Eoghan Harris terminated

gormdubhgorm

Fann Linn wrote: »

From reading this thread you'd almost be mistaken for thinking that it's Sinn Fein's fault that Harris got sacked. Not to mind that it was him bullying innocent parties and leaking info from his employer.

Just more of the same, '... but Sinn Fein. '

Not true again.

It is just that Harris and SF have been interwinnered on diametrically opposed viewpoints for decades.

The independent was set up as vehicle to attack SF at every opportunity as (rightly) pointed out on boards.ie on numerous occasions.

But SF do play a part in creating the atmosphere for these turn of events.
Their duplicity on my issues (many life or death) gave Harris the justification in his own mind to fight 'fire with fire' with no real subtlety or skill.

SF are more adept and skillful on social media in my opinion. I have engaged with SF supporters a lot on boards.ie and they would twist, turn, argue, malgin, duck, dive around any argument. And they are only 'foot soldiers' in a social media sense.

This leads me to believe that the paid activists from SF on social media must be well attuned and battle hardened online. A major part in SF GE success in my opinion.

Other parties are merely playing 'catch up' in the social media world. Although I think few journalists or parties would be as poor as Harris and his 'team'?

It would be interesting to hear an online political activist opinion?

TheCitizen

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I think McInerney played the Harris interview very well. Calm calculated, Harris was doing OK until the went on the SF/RTE conspiracy/plot line.

No way would McInerney be a SF supporter!

Harris said things like RTE did not have him on their media... Harris then said it was years ago, then two years.

McInerney: It was one year ago.

Harris blubbered from there on.

The more he spoke the more McInerney won the argument.

Harris could have came out of the interview OK if he kept it simple and played it different. Sticking to the tweets mentioned etc. Maybe even apolgising for any hurt the tweets may have caused as it was not his intent. He started off alright. But then lost the plot.

However, Harris went the other way and said SF as he saw them deserve such treatment. Digging the hole bigger for himself.

If he was less vehement and conciliatory he could have salvaged the interview.

But he not.

That is my take on it when I gave it a quick listen. a few days ago.

Harris was used to getting things his own way, anytime anyone stood up to him he lost the plot.

TheCitizen

Rosita wrote: »

I never questioned her right to bring anything up. I have no idea why you'd feel the need to point that out. Weird. I simply commented on the fact that the act of bringing it up doesn't make it a relevant or strong point.

Nope, you're wrong. It added to and strengthened her points as she put them to him. He was filleted.

Must try to find that radio show clip when he walked out of a debate with Fintan O'Toole:pac:.

Rosita

TheCitizen wrote: »

It is an argument. I'm arguing that he had a malignant, negative influence on the Peace Process, attacking John Hume one of the architects of it.

Not relevant to me. I commented on his interview with S McInerney only.

I hardly remember John Hume in public life never mind what Harris said about him so certainly didn't comment on that.

gormdubhgorm

TheCitizen wrote: »

If you wouldn't vote for SF because they are celebrating Harris getting found out, then you're not being honest yourself. Why shouldn't they celebrate Harris getting a good going over, he deserves it for the malign influence he had on Irish print media in years gone by.

Imagine if you wanted to be a journalist back in the 80's and 90's and you had a balanced view on Northern Ireland as opposed to the extremist view that he and the other nest of vipers at the SIndo had? You wouldn't have had a hope of getting a gig at the Sunday Independent.

I never said Harris did not deserve it he does.
It is the SF supporters coming out of the work work with the sneering that annoys me. All that GE stuff with David Cullinane's Tiocfaidh ar La stuff and the likes of a sneering Dessie Ellis that wind me up. Not forgotten by me.
'Nod and a wink' haha etc. That is just simple stuff, without getting into the blood and guts.

Yet SF carry on as if they are 'squeaky clean' and there have been some who have tried to imply that Harris is part of a wider media conspiracy against SF, not just in the Independent.
People have referred to the Independent as Pravda. Which I have already said got to laughable levels so I could agree there.
Sure you could not take the Independent seriously at all after a while - sports pages became my limit.

But I have also had a gawk at 'An Phoblacht' on occasion just as bad and transparently biased if not worse. Because it seems life and death is only worth how much propaganda they can make out of it.

Jaysci20

TheCitizen wrote: »

Nope, you're wrong. It added to and strengthened her points as she put them to him. He was filleted.

Must try to find that radio show clip when he walked out of a debate with Fintan O'Toole:pac:.

I disagree. I thought it detracted from her interview - that along with the "ah will ya stop the nonsense" comment. It lacked professionalism.

Rosita

[QUOTE=TheCitizen;117117624

Must try to find that radio show clip when he walked out of a debate with Fintan O'Toole:pac:.[/QUOTE]

I presume this is note to yourself.......

Please don't think I care.

gormdubhgorm

TheCitizen wrote: »

Harris was used to getting things his own way, anytime anyone stood up to him he lost the plot.

It was completely idiotic by Harris no logic to it. I would agree with what others have implied about Harris he does seem to have narcissistic tendencies.

He basically tried to shout McInerney down in a 'how dare you' challenge me vibe and said it was all set against him.

Rosita

shockframe wrote: »

Harris on Drivetime is like Father Ted and the money resting in my account:D

I know it's hard to get through a thread of the 40/50 something cohort without the inevitable Fr Ted reference but it's a little more serious I think.

Rosita

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

It was completely idiotic by Harris no logic to it. I would agree with what others have implied about Harris he does seem to have narcissistic tendencies.

He basically tried to shout McInerney down in a 'how dare you' challenge me vibe and it was all set against him.

I'd say 'tendencies' is an understatement! I think that's why she was unable to stop him being so assertive and aggressive even in a no-win situation.

shockframe

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I never said Harris did not deserve it he does.
It is the SF supporters coming out of the work work with the sneering that annoys me. All that GE stuff with David Cullinane's Tiocfaidh ar La stuff and the likes of a sneering Dessie Ellis that wind me up. Not forgotten by me.
'Nod and a wink' haha etc That is just simple stuff without getting into the blood and guts.

Yet SF carry on as if they are 'squeaky clean' and there have been some who have tried to imply that Harris is part of a wider media conspiracy against SF, not just in the Independent.
People have referred to the Independent as Pravda. Which I have already said got to laughable levels so I could agree there.

But I have also had a gawk at 'An Phoblacht' on occasion just as bad and transparently biased if not worse. Because it seems life and death is only worth how much propaganda they can make out of it.

If you were a supporter of Sinn Fein why wouldn't you be laughing at the events of last week?

One of the most pompous stooges in the state who stuck the boot into them at every opportunity got his just desserts.

There must have been 25-30 references to SF between Harris on RTE and English.

If they wanted to have a go at them over how they did over Covid that's fair game.Continuously throwing dirt at them in random attacks like they have done is almost asking for ridicule when it goes wrong.

TheCitizen

Rosita wrote: »

Not relevant to me. I commented on his interview with S McInerney only.

It is relevant. She pointed out that this anonymous twitter account also sent offensive comments to her. Whether you find it relevant or not is neither here nor there. It is relevant.

Rosita wrote: »

I hardly remember John Hume in public life never mind what Harris said about him so certainly didn't comment on that.

I remember John Hume and the Hume Adams axis that was a precursor to the Peace Process. When Harris passes on and the usual gobdaws pay tribute to him for his polemics etc., that's what I'll remember him for; attacking John Hume and others when they were trying to bring an end to the conflict.

An Claidheamh

So Ronan McGreevy is being challenged on twitter and blocking people who are doing it

It has been pointed out that :

1) He followed every Harris linked account

2) He was one of only a dozen people who followed the 'Northern Whig' which harrassed Martina Devlin

McGreevy writes for the Irish Times and has a strong interest in the celebration of the British army and empire


https://mobile.twitter.com/RMcGreevy1301/status/1391256412718776320

TheCitizen

Rosita wrote: »

I presume this is note to yourself.......

Please don't think I care.

You appear to have a lot to say about someone (Harris) that you know very little about.

TheCitizen

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I never said Harris did not deserve it he does.
It is the SF supporters coming out of the work work with the sneering that annoys me. All that GE stuff with David Cullinane's Tiocfaidh ar La stuff and the likes of a sneering Dessie Ellis that wind me up. Not forgotten by me.
'Nod and a wink' haha etc. That is just simple stuff, without getting into the blood and guts.

Yet SF carry on as if they are 'squeaky clean' and there have been some who have tried to imply that Harris is part of a wider media conspiracy against SF, not just in the Independent.
People have referred to the Independent as Pravda. Which I have already said got to laughable levels so I could agree there.
Sure you could not take the Independent seriously at all after a while - sports pages became my limit.

But I have also had a gawk at 'An Phoblacht' on occasion just as bad and transparently biased if not worse. Because it seems life and death is only worth how much propaganda they can make out of it.

They're right to sneer at him. Why does it annoy you that they or anyone else is sneering at him? He deserves it.

McMurphy

Jaysci20 wrote: »

I disagree. I thought it detracted from her interview - that along with the "ah will ya stop the nonsense" comment. It lacked professionalism.

Stop being ridiculous, Harris had the right to reply to McInerney, (and indeed did so) when she mentioned being trolled by the Barbara account, had it been untrue - Harris had the microphone to argue so, however he didn't deny it, and muttered something about McInerney being "no dying Violet".

Saying it detracted from the interview is an absolute nonsense, the man was literally there to discuss a Twitter account he had set up to troll people, with that in mind, expecting McInerney not to have mentioned her own personal experience and problems with the very thing they're discussing would have been bizzare in the extreme!

If she had Michael O'Leary on the show for example, would it detract from, or be unprofessional for McInerney to mention she had an unpleasant experience with the airline before?

padd b1975

TheCitizen wrote: »

I remember John Hume and the Hume Adams axis that was a precursor to the Peace Process. When Harris passes on and the usual gobdaws pay tribute to him for his polemics etc., that's what I'll remember him for; attacking John Hume and others when they were trying to bring an end to the conflict.

Dunphy was worse.

smurgen

Harris ranting and raving and conspiracy theories spouted in that interview sounded similar to the rhetoric I've seen from posters in other threads here. I'm wondering if it's part of a larger group or strategy across platforms other than twitter?

McMurphy

smurgen wrote: »

Harris ranting and raving and conspiracy theories spouted in that interview sounded similar to the rhetoric I've seen from posters in other threads here. I'm wondering if it's part of a larger group or strategy across platforms other than twitter?

Have been wondering the exact same thing smurge, nail on head!.

volchitsa

Rosita wrote: »

Not relevant to me. I commented on his interview with S McInerney only.

I hardly remember John Hume in public life never mind what Harris said about him so certainly didn't comment on that.

Nevertheless, Harris basically tried to scupper the peace process with his personal attacks on John Hume at a time when he needed people in the south to be behind him.

I'll never forgive him for that. Not many living journalists in Ireland have done anything so evil IMO.

An Claidheamh

An Claidheamh wrote: »

So Ronan McGreevy is being challenged on twitter and blocking people who are doing it

It has been pointed out that :

1) He followed every Harris linked account

2) He was one of only a dozen people who followed the 'Northern Whig' which harrassed Martina Devlin

McGreevy writes for the Irish Times and has a strong interest in the celebration of the British army and empire


https://mobile.twitter.com/RMcGreevy1301/status/1391256412718776320

He certainly is not denying it, gave tacit support to Harris' vile views

Irish Times now have questions to answer with him considering 90% of its output is faux liberalism, silence from Una Mulally, Jennifer O'Connell no doubt as its one of their own

Would not surprise me if Stephen Collins was involved also

Rosita

McMurphy wrote: »

Stop being ridiculous, Harris had the right to reply to McInerney, (and indeed did so) when she mentioned being trolled by the Barbara account, had it been untrue - Harris had the microphone to argue so, however he didn't deny it/QUOTE]

Right to reply? About her "muting" an account on twitter? Without her specifying why it was "muted"?

I imagine someone as angry as him probably targeted hundreds of people. Why would she think she's so special that he'd specifically remember her and what was said to her? There was no argument to make.

volchitsa

padd b1975 wrote: »

Dunphy was worse.

It was incomprehensible to me at the time. A real betrayal of those of us north of the border who just wanted peace.

https://twitter.com/rmcgreevy1301/status/1290317455043309574?lang=en

volchitsa

Rosita wrote: »

Right to reply? About her "muting" an account on twitter? Without her specifying why it was "muted"?

I imagine someone as angry as him probably targeted hundreds of people. Why would she think she's so special that he'd specifically remember her and what was said to her? There was no argument to make.

Tells us a lot about the nature of the fake twitter account though? It was set up by a man with far more access to express his opinions in public than the average citizen, in order to attack people anonymously in a way he didn't dare do from his "official" writings.

Rosita

McMurphy wrote: »

If she had Michael O'Leary on the show for example, would it detract from, or be unprofessional for McInerney to mention she had an unpleasant experience with the airline before?

If it was not specified in some detail then yeah it would detract from it. Of course it would.

In the same way anyone who has an experience to share but won't detail it risks irrelevance. Goes without saying.

If it was another issue you'd no doubt accept that too.

Cilldara_2000

smurgen wrote: »

Harris ranting and raving and conspiracy theories spouted in that interview sounded similar to the rhetoric I've seen from posters in other threads here. I'm wondering if it's part of a larger group or strategy across platforms other than twitter?

But Sinn Féin!!!!

tipptom

An Claidheamh wrote: »

He certainly is not denying it, gave tacit support to Harris' vile views

Irish Times now have questions to answer with him considering 90% of its output is faux liberalism, silence from Una Mulally, Jennifer O'Connell no doubt as its one of their own

Would not surprise me if Stephen Collins was involved also

Eilis o Hanlon would be a good bet as she would just basically parrot his lead every Sunday so i dont see why she would not follow him down the twitter rabbit hole and she had a speciality of using her articles for nasty insults at other women journalists,isnt that a coincidence?

Rosita

volchitsa wrote: »

Tells us a lot about the nature of the fake twitter account though? It was set up by a man with far more access to express his opinions in public than the average citizen, in order to attack people anonymously in a way he didn't dare do from his "official" writings.

Yeah, no doubt twitter is home to despicable people who have the freedom to write despicable things. Harris seems to one of those despicable people.

But S McInerney's reference to muting him is not evidence in that regard. Maybe she is highly sensitive and over-reacted. We don't know, which is why it's irrelevant.

McMurphy

Rosita wrote: »

McMurphy wrote: »

Stop being ridiculous, Harris had the right to reply to McInerney, (and indeed did so) when she mentioned being trolled by the Barbara account, had it been untrue - Harris had the microphone to argue so, however he didn't deny it

Right to reply? About her "muting" an account on twitter? Without her specifying why it was "muted"?

I imagine someone as angry as him probably targeted hundreds of people. Why would she think she's so special that he'd specifically remember her and what was said to her? There was no argument to make.

Hundreds of people, including the very person he agreed to let interview him, exactly why it was relevant in that interview.

amandstu

When are these court cases going to see the day?