her on the rack and see if she'll recant

It's certainly plausible given the BAI decisions, and it's a little odd that a fairly well-known journalist launching a book on a topic of much current interest would not be interviewed about it on the radio, obviously the author and publisher benefit from it but it's very cheap radio for the broadcaster and helps them fill up their 'current affairs' quota and maybe stir up the angry texter brigade too - win win - so why didn't it happen?

did it not happen?, did she not go on those programmes?

Hotblack Desiato

Not to my knowledge and not according to the articles she's written.

Peregrinus

Sorry, I'm confused. Is her complaint that:

(a) an Iona representative was present on every single programme where her book was discussed, or

(b) that she was not present on every single programme where her book was discussed?

And, in either, is there any evidence (beyond her assertion) that this was so?

expectationlost

Peregrinus wrote: »

Sorry, I'm confused. Is her complaint that:

(a) an Iona representative was present on every single programme where her book was discussed, or

(b) that she was not present on every single programme where her book was discussed?

And, in either, is there any evidence (beyond her assertion) that this was so?

her complaint was that she was told by radio show produces that somebody else would have to be on the show to give a counter arguement when she was promoting her book (before the referendum period started) (not a reasonable request imho)

i suspect she may have eventually gone on those programmes

Peregrinus

But was this just one particular programme that she was going on, or was she given the impression that this was a rule that would apply to every occasion on which her book was discussed?

I could easily see a situation where a producer wants a bit of of biffo on the show, and so brings in someone with a contrary view, and tries to keep the author onside by saying that "my hands are tied", or some such thing. I'm not saying that that is what happened here, but there does seem to be some distance between what Mullally is saying she was told were the rules , and what others say the rules are.

expectationlost

Peregrinus wrote: »

But was this just one particular programme that she was going on, or was she given the impression that this was a rule that would apply to every occasion on which her book was discussed?

I could easily see a situation where a producer wants a bit of of biffo on the show, and so brings in someone with a contrary view, and tries to keep the author onside by saying that "my hands are tied", or some such thing. I'm not saying that that is what happened here, but there does seem to be some distance between what Mullally is saying she was told were the rules , and what others say the rules are.

i think more then one producer said it was the what they were being told by the BAI, and what they were inferring from the decisions of the BAI she mentioned.

my impression is that book authors are mainly invited on by themselves (although it may be changing now), if they do a review of the book later they may have more then one person their to give a range of views.

I understand her point that her book was partly personal and it would be unreasonable for her to come on and tell her story and have to debate somebody else about it, she could debate somebody at some other time if they want.

although book authors are selling their wares,but radio and TV need content (between their own ads ) and this gives them some, maybe a programme needs some sort of balance to be more then just being a commercial for a book, but the presenter can do that Im not sure it needs means a potentially hostile counter guest