What would we lose if RTÉ was abolished

Why do so many people assume this thread is about abolishing public broadcasting? The question is whether we would lose anything by abolishing RTÉ but, of course, there would be others who happily fill that void, especially with licence fee support.

Normally, there should be a substantial loss of assets if any long-established, well-funded organisation is abolished. The organisation will have accumulated valuable intangible assets - human capital, know-how, managerial processes etc. . An organisation like RTÉ should be exceptionally rich in human capital, whether in front of or behind the cameras. Sadly, we have seen epic dysfunction and mismanagement within RTÉ in recent years. No one on this thread has argued that RTÉ produces anything of special value outside of news, current affairs and sports. All three areas, including the current talent, would be easily transferable (with licence fee funding) to a new, slimmer organisation.

No one in Government has made a convincing case for RTÉ but I doubt if any politician could even consider the question we are discussing. Of course, I don't believe for a moment that RTÉ will actually be abolished because the Government is simply incapable of making such a decision even if everyone around the Cabinet table abandoned the habits of a lifetime and agreed that it would be the best option.

At most there will be a re-branding with some new faces. The Licence Fee will be abolished because it has become troublesome to collect and a vote-loser. Eventually, RTÉ 2.0 will be financed from the public purse. All the Nordic countries have done this. The allegation that RTÉ is in the Government's pocket would then actually have some basis but the financing change won't make any noticeable difference - the programming will not improve.

The three RTÉ reports paint a dismal picture of mismanagement (or worse) in HR and Corporate Governance with a hidden slush fund in the "Barter Account".

What will be the consequences? The main culprits fled the scene and seem immune. The focus will be on avoiding a repetition. That will mean new layers of bureaucracy and governance after which the Government will provide a bail-out and introduce a new funding model - probably direct Exchequer funding to replace/supplement the discredited licence fee. Lots of political capital will be expended, tensions in Cabinet will intensify and there will be dissatisfaction all round with the eventual compromise (after the Locals/EP elections). I'd give it five years before the next crisis when the Government may not be so flush with our cash.

There will be endless blather and hand-wringing but no one with any authority or influence will even broach the radical solution - abolish RTÉ. Not because of the Barter Account or Tubs backhander or the Exit Packages. All that would be secondary if RTÉ had created anything of lasting value over the years.

I think it is clear from this thread that nothing of real value would be lost so long as we support public service news and current affairs broadcasting. RTÉ's physical assets could be transferred as appropriate to the news/current affairs public broadcasters would could be subsidised with ~€100Million a year. Sports coverage will largely finance itself. Another ~€100Million, plus tax breaks, could support culture/drama programming, which is largely what RTÉ does now but very inefficiently. €200 Million is half the cost of RTÉ today.

I would contrast this situation with other public sector scandals where there are substantial non-tangible assets that greatly outweigh any current issues. University of Limerick comes to mind. But abolishing RTÉ would have an exemplary effect on some other State bodies badly in need of reform. Even the HSE, a monster beyond all democratic control, might take notice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/media/2024/05/07/rte-reports-make-for-sorry-reading-but-can-the-national-broadcaster-find-redemption/

It amazes me how, despite numerous posts on this thread, everyone assumes abolishing RTÉ means abolishing public broadcasting. Creating this identification between their organisation and the concept of public broadcasting may be RTÉ’s main achievement and its salvation.

I specifically said in my last post that ~€100Million should be provided for news/current affairs broadcasting. There would be no shortage of Irish offers to avail of that money.

I'll just keep repeating this - abolishing RTÉ would not mean abolishing public service broadcasting.

Of course, it would not mean handing the licence fee to Virgin. Obviously, as I outlined a half-dozen times here, alternative structures would be needed to support public broadcasting, particularly news and current affairs. If RTÉ was abolished, Virgin would not need a penny from the taxpayer because it would capture all RTÉ's advertising revenues by running all RTÉ's rubbish (DWTS - there's public service for yeah!) In fairness to Virgin (like TG4), it runs a shoe-string news service which is reasonably impartial and even comparable to RTÉ News which has 50 times the resources. It is true that Vincent Browne was outrageously biased but he was always entertaining. Perhaps we need more of that and less of RTÉ's stifling impartiality.

No wonder our politicians have lost the capacity to take radical measures - Irish voters cannot even envisage a radical response. That is generally true of the major crises (e.g. housing, health, migration etc.) but it is especially depressing in regard to public broadcasting because it is an issue entirely and exclusively within the power of government i.e. there is no external pressure preventing the Government seeking a radical solution (the EBU might kick us out of Eurovision - bonus!).

Of course, we have a lame-duck Government comprising three parties with completely different conceptions of the State but I doubt if any Irish party could find the courage to do something radical with RTÉ. In Irish public discourse, the phrase "radical solution" is now generally taken to mean "more of the same but at twice the cost". For RTÉ, that means substituting exchequer funding for the licence fee, plus a bailout, to kick the can past the next election.

You read my posts and conclude that I want a US style system. I despair!

The US government provides very limited funding via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the vast bulk of TV stations receive no public funds. This is practically the opposite of my proposals to subsidise public broadcasting. Either your ignorance of American broadcasting is total or you are unable to follow a simple argument.

If my simplest proposals are going to be misconstrued so badly, let me conclude with two provocative thoughts which are bound to be misrepresented.

• American TV produces most of the best programming in the world including many of the most admired/popular programmes in Ireland. Only British TV can compare. On the other hand, Europe is full of public broadcasters on the RTÉ model i.e. they produce little of lasting value despite generous finance by taxation and/or licence fees. Nonetheless, you (like most Irish people) cannot conceive of abandoning this failed model and, astonishingly, you think the worst option would be to imitate the American system. (Again, not my proposal but at least I don't suffer cognitive dissonance).
• I would have doubled Tubs' pay (and Dee Forbes' pay) and brought everyone in RTÉ on lavish freebies with the Barter Account if they had produced world-class TV. Instead, they produced nothing anyone wanted so they were both overpaid for what they delivered and should have been fired years ago.

I tend to blame our political paralysis and lack of innovative thinking on our clientelist politics but when Irish people are given a choice on this issue, the radical option is much the most popular. The poll is unscientific and those who want to defund RTÉ may have no idea about how to support public service broadcasting but this poll suggests that politicians could be radical on this issue if they wished.

https://www.thejournal.ie/how-should-rte-be-funded-6299202-Feb2024/