Defund RTE

rightmove

kenmm wrote: »

Cancel culture really does annoy the sh!t out if me, it's quite depressing really.

cancelling rte is cancelling cancel culture. They have totally one sided debates and are very biased. (many examples provided)

paying for them is a big issue

kenmm

rightmove wrote: »

(many examples provided)

I counted one. It's getting dogmatic at this stage.

elperello

rightmove wrote: »

respect your opinion. I too used to believe in PBS but not anymore. Too biased and too expensive

Thank you.

I really sincerely believe that the only future for TV as a medium lies in PBS.

If it is left to commercial interests it will die.

kenmm

elperello wrote: »

If it is left to commercial interests it will die.

I think this is key, and especially if we fast forward 5-15 years when god knows what the political landscape will look like.

I do think that there should be reform when it comes to how much it costs and how we pay for it.

pythonfoot

GT89 wrote: »

Having people like the Professor Delores Cahill and Marcus De Brun who have different view about the lockdown and masks for example instead of constantly having Luke O'Neill and Sam McConkey on the air would be a good start. Allow us to talk about thing like Hydroxyclorquine aswell

Best to stay on your YouTube algorithm for crackpots . Leave the tv to the grown ups.

rightmove

kenmm wrote: »

I think this is key, and especially if we fast forward 5-15 years when god knows what the political landscape will look like.

I do think that there should be reform when it comes to how much it costs and how we pay for it.

I think its gone too far.

We are paying for a public broadcaster that acts like a privately funded one!

end of the road

Geuze wrote: »

When I discuss social/economic issues with my friend, an RTE employee, I sometimes ask why they don't report on such an issue, or report a certain aspect of an issue. He often replies with:

"but you can't say that"

meaning that although what I said is true, they won't report that side of a story.


I don't know what more evidence you need.


An RTE employee stating directly to me, and others, in friendly conversation, that true aspects of Irish society can not be stated on RTE, due to the current culture.


This all harks back to an underlying philosophy.

They don't ask the hard questions.

Example: Margaret Cash, or any other homeless person, with very young babies

RTE never ask:

(1) where is your husband?
(2) where is the father of your children? Why isn't he supporting you?
(3) why did you have another baby during homelessness?

Obviously, there aren't enough house, and rents are way too high.


This applies in other media, and applies in other areas.


A newspaper interviewed an AS who was living here, who admitted in the interview that they returned back to their country of origin on holiday, and the reporter did not challenge why somebody fleeing persecution would return there.

they don't ask such questions because they are irrelevant and the answers are none of your business. it's that simple.

Geuze wrote: »

I agree with your description of RTE, yes.

But I do see a problem with it being tilted to the left.

Surely it should have a responsibility to show both sides of a discussion / debate?

it does have such a responsibility and does so where possible.
however the reality is that in some cases there just aren't individuals of a certain quality to put forward views supporting one side of an argument and therefore rte cannot give them a platform as 1 side will be able to debate with the other not being able to which makes the whole thing a junk show.

yrreg0850 wrote: »

If RTE want to save money, they could shut down either one (or both) RTE 1 and 2 television overnight .
After all why have the two channels showing the same programme overnight.
Both carry Euronews between about 1.30 and 6 am.

that wouldn't save anything as the transmitters would be remaining on air, as turning them on and off i believe can lessen their lifespan, so it's easier to carry something like euronews which i don't think they have to pay for, or if they do then they could carry the telly shopping which may bring in income instead.

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Well then you should pay for it, along with the majority, and the 'small minority' who have an issue with RTE's stance on societal issues should be free to go about our business and not be charged for something we don't wish to consume.

that would not be possible quite rightly.
it means others forking out more while you don't have to, and it means we are at high risk of your views being able to be propagated under the radar.
at least while you are forced to pay and are complaining about your views not being covered because there are nobody able to push them in a reasonable manner, we know what your views are and we can debunk them.

end of the road

Kivaro wrote: »

Your posts are indeed disingenuous. You were provided many examples. I posted about the RTE Radio1 news interview yesterday of a person on their views of the Republican national convention. They interviewed an expert from the Clinton Institute, who went on to just portray the convention in a negative light. RTE could have easily interviewed someone on the Republican side.
We're still waiting for the RTE posters on here to provide examples on RTE unbiased reporting on asylum seekers or non-EU migrants. Unbiased = views from both sides.

There is no sense of fairness or impartiality at RTE.

posting articles and claiming bias does not equal bias.
listening to a report and it not highlighting one's hero in a good light because there are no redeaming features is not bias either.
fairness and impartiality are regulated into rte's reporting, that does not mean they have to give airtime to every single viewpoint as that is just not possible, so they just report the facts and where they can get coherent arguments from both sides of a debate then they will do debates.
you were given enough to show that rte's reporting isn't biased, but that sometimes it's not possible for them to cover every single viewpoint in a topic and they have no obligation to give a platform to absolutely everyone.

Kivaro wrote: »

Exactly.
This is the end goal for RTE ......... funding from direct taxation, as it would allow them to operate with an open cheque book and unlimited funds. We will be told that accountability would be put in place, but we all know that RTE would drain our tax payments in order to increase the salaries of their stars and staff, and further enhance their high-end lifestyles.

RTE badly needs a root to branch reorganisation, as they are currently not fit for purpose. How posters on here justify the staggering financial losses and poor quality programs and reporting at RTE is beyond most rational thinking people.

nobody has justified the poor quality entertainment programming and many of us have said plenty of times it needs to be removed with the focus on current affairs and other minority programming that is of historical and cultural relevance.
the reporting is easily justified as it is of good quality and it sticks to reporting the facts mostly, with debates taking place where there are coherent individuals on both sides to allow for an actual debate.

Kivaro wrote: »

Isn't it amazing that something is unsubstantiated if it is goes against the liberal left grain. However, it is taken as Gospel and fact when these claims are made by Travellers, Asylum Seekers etc.

RTE is exactly like Fox News; except it is on the other spectrum of the divide.

ah here, we are at conspiricy level nonsense now at this stage.

Arthur Daley

end of the road wrote: »

that would not be possible quite rightly.
it means others forking out more while you don't have to, and it means we are at high risk of your views being able to be propagated under the radar.
at least while you are forced to pay and are complaining about your views not being covered because there are nobody able to push them in a reasonable manner, we know what your views are and we can debunk them.

Isn't it wonderful to be free to live in such an 'Open Society'

And RTE's raison d'etre is reduced to the above.

Just as we suspected

Tony EH

kenmm wrote: »

There has been one concrete example of potentially biased reporting (brainstorm, provided by J). Anything without links is anecdotal and not verifiable.

Except it wasn't really.

The "brainstorm" thing is a load of opinion pieces. RTE CLEARLY states that the articles are OPINION pieces and does not reflect on them.

To any adult reading, that's the cue to make up your own mind on what the people in the article are writing.

They aren't RTE "reports".



https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0506/1136736-emigration-ireland-coronavirus/















I'm sure there are plenty of articles that I can read on RTE and elsewhere that I won't agree with. But the thing is, I don't need to live in an echo chamber where all I hear are the opinions I already have in my head.

end of the road

rightmove wrote: »

respect your opinion. I too used to believe in PBS but not anymore. Too biased and too expensive

sure it's too expensive alright, dispite what it gets being quite small.
i bet it wouldn't be too expensive if it was a propaganda machine for your views though.

rightmove wrote: »

cancelling rte is cancelling cancel culture. They have totally one sided debates and are very biased. (many examples provided)

paying for them is a big issue

canceling rte is cancel culture as cancel culture remains with rte gone.

if there are one sided debates then it will be for 2 reasons.
1. what is debated has been factualy established and there is no other side.
2. the other side is not able to debate the subject to a reasonable standard.
providing a few opinion pieces and crying bias, is as i said not bias.

rightmove

end of the road wrote: »

i bet it wouldn't be too expensive if it was a propaganda machine for your views though.

My view is that I dont want a publicly funded propaganda machine.:rolleyes:

Thought this was obvious

nice try though

rightmove

end of the road wrote: »

1. what is debated has been factualy established and there is no other side.

ah now you are just having a laugh

Tony EH

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I meant there is nothing wrong with being left in the way the guardian is provided the tax payer isn't funding it

Yes there is.

It doesn't matter what the leaning is, the news should remain impartial as possible. Otherwise you just end up with mouthpieces who will only come from one particular viewpoint.

RTE does try to stay on the impartial side and its reporting is, by and large, very neutral. It has always been delivered in a flat, matter of fact, way for as long as I've been watching it. It was one of the few news outlets that could be relied upon during the Iraq war.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

How anyone can miss the left wing editorial policy at RTE is beyond me

How any can think that RTE are a bunch of lefties is beyond me.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Far left activists like Philip o Connor are employed as the " our man in Sweden " reporter FFS

Ever read that guy on twitter, he makes paul Murphy look right wing

I don't know really know what Philip O'Connor stands for and I don't care. But so what if he is left wing?

BUT ONE GUY DOES NOT MAKE A WHOLE ORGANISATION.

It will be made up of many individuals with differing views.



And here in lies the real problem. People pointing to single, tenuous, item as a reason to damn an entirety.

Tony EH

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Yes , I was a tad pedantic but the style is very different, RTE is more like the Guardian newspaper if it were on tv

If you think that RTE is like The Guardian, then you really aren't qualified to speak about either.

kowloon

'I too am worried RTE isn't racist enough. I'd like to see programming that highlights how coronavirus is a hoax designed to turn us away from jesus. Did you know 5G causes it? Windmills cause cancer. Alex Jones is a hero fighting the deep state.'

This is how some of you sound to me.

Tony EH

rightmove wrote: »

My view is that I dont want a publicly funded propaganda machine.

Good.

Because you don't have one.

Kivaro

end of the road wrote: »

if there are one sided debates then it will be for 2 reasons.
1. what is debated has been factualy established and there is no other side.
2. the other side is not able to debate the subject to a reasonable standard.
providing a few opinion pieces and crying bias, is as i said not bias.

Obviously the Margaret Cash interview is a clear example of above

end of the road wrote: »

they don't ask such questions because they are irrelevant and the answers are none of your business. it's that simple.

it means others forking out more while you don't have to, and it means we are at high risk of your views being able to be propagated under the radar.
at least while you are forced to pay and are complaining about your views not being covered because there are nobody able to push them in a reasonable manner, we know what your views are and we can debunk them.

Holy MI5 Batman!
The Twilight Zone music was playing in my head while I was reading those responses .....
And don't forget folks: "the answers are none of your business". That would typically be the comment from someone who is actually not paying income taxes in order to sustain the dysfunctional AS system.

kenmm

Tony EH wrote: »

Except it wasn't really.

.

I said potentially, and credit to the poster for putting it together. No one else is able to even attempt citing bias. I am not able to say there is none, just that there doesn't appear to be that much.

Tony EH

kenmm wrote: »

I said potentially, and credit to the poster for putting it together. No one else is able to even attempt citing bias. I am not able to say there is none, just that there doesn't appear to be that much.

I don't think it's a very good example. Sure, it's all that particular poster needs of course.

I think trying to equate RTE to a bunch of lefties is childish and stupid and the idea certainly isn't supported in a concrete way by any of the posts on here, that's for sure.

As I've said a number of times, it's just people whinging because their own (extreme minority) views aren't getting spouted back at them repeatedly through the tele...so therefore, it's "biased".

Do I hear things on RTE that I disagree with? Sure. But I don't lose my shit over it and start screaming "bias". I am able to listen to or read points that I don't agree with and don't have to constantly have my own validated.

rightmove

Tony EH wrote: »

Good.

Because you don't have one.

this dialog and ppl wonder why the likes of trump get elected

rightmove

Tony EH wrote: »

As I've said a number of times, it's just people whinging because their own (extreme minority) views aren't getting spouted back at them repeatedly through the tele...so therefore, it's "biased".
.

come on now! - this might be the way you look at the world but others have the integrity to see what is in front of their face. The night of brexit I saw no one representing the brexit side NO ONE. Now I would have been against brexit so its not that I wanted a worm hole...quite the opposite, I know when things are not discussed on rte whether that is about race travellers religion etc they are feeding the opposition by not engaging in real discourse

Tony EH

rightmove wrote: »

this dialog and ppl wonder why the likes of trump get elected

:pac:

Trump got elected because American politics is a sham, where a guy like Trump becomes Tweedle Dum and a woman like Clinton becomes Tweedle Dee for parties that are more alike than they differ in a country that has a political option of Team A or Team B.

Nobody will know what that has to do with RTE though.

Tony EH

rightmove wrote: »

come on now! - this might be the way you look at the world but others have the integrity to see what is in front of their face. The night of brexit I saw no one representing the brexit side NO ONE.

There were many, many nights of Brexit discussion. :rolleyes:

rightmove wrote: »

I know when things are not discussed on rte whether that is about race travellers religion etc they are feeding the opposition by not engaging in real discourse

What exactly is it about race do you want "discussed"?

You've never seen a discussion on Travelers or religion on RTE? I can clearly recall Prime Time discussions about Traveler violence, and you really expect people to believe that RTE has never talked about religion. :pac:

end of the road

Kivaro wrote: »

Obviously the Margaret Cash interview is a clear example of above



Holy MI5 Batman!
The Twilight Zone music was playing in my head while I was reading those responses .....
And don't forget folks: "the answers are none of your business". That would typically be the comment from someone who is actually not paying income taxes in order to sustain the dysfunctional AS system.

no it would be the comment from someone who lives in the real world where simply deciding i don't like someone or something is not proof of anything.
where there are paid qualified people who have access to actual evidence who will decide the status of asylem seekers, rather then simply throwing out nonsense like "they bogus cause me not like foreigner"

Geuze

end of the road wrote: »

they don't ask such questions because they are irrelevant and the answers are none of your business. it's that simple.

It is relevant where the fathers are of these homeless children.

They should be held responsible.

Bear in mind as taxpayers we are paying for all this, so we deserve answers.

If anybody like Margaret Cash presents in a Garda station, or elsewhere, looking for accomm, the first questions that should be asked are:

(1) where is the father of the children?
(2) why can't you stay with your parents/siblings?



RTE should also be asking about the way too high rents in Ireland, and about the barriers preventing more supply of houses.

They have made programs about such issues, fair enough.

Geuze

Tony EH wrote: »

I can clearly recall Prime Time discussions about Traveler violence

Fair enough, good to know.

end of the road

Geuze wrote: »

It is relevant where the fathers are of these homeless children.

They should be held responsible.

Bear in mind as taxpayers we are paying for all this, so we deserve answers.

If anybody like Margaret Cash presents in a Garda station, or elsewhere, looking for accomm, the first questions that should be asked are:

(1) where is the father of the children?
(2) why can't you stay with your parents/siblings?



RTE should also be asking about the way too high rents in Ireland, and about the barriers preventing more supply of houses.

They have made programs about such issues, fair enough.

it's relevant to the authorities yes, the authorities i would expect already ask the questions you list above and it is all between them and the individual concerned.
because we pay money to such individuals for the sake of the children does not entitle us to know everything about these people, just the bare basic facts which we do ultimately get.

AllForIt

I had a look at RTE player last night, and I sought out their 'diversity' programming, as a result of this thread.

Quite a few docs on a multicultural theme.

I watched the one about the Sryian, who came to Ireland when he was 11 as a result of the Syrian war. (God, will that ever end).

Anyway, what stood out for me is it's utter predicable-ness, for e.g. he said "It's every child's dream to play in Croke Park'.

It's so utterly cringe, RTE never stop day and night promoting national sports, they have a vested interest. But I've never dreamed as a kid of paying in Croke Park, that's what all the dreary promoters of sport say ad nauseam. It doesn't sound very diverse to me that one would think that all kids have the same desire. That being Irish means you're a GAA nut.

Without a doubt what he said was scripted for him. Without a doubt the doc portrayed him as a stereotypical Irish person. What if he was a raging right winger with stereotypical Islamic views? Would RTE have used him as a use case then? The idea that foreigners come here and 'convert' to being a stereotypical Irish person is all kinds of absurd, and the hypocrisy of it is something else if you are in fact interested in diversity.

RWCNT

AllForIt wrote: »

I had a look at RTE player last night, and I sought out their 'diversity' programming, as a result of this thread.

Quite a few docs on a multicultural theme.

I watched the one about the Sryian, who came to Ireland when he was 11 as a result of the Syrian war. (God, will that ever end).

Anyway, what stood out for me is it's utter predicable-ness, for e.g. he said "It's every child's dream to play in Croke Park'.

It's so utterly cringe, RTE never stop day and night promoting national sports, they have a vested interest. But I've never dreamed as a kid of paying in Croke Park, that's what all the dreary promoters of sport say ad nauseam. It doesn't sound very diverse to me that one would think that all kids have the same desire. That being Irish means you're a GAA nut.

Without a doubt what he said was scripted for him. Without a doubt the doc portrayed him as a stereotypical Irish person. What if he was a raging right winger with stereotypical Islamic views? Would RTE have used him as a use case then? The idea that foreigners come here and 'convert' to being a stereotypical Irish person is all kinds of absurd, and the hypocrisy of it is something else if you are in fact interested in diversity.

You, of all people, purposefully sought out "diversity" programming and didn't like what you saw? Surprise of the goddamn century right there.