Eoghan Harris terminated

magicbastarder

tipptom wrote: »

Harris is shameless but Irish journalism should be ashamed of themselves for letting this lunatic operate so long with an agenda of hate against any NI Catholics he targeted

what do you mean by 'letting him operate'?
should someone in the examiner, for example, have somehow prevented the sindo from publishing his opinions?
irish journalism isn't the monolith many people seem to think it is.

magicbastarder

Rosita wrote: »

Very good, thanks. Proves my point that it was the 'anonymous' thing she took issue with. I suppose when she's a self acknowledged Twitter user herself she couldn't credibly disavow the platform.

yes, you have astutely deduced the point she was explicitly making.

FrancieBrady

Rosita wrote: »

Seriously, you are not that clueless are you? Read my post and see what I actually said.

In case it slips you on a second reading - I said there was nothing inherently wrong with the platform, so McInerney's point (about a platform she acknowledges using herself) is irrelevant.

Maybe you should listen to McInerney again. She asked why he choose to use an anonymous account...he said because he needed a platform...that is when she flummoxed him...he had no answer when she asked why he didn't just create and account in his own name...had a podcast etc.

He hadn't a leg to stand on in other words. Stop with the hollow defence.

gormdubhgorm

wicklowstevo wrote: »

jasas that interview was some car crash ,

I wouldnt know Sarah McInerney but she seemed to do really well

harris on the other hand seems like some kind of a Iona institute nutter ,

is having some kind of break down or is it bitterness at his former sf team mates ?

It was entertaining that is for sure.

Eoghan Harris admits membership of secret....









twitter account


a 6 person cell/column.

No association to other accounts apparently. And the other 9 accounts had nothing to do with Pym account and he suggested that SF were behind the pressure to get them closed.

No apology for getting involved in this situation.

---

The reassure 'Northern Unionist' bit seems baffling. Harris then went on an anti-SF and anti-RTE rant when asked about whether another tweet to a journalist (not Moore) was benign. Plus said the only time RTE rings him is when he is trouble.

---

It was good that Mcinerney read the actual tweets that were sent to Ms Moore in the interests of fairness. McInerney also pointed out she herself was targeted by the Pym account who she had to mute.

--

Good interview McInerney did well - Harris not so much. He claimed that everytime he was on RTE he hurts SF.
All I could think of was, maybe not this time Harris???

Dank Janniels

Just heard the repeat of the interview.
RTE pro Sinn Fein? Lol

Junkyard Tom

tipptom wrote: »

What is the most shocking about this is how Irish journalists stood by and let this bullying,misogyny,bigotism etc carry on and not a word even though they knew who was behind this account.

It's the sort of thing journalists should be exposing not colluding in. It'll be interesting to see what other names are associated with Barb.

Rosita

JeffKenna wrote: »

Course she did. As you say, he defended the tweets to the Irish Examiner journalist quite well but as soon as she said that account was one of 15 ever that she had to block, it became fairly obvious this was systematic.

No, her blocking it doesn't prove it was systematic. It just proves it was one of 15 she blocked. It tells us nothing about the twitter account and whether it systematically abused people.

I doubt, based on what he writes, that it was very pleasant, but she didn't adduce any game changing evidence just by nominating it as one of 15 she had blocked. What were the circumstances? Maybe she doesn't respond well to criticism or being challenged. We don't know the nature of her blocking and even if we did one person blocking does not prove systematic behaviour anyway.

Big claims require big evidence. She did okay but her performance is being wildly exaggerated because people don't like him.

RandomViewer

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Not just a Sunday “broadsheet” but the largest circulating newspaper in the country, or at least it was before they decided to suppress the circulation figures.

Not much demand for the freebie copies when the hotels and cafes are closed

Rosita

magicbastarder wrote: »

yes, you have astutely deduced the point she was explicitly making.

I think 'astute' is giving me unnecessary credit. Fairly obvious what she was at.

Rosita

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Maybe you should listen to McInerney again. She asked why he choose to use an anonymous account...he said because he needed a platform...that is when she flummoxed him...he had no answer when she asked why he didn't just create and account in his own name...had a podcast etc.

He hadn't a leg to stand on in other words. Stop with the hollow defence.

Why have you just repeated a previous post? Already dealt with this.

tipptom

magicbastarder wrote: »

what do you mean by 'letting him operate'?
should someone in the examiner, for example, have somehow prevented the sindo from publishing his opinions?
irish journalism isn't the monolith many people seem to think it is.

Of course the Examiner cant stop them publishing his opinions but plenty of Journalists have been cancelled when Journalists actually do their job in standing up and pointing out their abuse and hate.

Harris has not been given the road not because of some good investigative journalism and there is a lot more to come about him

magicbastarder

Rosita wrote: »

She did okay but her performance is being wildly exaggerated because people don't like him.

like you said, she was sailing with the wind. but it was quite amusing to see someone like harris, who would claim to be a bull**** detector par excellence, leading himself along the garden path and allowing himself to be so easily outwitted.

it takes two to tango; like it did with the o'rourke/bailey interview. like the above, o'rourke just had to have the cop on to let his interviewee paint themselves into a corner.

Tony EH

Rosita wrote: »

Very good, thanks. Proves my point that it was the 'anonymous' thing she took issue with. I suppose when she's a self acknowledged Twitter user herself she couldn't credibly disavow the platform.

She had no intention to "disavow the platform".

Her issue, quite rightly, is why Harris felt it necessary to hide behind a pseudonym and not simply post under his own name.

The answer, of course, is obvious. But she was trying to get him to give his reason why.

His excuse was pretty empty though.

magicbastarder

with friends like this

https://twitter.com/DavQuinn/status/1390743092203081728

FrancieBrady

Rosita wrote: »

Why have you just repeated a previous post? Already dealt with this.

I really think you need to research this whole thing again...we know the account abused numerous people and has two defamation cases against it already.

You also need to listen to the interview again without looking for hills to die on to defend him.

Rarely have I seen SF and FG supporters on twitter be so in agreement about anything as they are about Harris getting his comeuppance.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

Cilldara_2000

tipptom wrote: »

Of course the Examiner cant stop them publishing his opinions but plenty of Journalists have been cancelled when Journalists actually do their job in standing up and pointing out their abuse and hate.

Harris has not been given the road not because of some good investigative journalism and there is a lot more to come about him

Such a shame there wasn’t more of this investigative journalism back in the 70s when Harris and his communist clique were effectively running RTE. Surely holy catholic Ireland would not have taken the side of these communists with their particularly bizarre view of communism just because they were particularly opposed to the provos?

magicbastarder

https://twitter.com/Donal_OKeeffe/status/1390705057117638659

AngeloArgue

I was thinking about the circumstances of what happened.
Harris and Dudley Edwards et al are relics of a pre-brexit political landscape.
Before their anti-Sinn Fein and pro unionist sympathies was politically acceptable and promoted by political parties and other interests.
Now in the post brexit environment unionists and the British are no longer acceptable to express sympathies for.
He's been found not wearing swimming trunks when the tide went out.

Larbre34

The Indo has transcribed the entire McInerney Harris interview.

Its clear enough, if proof were needed, that he departed the plane of existence that the rest of us live on, some time ago.

He is Captain Ahab.

golfball37

magicbastarder wrote: »

like you said, she was sailing with the wind. but it was quite amusing to see someone like harris, who would claim to be a bull**** detector par excellence, leading himself along the garden path and allowing himself to be so easily outwitted.

it takes two to tango; like it did with the o'rourke/bailey interview. like the above, o'rourke just had to have the cop on to let his interviewee paint themselves into a corner.

Sean O Rourke had Bailey on as a favour to her. He tried to shut down Allison o Conner and panel discussing it when she left studio. He was sorry she went off reservation and there were many punches he chose not to throw.
Sarah is a complete professional who doesn’t let her personal biases effect her when discharging her duties.

shtpEdthePlum

Tony EH wrote: »

You and the other guy do realise that "counselling" could simply mean talking to someone about how to deal with a certain situation in a rational manner and not laying on a couch talking to a psychiatrist about your mother right?

God forbid somebody actually addresses thoughts that are bothering them.

DeadHand

Strange case.

Commentators can happily tweet “kill all men”, “kill white people”, “white people are subhuman and should be removed from society” (that one directly from the BLM), “white people are snivelling goblins” and be applauded for it instead of ruined.

The Pym tweets were caustic at most. An indecent amount of spin was required to now have them broadly accepted as abusive. It has been made received wisdom that having one’s backside mentioned non sexually in a communication and other, even milder, vagaries are police matters and traumatic events requiring counselling.

This was much more about the identities and politics of the sender and target than the content of the tweets.

Harris was foolish to play these stupid games on Twitter. He has been clearly psychologically unstable for decades and a break from public life would do him good.

For me, the issue is not so much about Harris. Much more undeserved, dishonest hatchet jobs were carried out against Myers and Hook. It’s about the fact that Ireland is becoming no country for contrary views. It’s about the worrying, increasing dominance of extreme progressivist ideology over Irish society.

This is an ideology that the great majority of the public has no time for yet is embraced fanatically by political and media establishments which have never been so detached from the Irish nation. And it’s currently expressing itself in infinitely more harmful ways than the ruination of Harris, ways which the same media that excoriates him will not subject to anything approaching honest, much less brave, examination. (See the changes to our asylum laws).

Twitter’s famously woke and biased standards are becoming our standards. The entire English speaking world is becoming an American campus.

It’s a bad path we’ve been placed on.

Chips Lovell

I think my favourite part of the interview was that she saved this one right till the end:

Just finally then, as well as the various other tweets which we’ve discussed, the Barbara Pym account regularly tweets about how great you are, and how good you are at your job. I’ll give you a couple of examples...

shtpEdthePlum

I just don't understand his fixation with the backsides of the women he supposedly hates.

ooter

When he mentions "the site" in the interview is he talking about the Twitter account?

shtpEdthePlum

ooter wrote: »

When he mentions "the site" in the interview is he talking about the Twitter account?

Tbf wasn't the same fella born in the 40s?

Rosita

magicbastarder wrote: »

like you said, she was sailing with the wind. but it was quite amusing to see someone like harris, who would claim to be a bull**** detector par excellence, leading himself along the garden path and allowing himself to be so easily outwitted.

Well, my point really is that I didn't think he was outwitted. She picked him up on 'anonymity' - but virtually every Internet forum, including this, operates on anonymity. Using anonymity is not a crime. He pointed to journalistic traditions of old but anonymous commentary has never been more rife than now. Thought her point was weak.

She called him on calling someone an 'imbecile' - yeah, it doesn't add much to debate nor does name-calling at any level, but look at the constant comments here about Harris's mental state from people who've never met him. In that context 'imbecile' is fairly benign yet she made an issue of it. Didn't think she really landed a blow since he didn't remember tweeting it anyway.

Given that he was defending an impossible situation I thought he was on the offensive and acquitted himself quite well. I think it was only 'a car crash interview' for people who had decided this before listening to it. Thought he held his own with McInerney. He was helped by his natural aggression in that regard as well as his ability to deflect from direct questions with whataboutery.

I think people wanted it to be 'a car crash' but I just didn't see that. He didn't enhance his reputation but he didn't damage it more either and that's from a position of having taken on a fairly difficult interview.

It doesn't mean he's not fairly extreme, or that he's likeable, or reasonable. But I don't think that interview was his ruination.

McMurphy

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

Tbf wasn't the same fella born in the 40s?

On the planet Krypton.

Dyr

Rosita wrote: »

Well, my point really is that I didn't think he was outwitted. She picked him up on 'anonymity' - but virtually every Internet forum, including this, operates on anonymity. Using anonymity is not a crime. He pointed to journalistic traditions of old but anonymous commentary has never been more rife than now. Thought her point was weak.

She called him on calling someone an 'imbecile' - yeah, it doesn't add much to debate nor does name-calling at any level, but look at the constant comments here about Harris's mental state from people who've never met him. In that context 'imbecile' is fairly benign yet she made an issue of it. Didn't think she really landed a blow since he didn't remember tweeting it anyway.

Given that he was defending an impossible situation I thought he was on the offensive and acquitted himself quite well. I think it was only 'a car crash interview' for people who had decided this before listening to it. Thought he held his own with McInerney. He was helped by his natural aggression in that regard as well as his ability to deflect from direct questions with whataboutery.

I think people wanted it to be 'a car crash' but I just didn't see that. He didn't enhance his reputation but he didn't damage it more either and that's from a position of having taken on a fairly difficult interview.

It doesn't mean he's not fairly extreme, or that he's likeable, or reasonable. But I don't think that interview was his ruination.

You're assuming the people who call Harris mental have never met him.