RTE Cutbacks The Plan

thenightman

Keep the investigative and current affairs output. Keep Radio 1 & Lyric. Increase the scope for nationwide creative talent searches like 'Storyland' which stops the stagnation of the same old Kathryn Thomas, Vogue Williams etc getting handy work repeatedly and encourages innovation from talented, creative people across the country who currently have little or no way to get involved with the national broadcaster, unless they know someone. Increase documentary output.

Stop paying for all the imports that are available elsewhere, and that are shown at ridiculous times anyway.

H3llR4iser

elperello wrote: »

Sorry I didn't mean to come across as defending the current arrangement.

As far as I'm concerned I'd do away with the licence and pay for public service broadcasting out of general taxation. Job done, no licence, no collection, no inspectors, no hassle.

But then I believe PSB is a good thing worth having and needs to be paid for.

Just on the monitors. I never heard of a prosecution for having a computer monitor without a licence.

General taxation I'd agree 100% - either it is a public service and it's founded via tax, or it is a product paid by voluntary subscribers. End of it.

I know of somebody a who got into a bit of bother for a projector a few years ago, when the Saorview launched - the inspector kept insisting "you can connect a Saorview box to it, you need to pay". The letter of the law doesn't totally exclude it. They ended up just paying so not to be bothered with court etc.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Debate going on on Radio 1 now. Admitting that they are getting absolutely no support on social media.

lisasimpson

Is Dee going to give up her 25k car allowance along with a pay cut

boring accountant

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

They could sell their D4 site for €200 million easily.

Then relocate to an inexpensive part of the country and focus on running one good radio station and an on-demand subscription-based streaming service.

Public service remit sorted. Then they can go away, stop whinging, and leave people alone who don't want to watch RTE.

More than that I'd say.

They'd never downscale to that extent. It's called "empire building". It's an agency cost. The tendency of management to increase the size of the business even if it reduces overall profitability because they get to skim off the top of a bigger pot.

elperello

H3llR4iser wrote: »

General taxation I'd agree 100% - either it is a public service and it's founded via tax, or it is a product paid by voluntary subscribers. End of it.

I know of somebody a who got into a bit of bother for a projector a few years ago, when the Saorview launched - the inspector kept insisting "you can connect a Saorview box to it, you need to pay". The letter of the law doesn't totally exclude it. They ended up just paying so not to be bothered with court etc.

Actually I was wary of mentioning the general taxation idea for fear of being lynched. Surprised they haven't come for me yet.

I've suggested it on a couple of other discussions to general derision and total rejection.

It's probably too simple and straightforward to be a runner.

On the monitor, I think if they tested it front of a judge they would have got a result but I can understand somebody not wanting the bother.

BDI

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

Debate going on on Radio 1 now. Admitting that they are getting absolutely no support on social media.

Im surprised if they have a social media account. Probably a bebo page.

Damien360

H3llR4iser wrote: »

General taxation I'd agree 100% - either it is a public service and it's founded via tax, or it is a product paid by voluntary subscribers. End of it.

General taxation. Good god no. I can see a scenario of public interest arguments used as justification for an ever increasing budget. And sure isn’t it only x percent of government income.

RTE is long out of control. Pat Kenny left and more than once outlined the ridiculous practices that constrain it and cost it a fortune. Salaries across the board need chopping. They are paying stars on the basis on revenue they bring in (apparently) as stated by RTE. But they never looked at costs. The income stream was never going to keep up with the cost inflation of salaries in particular.

Have a listen to a standard RTE radio program at the end when the staff get listed. It’s huge compared to let’s say TodayFM. It would be unfair to compare with a regional station so todayFm would be appropriate. Each of those people have to get paid. And they never leave.

General taxation would allow them argue inflationary increases and never look at costs. Budgets mean nothing when the state is picking up the bill.

BDI

The tv license should be used to pay for Irish water.

elperello

BDI wrote: »

The tv license should be used to pay for Irish water.

And then we can run the electricity off the gas and the gas off the electricity.

Turbohymac

Now looks on the rte news app. like leo and the lads are going to bail out rte for the good of the nation.. sounds just like the Anglo bank bail out again we all know how that went...

end of the road

10000maniacs wrote: »

No the license is an RTE tax. Much like income tax, a tax you have to pay if you have a job/tv.

no it's a terrestrial television reception tax, for which the revenue collected from it goes to rte.

Calhoun wrote: »

How about those who love it pay for it, and the rest of us don't have to subsidize the crap.

If my options are no public broadcasting or RTE being a cash cow for the elite cohort in Montrose i will sacrifice public broadcasting.

that's not how paying for public services work. we have to pay regardless of whether we use them so that they will be available if we need to use them.

BDI wrote: »

It should just be 9 or 10 people working in shifts reading the news with 10-20 investigative people.

No bells, no whistles state tv. It should have no interference from government provided it does its utmost to report the truth.

The rest can be provided by independent channels.

only some of the rest can be provided by independent channels. mainly what the independent channels already provide.
the likes of lyric, 2xm and rte pulse couldn't be provided by independent channels under the current regulatory environment.

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

D4’s said on the news that they had looked at that option but it was ruled out

BY THEMSELVES

These decisions need to be taken out of an insolvent companies hands

they don't.
the company will know as to whether selling up and moving elsewhere is viable or not, and realistically, it's not as by the time they would build a purpose built campus and equip it, they will quite likely end up wiping out a serious amount of what they got with whatever left only being able to plug the shortfall for a small time.

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

They could sell their D4 site for €200 million easily.

Then relocate to an inexpensive part of the country and focus on running one good radio station and an on-demand subscription-based streaming service.

Public service remit sorted. Then they can go away, stop whinging, and leave people alone who don't want to watch RTE.

no, not public service remit sorted as the 1 channel will only be able to appeal to some, whereas a number of services will appeal to more people. it's increasing services and appealing to a greater audience that rte need to be doing.

Duane Dibbley

RTE remind me of the FAI

MrAbyss

I have a YouTube channel that gets millions of views a year. I am probably more famous around the world than any of RTE's 'stars'. I work a regular day job and make videos on the weekend.

I don't need the License Fee. RTE exist in a world that no longer exists.

sligeach

Caught up more on +1 about Prime Time. W+nk€r$. It was just point scoring between FF and FG. The whole section is a joke, including the host. Farcical! Watch it! I'm no major fan of the government, but look at the entitlement.

elperello

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

RTE remind me of the FAI

Greyhound racing would be closer €16.8 million this year.

https://www.thejournal.ie/poll-greyh...99146-Jun2019/

end of the road

Damien360 wrote: »

General taxation. Good god no. I can see a scenario of public interest arguments used as justification for an ever increasing budget. And sure isn’t it only x percent of government income.

RTE is long out of control. Pat Kenny left and more than once outlined the ridiculous practices that constrain it and cost it a fortune. Salaries across the board need chopping. They are paying stars on the basis on revenue they bring in (apparently) as stated by RTE. But they never looked at costs. The income stream was never going to keep up with the cost inflation of salaries in particular.

Have a listen to a standard RTE radio program at the end when the staff get listed. It’s huge compared to let’s say TodayFM. It would be unfair to compare with a regional station so todayFm would be appropriate. Each of those people have to get paid. And they never leave.

General taxation would allow them argue inflationary increases and never look at costs. Budgets mean nothing when the state is picking up the bill.

comparing rte to today fm wouldn't even be fair as today fm is a commercial pop music station where as rte radio is for the most part a number of public service stations, most of 2fm asside.

MrAbyss wrote: »

I have a YouTube channel that gets millions of views a year. I am probably more famous around the world than any of RTE's 'stars'. I work a regular day job and make videos on the weekend.

I don't need the License Fee. RTE exist in a world that no longer exists.

to be fair the world they operate in very much still exists. the world where there has been quite an amount of choice for decades and where the audiences became more fragmented.
now terrestrial tv audiences are declining but that is across the board.

bobbyss

To think that Ray Darcy has a higher salary than Trump. ( I know. I know. )

trixiebust

Why not just stop importing crap TV shows everyone has seen before? Why are the likes of RTE2 trying to compete with UK stations with re runs of TBBT?

That's not public service broadcasting, it's trying to have your cake & eat it too. But Dee Forbes appears on six one telling us, 'the future of PSB is under threat'.

They are living in Cuckoo land up there.

Calhoun

end of the road wrote: »

that's not how paying for public services work. we have to pay regardless of whether we use them so that they will be available if we need to use them.

Is it really a public service considering that its propped up by advertisement revenue and pays such high amount on incomes?

I am not against the concept of a public service charge but i am against propping up a gravy train like RTE. The public service charge can be distributed elsewhere.

trixiebust wrote: »

Why not just stop importing crap TV shows everyone has seen before? Why are the likes of RTE2 trying to compete with UK stations with re runs of TBBT?

That's not public service broadcasting, it's trying to have your cake & eat it too. But Dee Forbes appears on six one telling us, 'the future of PSB is under threat'.

They are living in Cuckoo land up there.

You also have to look at the likes of eastenders, which is on nearly the same time as the UK and has ads.

Beggars belief they are trying to play the poor mouth now and from the looks of it they are suckering people right in. As i said those who want it should have to pay for it the rest of us can then pay for a more reasonable public broadcast.

end of the road

Calhoun wrote: »

Is it really a public service considering that its propped up by advertisement revenue and pays such high amount on incomes?

I am not against the concept of a public service charge but i am against propping up a gravy train like RTE. The public service charge can be distributed elsewhere.

much of it is very much a public service yes, the minority programming and current affairs.
the bought in stuff could be got rid of but that would require an acceptance of it being a public service broadcaster only, rather then the current expectation of it being both commercial and ps at the same time, which isn't working for anyone really.

Calhoun wrote: »

You also have to look at the likes of eastenders, which is on nearly the same time as the UK and has ads.

Beggars belief they are trying to play the poor mouth now and from the looks of it they are suckering people right in. As i said those who want it should have to pay for it the rest of us can then pay for a more reasonable public broadcast.

those who want what should pay for what though?
the bought in content rte provides? already available either free to air elsewhere or on already existing subscription packages which most probably have. forget about the home grown fluff they have as entertainment, nobody is going to pay to watch it and there isn't going to be a subscription part of rte anyway.
the only way forward is to cut out the non-ps parts which would be the bought in content, which i think, the vast majority of us would be happy with being done.

Calhoun

end of the road wrote: »

much of it is very much a public service yes, the minority programming and current affairs.
the bought in stuff could be got rid of but that would require an acceptance of it being a public service broadcaster only, rather then the current expectation of it being both commercial and ps at the same time, which isn't working for anyone really.



those who want what should pay for what though?
the bought in content rte provides? already available either free to air elsewhere or on already existing subscription packages which most probably have. forget about the home grown fluff they have as entertainment, nobody is going to pay to watch it and there isn't going to be a subscription part of rte anyway.
the only way forward is to cut out the non-ps parts which would be the bought in content, which i think, the vast majority of us would be happy with being done.

I am more than happy for them to cut back on all and be a public broadcaster only.

I think the expectation of it being a public broadcast and commercial one is something that they drive themselves, as the pay for the higher level staff definitely is more suited to a commercial organization.

Those who want it to be the hybrid gravy train mess can pay for it. I for one don't think its value for money and don't want to be subsidizing waste because people like certain aspects of what RTE provide.

end of the road

Calhoun wrote: »

I am more than happy for them to cut back on all and be a public broadcaster only.

I think the expectation of it being a public broadcast and commercial one is something that they drive themselves, as the pay for the higher level staff definitely is more suited to a commercial organization.

Those who want it to be the hybrid gravy train mess can pay for it. I for one don't think its value for money and don't want to be subsidizing waste because people like certain aspects of what RTE provide.

to be fair while rte drive it, because ultimately they do have to, the expectation of rte to be a hybrid is something that was forced and expected by successive governments.
i would be happy with the politicians being forced to stump up the cost of paying for that if it is what they want it to be but we would still be paying a tv license. perhapse the politicians themselves being forced to pay would actually give us a public service only broadcaster but god only knows.

Calhoun

end of the road wrote: »

to be fair while rte drive it, because ultimately they do have to, the expectation of rte to be a hybrid is something that was forced and expected by successive governments.
i would be happy with the politicians being forced to stump up the cost of paying for that if it is what they want it to be but we would still be paying a tv license. perhapse the politicians themselves being forced to pay would actually give us a public service only broadcaster but god only knows.

True enough, don't get me wrong i am not against public broadcasting as i believe its part of a good democracy. I am even fine with paying a TV license as long as its used for that purpose.

TallGlass2

trixiebust wrote: »

They are living in Cuckoo land up there.

Confirmed...

'RTÉ stars are worth as much as Taoiseach,' insists Forbes

"Let's be honest, these people work incredibly hard," she said

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rt-stars-are-worth-as-much-as-taoiseach-insists-forbes-38672630.html

lisasimpson

She reallly isnt doing the cause any favours there is she

odyssey06

In 2018 RTE received €189.1m of the total €221m licence fee collected which amounted to 86% of the overall amount.
That's enough money for a country of this size to fund any and all essential public service broadcasting functions.

There's no need for a device fee, no need for a licence fee increase, no need for funding it through general taxation - which I worry would mean in 5 years time RTE living it up like Hollywood of the 20s.

odyssey06

TallGlass2 wrote: »

Confirmed...
'RTÉ stars are worth as much as Taoiseach,' insists Forbes
"Let's be honest, these people work incredibly hard," she said
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rt-stars-are-worth-as-much-as-taoiseach-insists-forbes-38672630.html

Essential public service broadcasting does not involve paying 6 figure sums to Marian Finucane. What responsibilities does she have?

At this point Forbes has jumped the shark and the government should tell her so in no uncertain terms. Delusions worthy of ancien regime France here.

nkl12xtw5goz70

RTE has been savaged on social media over this latest round of moaning and guilt-tripping. People are annoyed at:

-- The outlandish salaries paid to top presenters

-- RTE's failure to live in the real world: It still operates with a state monopoly "gravy train" mentality even as the media landscape has changed utterly around it

-- Its failure to deliver a usable streaming app in 2019

-- The overall poor quality of its programming: Too few good shows, and too much fluff, repeats, and imported shows

-- Dee Forbes' approach to addressing RTE's financial position. Rather than innovating and restructuring, she has spent the first three years of her tenure trying to convince the government to extract €160/year from people who do not watch and do not want to watch RTE

-- RTE's lack of objectivity. Many see that RTE's programming is biased toward the left-wing agenda, with disproportionate coverage given to perennial socialist malcontents such as Paul Murphy and Richard Boyd Barrett. Even Pat Rabbitte formerly questioned why RTE, while giving extensive coverage to the campaign against water charges, hadn't produced any programmes "explaining why the public water system is on a knife edge; why our rivers are being polluted; why public health is threatened and our capacity to attract industry undermined and the options available to source the enormous investment needed to make it fit for purpose." We see similar bias in RTE's coverage of asylum seekers, immigration, Travellers, social welfare, and other issues. Leo Varadkar once noted that RTE's coverage of American politics amounted to a simplistic stance of "Republicans are bad and Democrats are good."

Unless RTE can address all of these issues, it's unlikely to be able to convince the public that it can function as a high-quality, cost-effective public broadcaster whose programming is objective and balanced.

Be right back

TallGlass2 wrote: »

Confirmed...

'RTÉ stars are worth as much as Taoiseach,' insists Forbes

"Let's be honest, these people work incredibly hard," she said

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rt-stars-are-worth-as-much-as-taoiseach-insists-forbes-38672630.html

What planet is she on? According to her, they have a stressful job. No, those in the health service do. Also, she should lead by example, taking more of a pay cut herself (10% to others' 15%).