RTE Cutbacks The Plan

Zird

Zird wrote: »

Enda Kilcullen is going to buy the RTE guide

Do you mean Enda O’Coineen?

BarryD2

Sports coverage has become very one dimensional. I'm all for covering national sports but GAA has too big a hold. Love to hear coverage of inter county games and so on during the championship season and the interesting parts of the league. But they often way beyond that, covering games that only a couple of hundred people would bother going to if that. Whoever runs sports programming in RTE needs a good kick up the arse to get them out of their comfort zones.

LiamoSail

RTE has numerous issues, has been badly managed and is an unnecessary burden on the tax payer.

That said, I have a huge sympathy for the 200 or so staff who stand to lose their jobs, particularly those who’s qualification and experience aren’t in high demand elsewhere. It must be an awful time for them.

RTE and their practice get a lot of bad press, but I’ve no doubt that there are good, hardworking capable people there, many of whom stand to lose their jobs, and possibly their careers with that. It’s wrong that so many people can be made redundant by a state funded company while they continue to pay the likes of Tuberty, D’Arcy and O’Callaghan what they do.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Boggles wrote: »

Streaming is about to get a whole lot more expensive for what is essentially a diluted product. Are people going to pay 5-6-7 subs to get their fix. No.

People will choose the services they want to watch, but costs will be driven down through price wars. Apple is now in the market with a $4.99 a month streaming service, which throws down the gauntlet to others.

RTE should be actively cherry picking the best of this content.

How exactly does RTE "cherry-pick" the best of Netflix's and Apple's content?

At least RTE produce 95% horsé**** on an infinitely smaller budget.

RTE wants people to pay €13.34 a month for the TV licence to watch ad-supported content, when they can pay less for Netflix and watch content with no ads. RTE's model is simply not attractive to consumers.

kippy

This may have been said already.
I have no issue paying an annual fee for public service broadcasting and all that entails - whether I use the service or not.
I'd rather the fee were lower and the organisation leaner but that's the same for any fee I pay.

What I see as the issue here is compliance. I am a compliant person in general and pay my bills/debts. RTE are now requesting that those who are compliant get screwed for a higher cost when RTE should be ensuring that those who aren't compliant get compliant - whether that is via an alternative method of fee collection or better compliance on existing fees.

The reality is the population of this country has increased as has the number of residences over the past number of years - as such there should be a larger number of "TV Sets" out there and as such a larger revenue stream for RTE. But instead of chasing that up properly, they want to screw those that do pay.
That's the issue I have and I don't really care too much around any arguments either side of that issue to be completely honest.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

If you have a television, its the law.

It's not illegal not to own a television.

NIMAN

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

People will choose the services they want to watch, but costs will be driven down through price wars. Apple is now in the market with a $4.99 a month streaming service, which throws down the gauntlet to others.



How exactly does RTE "cherry-pick" the best of Netflix's and Apple's content?



RTE wants people to pay €13.34 a month for the TV licence to watch ad-supported content, when they can pay less for Netflix and watch content with no ads. RTE's model is simply not attractive to consumers.

But you do know Netflix is not a public service broadcaster?

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

It's not illegal not to own a television.

If youre going to give strawman arguments like that I won't engage with you anymore.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Boggles wrote: »

It's not illegal not to own a television.

That is correct — but note that Forbes has been including households that do not have a television set in the €50 million figure she presents to government as revenue "lost" to RTE. Even though those households are not liable to pay the TV licence in the first place!

Boggles

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

People will choose the services they want to watch, but costs will be driven down through price wars. Apple is now in the market with a $4.99 a month streaming service, which throws down the gauntlet to others.

Doesn't matter, it's 4.99 more people will have to pay.

It will lead to illegal downloading.

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

How exactly does RTE "cherry-pick" the best of Netflix's and Apple's content?

If there is price war, costs will have to be offset, selling rights to terrestrial television makes since. AFAIK RTE have all ready purchased content from Netlix.

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

RTE wants people to pay €13.34 a month for the TV licence to watch ad-supported content, when they can pay less for Netflix and watch content with no ads. RTE's model is simply not attractive to consumers.

What you will start to see in the streaming world is ad supported and non ad supported at 2 different price points. Hulu all ready do this as do Youtube.

Boggles

NIMAN wrote: »

But you do know Netflix is not a public service broadcaster?

Again a point that gets lost in absolute lunatic comparisons.

BarryD2

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

RTE wants people to pay €13.34 a month for the TV licence to watch ad-supported content, when they can pay less for Netflix and watch content with no ads. RTE's model is simply not attractive to consumers.

How often do people have to repeat that RTE doesn't run the TV licence scheme! The government does, it's the law. You have a TV, you pay a licence.

If you let RTE at the licence, they'd probably double it!

The sooner a household 'media' charge comes in, the better. We do need a public broadcasting service and the public needs to pay for it. What's at issue is an efficient public broadcasting service that provides content and coverage of Irish affairs. Getting rid of the likes of Tubridy and other 'star' earners is a must - not needed and would set the tone.

Topgear on Dave

BarryD2 wrote: »

The sooner a household 'media' charge comes in, the better.

After the Irish water debacle? Good luck Water is an essential service.


RTE is just a "nice to have". Its not essential but RTE hasn't figured this out yet.

nkl12xtw5goz70

NIMAN wrote: »

But you do know Netflix is not a public service broadcaster?

I'm aware of that. But RTE is not a pure public service broadcaster either. It operates a hybrid public service and commercial model, drawing revenue both from the TV licence and from selling commercial advertising.

As more people are watching Netflix, Amazon, Sky, YouTube, etc., fewer are watching RTE, which affects how much it can charge for advertising slots.

Boggles

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

As more people are watching Netflix, Amazon, Sky, YouTube, etc., fewer are watching RTE, which affects how much it can charge for advertising slots.

Maybe then the answer is a tax on the alternatives which goes directly into funding public service telly.

To be fair RTE they are in a fairly unique situation with the level of competition been beamed in for mostly free.

Also we seem to become part of the United Kingdom when certain sports rights are been divided out.

That has never been adequately explained to me.

odyssey06

Boggles wrote: »

Again people need to start getting realistic with their comparisons.
We are firmly into why aren't Cork City winning the champions league nonsense.
The BBC spend more on online than RTE's entire budget.

I don't think you are being realistic either. Seems more in the territory of the impact of Premier League games and TV coverage on Cork City's crowds and TV audiences for the LOI. No point in the LOI pretending there is no Premier League or Sky Sports. RTE still seem to be stuck in 1988.

KildareP

Boggles wrote: »

Again people need to start getting realistic with their comparisons.

We are firmly into why aren't Cork City winning the champions league nonsense.

The BBC spend more on online than RTE's entire budget.

So what are you suggesting, don't bother doing anything and just carry on as they are now?

Because I think we can all agree that the current approach really isn't working out too well for them these last few years.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Boggles wrote: »

Maybe then the answer is a tax on the alternatives which goes directly into funding public service telly.

Well, people are already paying 23% VAT on their subscription to Netflix, etc.

You want even more tax levied?

The current bloated, inefficient incarnation of RTE simply cannot endure. The solution is not for the taxpayer to step in with more subsidies to keep the Montrose royalty on their lavish 6-figure salaries, but for RTE to adjust to the realities of the changed media landscape. It cannot go on behaving as a monopoly state broadcaster.

KildareP

NIMAN wrote: »

Only idiots are saying RTE should be as good as the BBC, Netflix, Sky etc. and there are lots of them online.

But my argument would be that people hosting a show on the radio for a handful of hours per week in Ireland shouldn't be earning half a million euro.

I think RTe make plenty of good TV and radio, but it is shockingly run with wages that should be reserved for the bigger British and US stations.

I'm not saying that RTÉ should be "as good as" Netflix or Sky - if that's the deduction that RTÉ are making out of feedback like mine, writing us off as idiots with ridiculous comparisons to bigger corporations, well then is it any wonder it is where it is?

RTÉ shouldn't be competing with them on the type of content Netflix and Sky do - that's not their remit.

But they need to be as good as them on platform access and this is where they are failing - badly.

If you don't have an off-air TV then you essentially don't have access to RTÉ TV services. The RTÉ Player doesn't work. It's totally unfit for purpose. The picture quality is poor. The only thing it ever manages to do well is play the pre-show advertisements - it frequently falls over as soon as it gets to the actual content. It crashes altogether when there's big events on.

When I can watch Netflix 4K, Amazon Prime 4K, Now TV in HD flawlessly, without so much as a blip, but any attempt to watch RTÉ is met with ads, crashes, stalling, more ads, buffering, pixellation, yet more ads, etc. then there's only so many times I'll try before I just give up on them altogether.

That's where RTÉ is finding itself amongst the upcoming generation.
They're not tuning in off-air and they're not bothering trying to access them online.

But hey, if you want to run with the counter argument that RTÉ is not the BBC, Netflix, Sky with their flawless online streaming in anything up to 4K, then why don't we just accept that and move everything back onto Standard Definition, Nicam Stereo with Aertel 888 for subtitles? We're not the BBC, Sky or Netflix so let's just not bother.

James Brown

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

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.

I was with you up until the right wing 'everyone is out to get us even though we control everything' rant. Does this coverage include Dobbo calling protesters idiots? Leo, an arrogant right winger himself, is a fan of Trump so he's hardly impartial. Also you'll see lots of talk on RTE being the mouthpiece of government so sounds like they might be in the middle on coverage.

Boggles

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

Well, people are already paying 23% VAT on their subscription to Netflix, etc.

You want even more tax levied?

I don't I posed the question going forward how it should paid for. It's not new, we have had "broadcast" charges for even the lowest level operators going back decades.

Unbiased public television needs to survive now more than other time in history really.

What they want to do in reality is to blanket the tax the internet effectively.

James Brown

The fun thing will be if the top salary, I hesitate to say 'earners', get wage cuts. We'll not hold our breath waiting on the BBC, CBS, Fox to come headhunting for them

Boggles

KildareP wrote: »

So what are you suggesting, don't bother doing anything and just carry on as they are now?

Absolutely not.

What I am saying is if people want services on par with the BBC, Sky, Netflix, etc.

Then the license may have to increase, something I am firmly against at the moment.

RTE need to go through every line surgically and brutally trim what isn't needed.

Boggles

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The fun thing will be if the top salary, I hesitate to say 'earners', get wage cuts. We'll not hold our breath waiting on the BBC, CBS, Fox to come headhunting for them

Well, I don't about that.

Craig Doyle got a job across the pond.

James Brown

Boggles wrote: »

Well, I don't about that.

Craig Doyle got a job across the pond.

Can you see mannequin come to life, (like the film, but less entertaining) Tubbs or 'with me forty coats and fifty pockets' Duffy getting a tea boy job anywhere outside of Ireland?

nkl12xtw5goz70

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I was with you up until the right wing 'everyone is out to get us even though we control everything' rant. Does this coverage include Dobbo calling protesters idiots? Leo, an arrogant right winger himself, is a fan of Trump so he's hardly impartial. Also you'll see lots of talk on RTE being the mouthpiece of government so sounds like they might be in the middle on coverage.

I quoted Pat Rabbitte above stating that RTE's coverage of the water charges issue was biased because it devoted far more time to the protests against the charges than the rationale for the charges. Given his affiliations with the Workers Party, Democratic Left, and the Labour Party, Rabbitte can hardly be termed a foaming-at-the-mouth right-winger.

As someone who has lived in the US, I agree with Varadkar's assessment that RTE's coverage of US politics tends to fall into a simplistic "Democrats good, Republicans bad" model. There is zero pretense to objectivity. Whenever US elections take place, RTE can be guaranteed to rally behind whomever the Democratic candidate is and demonize the Republican. This has nothing to do with Trump specifically—it's been going on for decades.

James Brown

Noemi Shapely Weakling wrote: »

I quoted Pat Rabbitte above stating that RTE's coverage of the water charges issue was biased because it devoted far more time to the protests against the charges than the rationale for the charges. Given his affiliations with the Workers Party, Democratic Left, and the Labour Party, Rabbitte can hardly be termed a foaming-at-the-mouth right-winger.

As someone who has lived in the US, I agree with Varadkar's assessment that RTE's coverage of US politics tends to fall into a simplistic "Democrats good, Republicans bad" model. There is zero pretense to objectivity. Whenever US elections take place, RTE can be guaranteed to rally behind whomever the Democratic candidate is and demonize the Republican. This has nothing to do with Trump specifically—it's been going on for decades.

The U.S. is a political basket case. It should be taken with a pinch of salt. How we view it or how RTE broadcast on it is from an Irish perspective.
People are anti-Trump because of what he is not because of supporting Democrats.
On the decades issue, very fond of Kennedy over here. Quite frankly, nobody wants to lay claim to a U.S. President who is 'human scum' and represents other 'human scum', his words.

KildareP

Boggles wrote: »

Absolutely not.

What I am saying is if people want services on par with the BBC, Sky, Netflix, etc.

Then the license may have to increase, something I am firmly against at the moment.

RTE need to go through every line surgically and brutally trim what isn't needed.

Yes - they absolutely need to do that.

Then pitch that plan as the selling point for a license fee increase.

Instead, all they're doing is screaming they need more money whilst threatening to shutter everything.

No plans to reform anything.

No plans to improve anything.

No intention to look at why they're largely irrelevant to most people aged under 30.

Essentially - pay us more money so we can keep the status quo or we're just going to have to start torching what's left.

The J Stands for Jay

KildareP wrote: »

Yes - they absolutely need to do that.

Then pitch that plan as the selling point for a license fee increase.

Instead, all they're doing is screaming they need more money whilst threatening to shutter everything.

No plans to reform anything.

No plans to improve anything.

No intention to look at why they're largely irrelevant to most people aged under 30.

Essentially - pay us more money so we can keep the status quo or we're just going to have to start torching what's left.

You mean "most people aged under 40".

nkl12xtw5goz70

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The U.S. is a political basket case. It should be taken with a pinch of salt. How we view it or how RTE broadcast on it is from an Irish perspective.
People are anti-Trump because of what he is not because of supporting Democrats.

As I said, it has nothing to do with Trump, because RTE's lack of objectivity on US politics has been going on for decades.

RTE were 100% behind Obama even as he was labeling Ireland a tax haven and pursuing policies designed to make foreign investment less appealing to US firms — policies that potentially could have impacted thousands of Irish jobs. Ireland has over 100,000 people in the direct employ of US multinationals, which also invest billions each year in Ireland. And yet Obama couldn't be criticized because he was a Democrat.

A simplistic, reflexive "Democrats good, Republicans bad" drives RTE's coverage of US politics — not a consideration of what's good for Ireland.