Sasa Vucinic on a free press

This is worth watching.


TF

It's never just words.....

So last friday another 500 jobs in the retail sector were either gone or under threat. A familiar story and nothing more than another example of our economy that has been run into the ground and good material for the working journalist.

Just one problem this time because one of those 500 unlucky people was me.

I found myself in the uncomfortable position last Friday of being the story as Hughes and Hughes Booksellers went into receivership at 5pm. No warning was given to any of the employees before a representative of the accountancy firm Deloitte walked in and ordered that all trading must cease and the shop closed.

I found out via a phone call from my boss who in a shellshocked voice simply said: "it's over." Not all of us were so lucky as they found out their jobs were gone through the dispassionate voices of Today FM and RTE News.

I bolted into town to attend a staff meeting where we were told that the game was up and that we should expect to be on the dole queue by Monday. The softly spoken accountant was dispassionate too , just doing his job and as I sat there only half hearing him  i became suddenly aware of the void that exists between the journalist and the events that he or she records.

500 people loose their jobs, 6 people die in a car accident, 3 homes are repossessed, all these things are real and having huge impact on real people but often if you are writing a story this impact is lost because its just words on the page, its just numbers as no reporter is in the car as it leaves the road or the courtroom where someone looses their home or when a person you have never met before turns up and says your job is history.

While working on the production of the Moyross Voice, the pull of a good story was irresistible and I remember the excitement I felt when I heard in an interview that regeneration was in trouble. Here was a good story and not only would it make the paper, it would make the front page.In that excitement I became disconnected from the reality that if regeneration was indeed in trouble then a lot of people would be let down and in a very real sense betrayed by the government that long ago should have shared the wealth.At the time I'm sorry to say all I felt was happy, I had my story and it was a good one.

I felt sick yesterday as I read the reports, each one reminding me that I can't pay my bills next week and I think despite my financial woes I have gained something and thats empathy. Reporting the news is a vital function of the journalist but I suspect that to the best kind of journalist you should never loose your empathy for the people whose lives are being affected.

Empathy does not mean you write your story with a softer tone, but maybe the next time you  interview your local TD, you will remember those people and ask the hard questions that they might not get an opportunity to ask or follow up your straight news story with a human interest piece that highlights the impact of the events you have reported.

Thats my  two cents, I'm off to wipe the NAMA shaped smile off my bank managers face when I show him my P45. Should be fun.

LS

Designs that can save newspapers

The famous international newspaper designer Jacek Utko talks about how new designs and new ways of thinking about newspapers can improve circulation. IT's worth watching, thinking about and hopefully talking about.

TF

Emily O'Reilly's UL Lecture

The following is the full text of the speech given by Ombudsman and Information Commissioner Emily O’Reilly to journalism students at the University of Limerick on Tuesday, February 23. Here her speech here.

To access the Ombudsman's website click here and to access the Information Commissioner's site click here.

Read The Irish Times article about the story here.

“Thank you for the invitation here this afternoon. The topic is Investigating Issues in Irish Journalism and I was invited to talk about some issues that I may have investigated as Ombudsman.

However I have taken the liberty of instead talking about some issues that are immensely relevant to Irish society, if not global society,and asking if they are being given the mainstream coverage that they deserve.

I am talking primarily about the IT revolution and its implications but also about the place of what we consider to be traditional journalism in an era where everyone with a mobile phone can hitch a ride on that professional title. I will also talk about the disappearance of privacy and our lemming like acquiescence in that disappearance. 

I was recently invited to join the International Advisory Board of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University, where I once was a Nieman Fellow and so I have begun to observe the nail-biting angst in the journalistic community over there about these matters.

So, I'd like to begin by asking if any of you know what the following are: a Biritech; a Rhapsode; a Roddermadam; a Toesher; a Breakerboy; a Soda Jerk; or a Drysalter.

Now before you get anxious, I should say that I had no idea either what any of them were until I Googled "defunct professions" and hundreds of them emerged.  Once upon a time, all of them, - from the Breakerboys who plucked

impurities from lumps of coal, to the Toeshers who scavenged for goods in London's sewers, had economic and professional relevance, until new technologies and other factors consigned them to oblivion.

I think you can see where I'm going on this.  As you sit here in UL, absorbing lectures in media law, and Local Government, and court reporting and a myriad other course modules, I suspect many of you are secretly praying that the world and Mr Jobs and Mr Google and Mr Facebook and Mr Twitter might just slow down long enough for you to secure a good old fashioned job as a journalist. Will you be able to knock a long term living out of it, or will the members of this class emerge as the Biritechs and Rhapsodes of the early 21st century.

None of this is historically new.  The parchment manufacturers of the middle ages probably chewed their nails in equal anxiety when the Chinese began to manufacture cheap paper. The development of the Gutenberg press put paid to many forms of employment and activity based on people's need to know what was happening around them without having anything put into their hands to read from. The primary historical parallel is this however;  the late 20th century development of the internet is, arguably,  as seismic in its impact as was the invention of paper, of the alphabet, of writing and  of the Gutenberg press. The closest parallel is probably the latter cueing as it did a great democratisation of knowledge, the same claim that is made for the internet, although one must be careful not to confuse knowledge with information.

I can't think of any recent generation of journalists that has faced such a challenge in attempting to maintain role and relevance. The distinctiveness of journalism as a  professional category is rapidly disappearing. Last year, in a three day seminar supposedly on journalism,  in the Anaheim School of Journalism in Southern California, the word journalism was not uttered once. The word's very etymology points to its increasing obsolescence; coming from the Latin and later the French word for day, or daily. In the land of the Tweet, that day has now shrivelled to hours and minutes and seconds.  The news cycle no longer pauses for breath. A recent cartoon in a US newspaper, had a bewildered academic handing out the Pulitzer ~Prize for Tweeting.  Step forward Senator Boyle...

Perhaps the new model of journalist will be that described recently on CNN by Pete Cashmore, a social media evangelist and founder of the Mashable blog on that subject. Cashmore said, 'The value of a life led in public is most obvious to those seeking employment. Working in media, I frequently find myself talking to journalists who now possess a distribution channel entirely separate from their publication.

"With thousands of Twitter followers and hundreds of Facebook friends, these writers are building large audiences for their personal brands that make them a valuable asset to employers.

"As he tweets out his latest story to his 1.1 million Twitter followers, does David Pogue need the New York Times, or does the New York Times, need David Pogue?" To which I suppose one answer is, well as long as the Times is handing out his pay cheque, Mr Pogue needs it more, but I think we get his drift.

I note that at least one Irish journalist, RTE's Mark Little, has embraced this new mode of working and has taken time out of RTE to build on it.  Many other journalists, even the permanent and pensionable ones, are also creating Blogs and Twitter accounts, arguably giving added value to their

publications.  How one turns any of this into hard cash is another proposition, and not just for individual Bloggers and Tweeters but for the collective mainstream media.

Side by side with the slow fade of traditional journalism, is the slow fade of the concept of privacy. The over riding impulse of the Facebook revolution - it seems to me - is to subsume the private into the public, as we are encouraged to buy into ever more fiendish ways of plugging our

individual selves into the "network". A British academic recently reflected that it may soon become impossible to take a legal action for breach of privacy because the concept itself is so rapidly becoming meaningless. Ask any teenager who has splattered their most private thought, intimate pictures, et al, across their Facebook page.

That word's etymology, from the Latin privare - to deprive - in the sense of distancing oneself from the world or depriving the world of you, also points to its own in-built obsolescence. I would submit, that in this year 2010, in countries that are both wealthy and technologically advanced, the only things that we can truly keep private are our thoughts. The CEO of Facebook, Mark Zukerberg,  put it rather more succinctly last month, "Privacy is dead; get over it."Public sharing, he insisted, is the new "social norm".

I note the ever encroaching destruction of our own private space and observe the benign manner in which it is peddled. To some, it's an Orwellian encroachment on that sacred space which is the private, to others it's a "fun", enlightened, socially progressive way of "keeping in touch."

Thus we have  Google Latitude, which allows you to see "where your friends are", and the rather more controversial Google Buzz, which I have to say, I can't quite get my head around but which has been criticised for an overly zealous approach towards sharing your Buzz with people you might not wish to share it with.

One woman in the US, a victim of domestic violence, found herself inadvertently sharing her Buzz with her ex abuser husband. Google has since come out with all sorts of new privacy settings but to me, that is largely meaningless. Telling the Genie to behave herself  while she's walking the streets, falls rather short of putting her back in the bottle. And meanwhile Google vans , cars and very strange tricyles, stalk the earth, webcamming our homes or whatever it is they do, for the purposes of Google Street View. Faces, number plates etc, are blanked out, but hey, if you spot an inappropriate usage of Street View, just let them know!

If the marketing of all of this super charged social networking innovation, were a movie, it would be pure Disneyland,  all pink and frothy and fun and winsome, overlaid with the sound track from Bambi.  One happy young Irish journalist, who Tweets and Facebooks and shares very much of her personal space with the rest of the world described what she and others do as "curating our lives", lending what to some is an inexplicable, narcissistic impulse to implode one's own privacy, a certain high end, arch, artistic overlay that simultaneously excuses it and challenges the aesthetics and modern sensibility of its luddite critics.

On a personal level, when I observe Google Latitude and Google Buzz, and noting the Godsend it must be to the Security and Intelligence forces of the world, I don't see Bambi, I see I Robot interlaced with the sound track of

1984.

Imagine the following as a line from either of those movies.  "A phone is no longer a phone; it is your alter ego. It does not think as well as you do, but it has a better memory. It has a more accurate idea of where you are, it can take pictures better than we can remember things."

Now those, what to me, are intensely creepy lines, don't come from I Robot, but from the mouth of Mr Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, talking recently about the latest mobile phone innovation and urging his technological peers on to even more fiendishly imaginative ways of morphing humans into walking talking, software applications.

What jars is the outward face of a happy, clappy I'd like to teach the World to Sing public marketing of social networking - even that description manipulates - with the certain knowledge of its potential, less benign use by

everyone from peddlers of T shirts to adolescents, to the aforementioned intelligence services, in order to exert ever more control over our individual selves, depriving us even further of that sacred puddle of privacy.

As I see it, we are being led largely by the commercial exploitation of the highly competitive and intense needs of adolescents to hunt and socialise in packs, into a world where the rest of us - unwittingly and unwillingly - are also being hunted down.

What emotions would you feel,for example, as the Google car draws up into your street? Is the impulse to give it a merry wave or chase after it with a blowtorch and angle grinder?

Perhaps it depends on what age you are. My kids would wave, I'd be reaching for the torch. I do realise that I am middle aged and that when I was your age, and indeed much older, I was still tapping my stories on to a type writer, making copies with grubby carbon paper, and researching ancient history by begging the Irish Times librarian to let me rifle through their old newspapers. I have to accept that whatever my take on the new reality is, it remains precisely that, the new reality, and to paraphrase Mr Facebook, I really do have to get over it.

But what interests me, ultimately, is what does all of this have to say about journalism. In a world where so much is now so visible, so directly accessible to so many, how does one assess, see relevance,  coherence,  how does one battle through the cacophony, the babble and do what most of us I

hope still consider to be the essence of public service journalism, which is, the holding of power to account?

A computer genius was telling a friend about his plans for the future; the computers, he said, will be faster, cleverer, more intuitive, etc.  That's great, said his friend, and what are you doing about the humans?

So, let's apply that "what are you doing about the humans?" test to traditional journalism.  The IT revolution has done away with much of the heavy lifting. You can summon up a myriad facts with a keystroke,  secure every opinion under the sun on an issue in the same way, most politicians in the western world are subject to virtually 24 7 scrutiny, and legislation such as the FOI Act, are undoubtedly making decision makers more accountable, but is all of that, to use a hideous business term, actually securing better outcomes for the people that they serve and if it isn't, where is the space for journalism in effecting those better outcomes?

This meditation is ultimately all about belief, belief that there is still a space for independent, clear eyed, intelligent rigorous and purposeful journalism, and belief that that space include a public hungry for it.

The great American journalist, Walter Lippmann, once said that the function of the journalist was to interpret the decisions of the elite in a way that made them clearly understood by the masses.

I submit that there is something rather patronising in that, but nonetheless that has to be a continuing, core function of your profession.

In the year 2010, of course, it isn't just a handful of journalists working in traditional media who are interpreting the decisions of the elite. Anyone with a mobile can do it and have it blasted through cyberspace. So, when a significant political event happens, in addition to going to the usual websites, RTE, etc, I also, for example, log on to Politics i.e. A website, which, I have to say,  occasionally beats the mainstream media to the breaking story.

When a big event happens, such as George Lee's  resignation from Fine Gael or Willie O'Dea's resignation as Minister, the website will host every opinion  under the sun about the event and while it's all very entertaining, is it possible  that the instantaneousness of the reporting and comment,  the sheer volume of directly contradictory opinions, is simply replacing one form of ignorance with another?  Is one any better informed when deluged with every last drop of opinionated spittle, than one was in the olden days when sources of information were severely restricted?

This is where that journalistic space comes in.  Websites, particularly those where opinion is submitted anonymously, are largely immune to bias or special interest control. Politics. I.e. may well get a scoop precisely because a party apparatchik is taking advantage of an anonymity not afforded in the by-lined mainstream.

In the midst of the noise, of the shrieking, of the loud, loud voices clamouring to be heard, most of us still want to go to that authentic place that we trust, the reporter, the editorial writer, the newspaper, - in whatever media they are to be found - to secure a view of the facts that one can trust.

So while I can read a hundred wildly entertaining and opinionated takes on what happened to Willie O'Dea, I will still turn to someone - with a name - who has built up their reputation for accuracy and balance over many years, and who is indeed, capable of interpreting the decisions of the elite - or at least through the prism of my own unconscious prejudice.

Last week, a senior Vatican official called on Ireland to start producing a better, more educated class of priest, or at least that's what I understood him to have said.  Now, apart from the fact that I suspect that the senior Vatican official, may be slightly missing the point about what's been going on here, I think his instruction could equally be applied to journalism. Anyone who secures a place on a journalism course - given the competition - must be pretty bright, but it's how you choose to engage that brightness and intelligence that will define your place and effectiveness in this job.

In the 24 / 7 world of noise that is the modern news cycle, an effective journalist must be rigorous in their reporting, must rise above the pressures imposed by the demands of the instant and must bring a standard of knowledge and analysis to their work that will cut through the babble and force the reading, listening, watching public to pay attention.

Just last week, I heard probably a dozen differing accounts about what Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary is up to in relation to the enigmatic Hangar 6 in Dublin Airport. I don't think that anyone, other than Mr O'Leary, holds the key to unlocking that one, but the reporters I paid attention to, were those who had researched the past statements and actions of all of the actors in this little drama, and then attempted, without apparent bias, to draw the threads together and make a reasonably informed analysis of what was going on. The voices too soon out of the traps skewed the story in ways that did little service to the public interests that are in play in this saga, not least the three hundred unemployed workers, agonising about their futures and those of their families and wanting simply to hear the truth.

But I want now to say a word about an issue more directly related to my current work - Freedom of Information. In the last year, as the economy went on a slide, the volume of FOI requests for public records, increased enormously. From a time, at the height of the boom, when I could count the number of FOI related stories in the media on the fingers of one hand in any given month, they now stream out in multiples on a daily basis.

Last year I called it the Shane Ross effect. It was Senator Ross and his colleague Nick Webb who dug deep into the entrails of Fas, through FOI, and produced the results they did - the effective holding to account of Fas management and Board.

Taking their cue, many other reporters began similar digs in other public bodies and Government Departments whereupon varying degrees of extravagance were unearthed.  The former Ceann Comhairle, John O'Donoghue was effectively forced to resign because of the endeavours of a Sunday Tribune reporter in relation to Mr O'Donoghue's travel and expenses.

I have no doubt that all of this will have had a cleansing effect,  and that higher standards will now apply, yet the words horse and bolted nevertheless come to mind when I witness the new media enthusiasm for the FOI Act.

The mistakes made during the boom, the extravagances perpetrated were there to be revealed as the boom, to quote a former public figure, became boomier. Who went trawling then?

In truth, I don't blame the media altogether for the relative lack of interest in the seamier side of those halcyon days. Extravagance can be clearly seen only if contrasted with penny pinching and penury. Who cared if a Minister bathed in Asses' milk at taxpayers expense, if the same taxpayers were also splashing about in the their very own milky baths. Lavish meals appear as such now only because a two course early bird dinner in the local Italian has become the new touchstone of luxury.

Yet, there were journalists who went against the cosy consensus nonetheless, who did their homework, who forecast the collapsing Pyramid scheme that was the property bubble, and put up with the derision heaped upon them at the time. They truly were doing the State some service even if the State was singularly ungrateful.

Good journalists need to stand apart, to observe the consensus and see if it stands up to hard scrutiny and to call it if it doesn't.

In conclusion I would like to draw your attention to another hat that I wear, that of Commissioner for Environmental Information, the Office I hold arising out of Ireland's adoption of the EU Directive on access to information on the environment.

The regulations were enacted a number of years ago, yet so far there is precious little usage of the access right either by the public or by the media.  This is partly because of unfamiliarity with the regulations, and also a lack of awareness of how they differ in scope from the provisions of the FOI act.  Each exemption for example, is subject to a public interest test, and the range of bodies covered is much greater than in FOI.   Given the supposed great public interest in the environment, I think the media might do well to examine this access route to information and begin to use

it.”

ENDS

Brian Cowen Late Late Show Interview

TF

A family torn to shreds

It was with great sadness and utter disbelief that I read the front page of yesterday's Irish Examiner. It was about a Limerick couple who have lost their three and only sons, one by one.

The article was heart wrenching, sickening and it struck a chord with me. It shook me to my very core.

The deaths of their sons were all tragedies, something no-one should have to endure. You wouldn't wish it on your worst enemy. Donal, a three month old child died from cot death in 1983. 20-year-old Noel died eight years ago in a car accident and their eldest son Liam (31) was just buried last Friday. He died following a work accident while loading a skip on to a lorry at a farm near Castleisland.

Reading this as a journalism student didn't matter. If it happened to my brothers/sisters or my father I wouldn't be able to cope. Just looking at the pictures of the three sons, a normal hard-working family, it is hard to envisage that they are all gone. Liam leaves behind a daughter and a son. They will never know their fathers character. A picture paints a 1000 words, but will that be enough?

I cannot express my admiration for the courage the O'Connor family have shown. It makes me question what we all take for granted, and to link in with Orla's earlier article on religion-I have to ask the questions: where was God for the O'Connor family and why do bad things happen good people?

They said after Donal's death: "It was heartbreaking burying our baby but we said it's God's will and there were no answers."

The article was a powerful example of how journalists can touch people and discuss an extremely sensitive and difficult topic with the utmost dignity and respect. An example to follow.

D.K

Willie?

TF

Cole hearted

Today's lecture really showed me how cynical world of journalism can be. Whilst casting a skeptical eye over Ashley and Cheryl Cole's recent separation, I discovered that most of the class truly believed that their marriage was a publicity stunt.

Cheryl Cole stood by her husband despite numerous allegations of infidelity against him. After five years of marriage, she's finally decided to call it quits (Michaela's covered all this in her blog below!).

Some observers have commented on the good timing of the split. Now that Miss Cole is a free agent, America is hers for the taking. Simon Cowell's protegée will now conquer the US, distraction free.

Others have pointed out that Ashley Cole was bad for Cheryl's public image. The most hated soccer player in Britain with the nation's sweetheart, it hardly did wonders for her PR. She probably ditched him to further her own career.

And then there is the belief that the union never existed, and the relationship was a hoax. I cannot fathom how anyone, celebrity or not, could pull that off. Unless you're Jordan and Alex Reid (and I'm no cynic, but come on..).

These disparaging comments make me wonder about the world we live in. We always have to assume to worst about people. Has our society become so seeped in negativity and pessimism that we cannot feel empathy for anyone?  

Cheryl Cole got married at a young age, probably too young to even comprehend what a marriage entails. She will now be a divorcée at the age of 26. Would anybody want this?

In my opinion, she is just like any other woman. Cheryl entered into marriage thinking it would be for life. Little did she know her husband was a cheat, and that she would be publicly humiliated.

She may be beautiful, rich and famous, and she may be propelled around the place by clouds of fairy-dust but I imagine that at the moment she's heartbroken (and hopefully on a  comfort food binge, that girl needs to put on a few pounds).

Call me naive if you want. But I refuse to believe that all celebrities are soul-less androids, slave to their PR machine. Of course there are exceptions (A certain Miss Price, anyone?).

There's a good chance that I'm wrong, and that all of this is a publicity stunt orchestrated by the ill-famed puppet master himself, Max Clifford, spin doctor to the stars. But I think Cheryl Cole's different. She strikes me as being down-to-earth (albeit, a tad annoying) and just...normal. As normal as a celebrity can get anyway. Cheryl is simply a girl from an estate in Newcastle who dreamed of fame and got lucky. Unfortunately for her, the dream is turning sour. 

As for me, I pity her. Who else would have to endure such pain for it all to called a lie? And if it's all a publicity stunt? Well, I pity her even more. Who wants to live their life through a series of carefully chosen PR moves? The fame and fortune is not worth it.  

AH

Ashley Cole, you dirty dog!

So Cheryl has finally given Ashley the boot, a terse 21-word statement issued just hours after her return from L.A. to Heathrow signalling the end of what one could refer to as one of the most controversial celebrity relationship of this century.
Of course the tabloids had a field day with the story: "cheating husband gets the boot" and "because he's not worth it" splashed across the papers. His "five flings" made public knowledge, not to mention his oh-so-sensitive images taken by a mistress being beamed into every Sky box this side of the Atlantic. Harrowing images of a heartbroken Cheryl (the nation's sweetheart, how could he) leaving the airport in turmoil ... a tragedy, but dare I say a delicious one.
One could attempt a baseless arguement that newspapers and the media *nagging old woman's voice* "have no right to invade the privacy of a couple's relationship" - that's is, I admit, 100% true. Nobody has the right, but the fact remains that as long as people want to know about the sordid details of a couple's failing relationship, the media will provide. There is A LOT of money to be made in the misery of others, horrible but true. Nobody likes this fact, but a fact it remains. Deal with it.

Women's sporting write

After playing a minute role with the UL camogie team as their 'statman'; seeing their preparation, skill and sheer determination to succeed, I feel compelled to question why women don’t have a greater voice in the world of sport. UL's win over CIT was barely covered in the national media. In fact, when it was mentioned it was simply stated and presented as a side event.

I can tell you that women can hack it in the world of sport, just like men can. The UL panel for instance trained just as hard as any men’s hurling team, up at half seven, put through their paces and challenged to their upper limits and into the extreme. Their tenacity and drive was what won them the shield. The majority of their players would not have looked out of place with UL's hurlers.

Apart from the local press who cover anything newsworthy in their locality, women’s sporting events are not as well represented as men’s (Fact-just open any paper and count). Gaelic games, soccer, boxing and rugby-all the space is given to one gender at the expense of the other. There are plenty of Katie Taylor’s, Aine Lyng’s and Serena Williams’ out there just waiting to be heard.

The idea of “biological determinism” throws up a lot of bulls**t about men and women. It offers us the ridiculous notion that men are stronger and less emotional than women. In short, it says that women have smaller brains and demands them to live a life of domesticity while men act as the breadwinner.

Well I’m not buying that crap. I have met enough women who train twice as hard and play as prolific as any man. If there is one thing that I have learnt with the camogie team, it is that they have to put in the hard yards to get any sort of acknowledgement and recognition. I admire TG4 for their effort in showing women’s tennis and Gaelic football and some camogie games. We have to start somewhere I guess, and with more women playing sport than at any time before, we have the chance to show that we care. Women can and always have hacked sport. It’s this male dominated arena that needs to change.

And I intend to change it-little by little.

D.K

Burley's "bruise" blunder

Last Wednesday, Sky News presenter Kay Burley sparked controversy after comments she made live on air regarding “quite a bruise” that she noticed US Vice-President Joe Biden had on his head.
“What’s happened to his head? I’m sure that’s what everybody’s asking at home,” she said.
“It looks like he’s walked into a door,” she told Sky’s Washington correspondent, while they discussed Mr Biden’s speech.
The two spent time offering opinions as to what the mysterious mark could be. They even came up with the suggestion that, as Mr Biden had just returned from the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, the most likely explanation was that he had sustained an injury whilst there.
So, what was the “bruise” on Mr Biden’s head? Well, last Wednesday being the Christian feast of Ash Wednesday, Mr Biden’s “bruise” was simply the ashes he had received earlier that day, a similar “bruise” to that worn by millions of Christians around the world to mark the beginning of Lent.
Ms Burley came in for furious criticism for her ignorance and insensitivity. For me, it highlights just how in-tune and aware every journalist needs to be of what is going on in the world around them. You certainly don’t need to be some religious fanatic, but a journalist and especially a journalist working with such a huge organisation as Sky News, should surely have been aware that the day was Ash Wednesday. Even if she wasn’t a practising Christian (which she later said she actually is), as a journalist she had a professional duty to be aware of the day, just as a journalist should know when Ramadan begins or when Yom Kippur falls.
The clip of her making the comments is extremely embarrassing, as anyone watching can clearly see, being the day it was, that Mr Biden has ashes on his forehead. Wouldn’t anyone watching a Hindu speak know that the coloured dot on their forehead (the “bindi”) was part of their religion, and not a mark they received when they “walked into a door”?
At the end of the clip, having obviously been informed of her mistake, Ms Burley cuts across Mr Biden’s speech to tell us that she is a “very bad Catholic” and that she now knows it is Ash Wednesday. “I hang my head in shame,” she said, before cutting to a commercial break. While her comments were obviously extremely insensitive to Christians, the incident clearly highlights the importance of journalistic accuracy. Does any journalist want to be forced to clarify stupid mistakes they have made live on air? It shows the importance of clear thinking for all journalists, even in the extremely pressurised environment that is Sky News.
As an experienced journalist, who began working for her local newspaper when she was just 17 and is now almost part of the furniture of the Sky newsroom, surely Ms Burley has been around long enough to know that she shouldn’t blurt out the first thing that comes into her head without considering it first.
For her, the faux pas is one in a long line of events that has landed her in hot water. She was recently accused of causing Peter Andre to break down in tears during a live interview, and was widely criticised for questions she asked the wife of the man convicted of the2006 Ipswich murders. Her suggestion that Mr Biden was possibly involved in some sort of incident at the Winter Olympics also provoked anger, as she jokingly suggested he may have been participating in the luge event (just days after a Georgian participant died in a horrific accident while practising on the luge track.)
For all us aspiring journos, it highlights just how careful we should be when writing an article, or making a piece for radio or television, to ensure that our work is correct and properly thought through, so as to avoid experiencing Ms Burley’s humiliation. KF

Is it collage or college?

The Sunday Times broke a story about college fees returning to the political agenda. It seems an economist (Colin Hunt) has chaired an 'expert' group on third level education. Since when was an economist an educational expert, able to decide our future? We know what to expect-cuts, cuts and more cuts. However, we should all stand united and in solidarity to mourn the passing of our education.

It is exactly this type of slash and burn which has cost schools Special Needs Assistants, language teachers, etc. We are meant to become a 'knowledge based economy'. But how?

"The options being considered include an Australian-style student loan system to replace the present "no fees" approach.”
So I gather they are going to differentiate between fees and contribution, as if a choice exists.

I know that while this may offer some people the benefit over fees, it will cause utter devastation for others, myself included. My father supports me and my four siblings-one in LC and another in WIT. He has taken pay cuts and pension cuts as a garda already. I'm already behind on rent and esb bills. I might as well pack my bags if this is agreed. Even if it doesn't come into effect until further down the road, it will hit my younger sister and my two bro's.

I just can't get over how the present government gloss over everything and still get away with it. We try to kid ourselves and say "next time things will be different. When FG get into power things will improve."

But will they really? My dad would be a FF supporter, not a staunch one but one the less. I slag him about going for SF for the craic. I never voted and don't think I will anytime soon. Yes it is my democratic right, people died for me. All the policies are the same, more or less. Willie O'Dea was shoved out, felt he had to bow out, curious George led the way.

Did they just prove what everyone else thought they knew?

Is politics a dirty game?

D.K

Who does he think he is?

Firstly I would ask you to read this short article by Richard Dawkins.

I know it is old but it's something that got my attention.

The whole article is written in a derogatory fashion with quite extremist views. Words and phrases like: force of evil, irrelevance and idiotic jumped out at me when I read it.

I know there will be many who won't agree with me on this. I am not saying the article should not have been written but surely there is a better way of putting across his views without being so condescending?

Why is it when someone who is Catholic speaks in this sort of a passionate way they get labelled as a bible basher or told they are trying to force religion down other people's throats. This man was published. His whole article is based on vicious opinion.(Oh sorry, I forgot, he does use one example. Must be everyone's opinon so.) I mean seriously, he said that the child abuse that went on was nothing compared to being brought up Catholic. I'm sure that those who were abused would have something to say about that.

Just to make a point here, yes I'm Catholic, I'm not offended by this article because this man doesn't believe in God, I'm offended by the fact he felt it neccesary to rip my religion to shreds to make his points credible. I'm aware there are problems in the Catholic Church, there are things I don't agree with. That's what faith is in my opinion. There's more too it than just going to mass on a Sunday. The church has been a place of solace for countless people, a place that should always feel like home to those who want it. There are bad people in every walk of life, but there are good ones too.

My question is, should we as journalists try to make this seem balanced? If so, how? Should he be allowed to have a rant about the fact he doesn't believe in God? Why? Or why not?

Here's his website if you want to have a look. Any opinons?

Censorship in a Third Level Institution? Never!

If you thought we had it bad, spare a thought for the students who walk the hallowed grounds of TCD.

It seems that college staff in Trinity College Dublin are making efforts to introduce a controversial clause, giving the Senior Dean power to remove student publications from circulation.

The clause is being strongly opposed by student bodies after a working group, attended by the Senior Dean, Junior Dean, Dean of Students and the College Secretary. The clause was added on in the last minute.

This would entitle the Senior Dean to censor publications such as ‘Trinity News’, which has been openly critical of the college in the past.

Trinity College Students’ Union President, Cónán Ó Bróim expressed concern at the clause and claimed he feared it would lead to censorship, but that they would be willing to fight it.

Students have already shown there disdain for the act by setting up a facebook page showing their opposition to the clause. The page has already gathered over 800 fans, from colleges all over Ireland, as well as Trinity Alumni.

Maybe it’s time the fine students who care about their college, their publications and their reputation to take some more affirmative action in showing the Deans their outrage. They could start with a telephone call to the NUJ.

JK

Dramas and scandals

Willie O'Dea, the man behind that infamous gun, is gone.

After surviving a vote of confidence in the Dáil, it seemed the Limerick man was safe. He would have sat back in his chair and given a sigh of relief. His body was probably still tense with worry and his greying moustache more than likely still quivered in fear. A vicious attack on him in the Dáil by Enda Kenny would have left him shaking. 

'The Government are harboring a perjurer, it's perjury!',the Fine Gael leader cried, possibly intent on pointing the finger at somebody else, and diverting everybody's attention from his own party's celebrity dramas last week. George Lee, a man who has forever been predicting from behind his crystal ball, probably knew this was all going to happen already.

A casual comment about a fellow Limerick man owning a brothel-what has our government come to in recent years...? The Irish sit glued to their screens every Wednesday night waiting for the latest episode of 'The Dáil', popcorn in the microwave, hot toddies being passed around, Dunnes Stores mini cans of Club Orange for the younger crowd, it would remind one of the days of the 'Big Big Movie' on a Saturday night. The intro sounds loudly, people tap their feet in unison to the music, and the screen pans out to show a large room.

Abuse, scandal and derogatory comments fly from all sides of the room. Parents block their children's ears when Paul Gogarty's face comes into focus. They breathe a sigh of relief as he controls his 'parliamentary language' to that of John Kelleher's idea of a PG standard.

On the 'Dáil Extra', a programme with exclusive behind the scenes action, interviews,and diary-room events, Quinlivan, the man at the end of O'Dea's brothel comments, sits in the diary room chair and speaks to the camera, 'It’s hardly acceptable for a cabinet minister to go around smearing his political opponents in the middle of an election campaign’. The popcorn is passed around the room, loud munching noises and people nod their heads in agreement.

Alas!The tapes have been recovered...a journalist holds his head high-of course he did not make up such a comment on O'Dea's behalf. An advertisement break, the kettle is put on and a few toilet breaks, you can feel the suspense heighten in the living room.

Willie, himself, is slumped in his seat. It seems comments about brothels and Sinn Féil candidates can get you nowhere in life. The Greens are split in two, divided down the middle, do they agree with O'Dea's affidavit mistake? It is perjury? Or did it really slip the poor man's mind he made such a comment?

'I swore an affidavit to the best of my recollection...', Willie claims. 

Murmurs of disagreement echo around the living room. Grandad, a firm Fianna Fáil supporter, hangs his head in shame. What has become of the party that fought for a free Ireland in the twentieth century? They built an independent country, and now their scandals and mistakes are pulling out the threads from the seams, one by one.

He appeals to the opposition, 'I say things I don't really mean sometimes in the heat of battle...', he stumbles upon his words. It seems that all is lost. The Dáil agrees they have confidence in O'Dea however, the people at home begin to reassess their opinions of him...well, if the Dáil says he's okay, then maybe he is...?

The televisions are switched off..people resign themselves to bed in a state of confusion.

Thursday night, breaking news. O'Dea has resigned himself from the Dáil on the grounds that he felt his continuation in the office would distract from the important and vital work of the government. Well, wasn't that thoughtful of him?

Now, how did that come about? What changed the government's decision over night..?

Microwave popcorn boxes and mini cans are thrown into the trollies on Wednesday morning around the country. The dinner is eaten quickly, phones are taken off the hook and the country settles in by the television for another week of hype, drama, scandal and affairs...

DC.

Ignorance is bliss...

Part of what makes sports journalism so important to me is the mutual respect between player and reporter. Every week, Alex Ferguson will say "well done!” to Sky Sports reporter Geoff Shreeves after his pre match interviews are complete. In 2002, Roy Keane sought after Tom Humphreys and Paul Kimmage to document the Irish team's unprofessional approach to World Cup preparations in Saipan. Journalists build up a relationship with the stars; achieve an understanding, and sometimes friendships with their subjects

But what happens when a journalist tries to break into the clique? The likes of Tom Humphreys, Paul Kimmage, Vincent Hogan or James Lawton can criticise players, teams and managers each week, and their opinions are highly respected and taken on board by the sports professionals. To break into the sports journalism clique you need to work for your jersey, not just have a regular column.

On Tuesday, in the wake of Ireland's humbling defeat in Paris, Kevin Myers launched a scathing attack on both Declan Kidney and Ronan O'Gara. He called into question Kidneys honesty. His lack of rugby knowledge was clear with each word, he called last season's Six Nations Grand Slam (arguably the greatest Irish sporting moment) an aberration and displayed all the smugness and condescending clichés of an armchair "fan".

He felt the need to explain to us who the great Brendan Mullen was, something a real fan wouldn’t feel the need to do. He told us in his infinite wisdom how teams target Ronan O'Gara's defensive frailties by running directly at his fly-half channel, without recognising how he regularly has the highest tackle count in each game he plays. He may be small, but his bravery cannot be questioned.

He slated Declan Kidney’s selection of O’Gara, and how the Irish team “did not want to win.” He told us about how we Irish have a longing for failure, and even a man as decorated as Kidney could not stay away from its allure. He insulted Jerry Flannery. Although his kick was shameful and crucial in the context of the game, much worse happens on the pith week in week out, and is in the lower category of offences one can commit. Certainly not worth omission from the Irish squad for two years, as Mr Myers would suggest.

Ronan called him on it. He didn’t seek a different journalist to aesthetically piece together his feelings. He didn’t deflect blame away from himself, or from the team. He went directly to Kevin and the public, with a Letter to the Editor. He questioned the balance of the article, and of how the editor would allow something so ignorant to the facts go to print.

O’Gara said that he himself is his harshest critic, and also said that Ireland was indeed well beaten by the French. But he refused to be made a scapegoat by Myers, who he labelled a self appointed rugby expert.

If Myers is indeed a rugby expert, would it be more appropriate for him to write in the sports section? Although entitled to his own opinion, Myers has insulted the most successful Irish team of all time, who until last week had not lost a match for almost eighteen months, and has in turn demonstrated his ignorance to the facts.

If what Myers had said was true, then why did Tony Ward, Hugh Farrelly and Gerry Thornley, the true experts, all put it down to a poor team performance, as well as a stunning French display? It seems Myers is on a sporting throne much higher than all the rest, who simply don’t have his expertise, class and most importantly, cunning skills of observation.

In demonstrating his need for attention, Myers has shown the two fingers to sports journalists everywhere. Who needs to build a relationship with their sporting subjects, when you have a daily column and the freedom to insult who you want?

He writes about sport because he needs to tell us how much he knows. I do it because sport matters.

NT

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/ogara-letter-to-editor-why-i-refuse-to--be-scapegoated-by-kevin-myers-2070434.html

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-its-an-irish-characteristic-we-are-comfortable--with-failure-its-a-familiar-condition-and-it-suits-us-2064681.html

Off your head

I have heard more about these so called “head shops” over the last few weeks than ever before. Within two weeks of each other, two Dublin head shops went up in flames. These fires happened at time where the safety of head shops is under investigation. This has just added to the controversy. Fine Gael Health Spokesperson James Reilly has suggested that an amendment be placed in the Finance Bill to legally require head shops to have a licence to operate.

If head shops can sell “legal highs” without a licence how do we know how safe these products are? They claim to sell products such as hallucinogens and party pills made from substances that are not registered as drugs in any country therefore making them legal. If a product is not made from illegal substances but creates the same effect, is it not just a dangerous? You could say it defeats the purpose of why a drug with this effect was made illegal in the first place.

Apart from the legal highs that head shops sell they also sell drug paraphernalia such as bongs and rolling paper. Although head shops are not selling the drugs in the store, they are encouraging the use by selling products you more than likely need drugs to use.

With hospitals all over the country admitting people with side effects of head shop products, they must not be as safe as shop owners’ claim. Side effects induced by these products include addiction, difficulty breathing and psychotic episodes. Not exactly a safe high in my opinion.

Just because the substances are legal does not mean they will not cause harm. Legal is not the same as safe.

JOD

A Strategic Alliance?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0218/education.html

Should be interesting to see how this works out! At least it's some good publicity for the university.

AH

Public affairs

Tiger Wood's is no longer keeping schtum. On Friday, he is issuing a public apology for his misdemeanors.

Wood's dramatic fall from grace has been well documented by the media, but seems to have died down somewhat. Why does he feel the need to speak now?

And why do we care?

Woods is obviously apologising to get his career back on track and to win back the public's favour. but he's good at what he does. Why should his personal life affect his professional?

I personally have no interest in Wood's extra-marital activities. Why would I be, he didn't cheat on me. It's an issue between him and golf club wielding wife.

But of course the public can't get enough of these scandals.

John Terry and Toni Poole, Ashley and Cheryl Cole, Vernon Kaye and Tess Daly, and (sigh) Jordan and Peter Andre. High profile couples whose private lives being played out through the media.

Their personal heartbreak is being devoured by the misery hunger vulchers that we are. They sell newspapers. We love reading about their crap lives.

Do we feel guilty? Not a chance. If these celebrities make so many aspects of their lives public they aren't entitled to privacy, right? That is the common belief amongst the public.

Tiger Wood's apology will make headlines. Ashley Cole will probably cheat again, and again, and again. Millions are waiting in anticipation.

Meanwhile, people all over the world are living in poverty, dying of cancer and AIDS but we care more about John Terry being stripped of his captaincy over the England squad.


AH

Taking the Mick

If Mickey Harte thinks he can suddenly place a red hand over TV crews, he is severely mistaken. He was reported as being furious with GAA HQ and the allowance of media video footage to sight three of his players and earn them respective 4 week bans (Irish Daily Star, Feb 16th).

Subsequently, he said: "We could reserve the right to decide whether our League games are to be televised or not."

Come off it Mickey, you don't have the authority or the balls to follow through with that. Not only does TV coverage help gain extra revenue for your county, it helps showcase your talented squad and OUR games. Are you going to deny the Irish Diaspora this? Are you going to deny the ardent 90-year-old a chance to see his team because he can no longer go to games?
Didn't think so.

I acknowledge that you’re pissed off. The argument that the same uniform coverage and 'trial by media' should apply across the board, while holding sway in some quarters, shouldn't fit in with what we stand for. I, for one do not believe in 'trial by media', this is the role of the courts, CCCC and other professional bodies. The industry did not knock on the door of CCCC and say: "Next up for scrutiny is troublesome Tyrone". It was the CCCC who knocked on our door.

Your point on it being applicable to all counties is a given. It should be justified. But, in reality-who would you rather watch, Tyrone v Dublin, or Laois (my own county) v Carlow (no offence intended)? That is the reality. The industry is also one of corporatism. If that point is to stand, an independent arbitrator or reporter should go to all the games, and write up a list of all players to stand trial. Frankly, I don't think you or any right thinking GAA fan would want that either.

While on the topic, it would be rather naive of me to refrain from discussing Paul Galvin. Paul, a player who plays with passion, prowess, heart and the occasional spite was severely wronged in the Cork game. His sending off was on the basis of reputation rather than cause and effect. The man was wrestled and hauled to the ground, and the natural human impulse was to defend himself. He should have remained on the field of play. Football, unlike hurling is fast becoming a dirty game (Puke football). There is no universal and accepted method of tackling, the game is littered with cynical fouling and the new hand passing rule has confused player and manager.

While I am glad that the Tyrone county board have come out and acknowledged the benefit of national coverage:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/championship/2010/0217/tyrone.html
I am disappointed to see a manager of Harte's calibre and stature threatening press freedom and GAA pride.

After all, there are more important sporting issues that need and should be addressed.

D.K

Dying for the cause

I'm just going to open a forum here... Is the job worth it??


CH

Killing Confession via the BBC

An extraordinary story broke yesterday when Ray Gosing, a veteran BBC journalist, apparently confessed to the killing of his terminally sick lover on a national broadcast

The confession was part of the programme Inside Out, which was aired by the BBC on Monday night.

Police have arrested Mr Gosling who is now 70 on a murder charge but so far he refuses to elaborate on the identity of his former lover or the specific place and date the event took place.

Whether his claims are true has yet to be verified but given what appears to be genuine distress and emotion during the confession i suspect it may well be true.

Have a look for yourselves
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKFehQYOEV0

Here is an interview shortly after the broadcast
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3anUQ0_rpc&feature=response_watch

This im sure will reignite the debate on euthanasia and the law surrounding assisted suicide and while i dont feel the need to wade into that on this blog, i think this is a great example of a news story that has huge implications in the wider context.

A few key questions:
Were the BBC right to broadcast this before the police had been notified?
Should it have been broadcast at all?
Should the BBC have verified his claims before the broadcast?

Over to you guys.

LS

Whatcha say?

Tubs’s tonsils failed him on Friday night. As if torturing Gerry Adams about his brother's upcoming sex abuse case wasn't bad enough, he couldn’t wait to move into the IRA domain. Countless times he questioned Gerry about his brother, until he cornered himself. It seemed Gerry was in for a grilling. He wasn't the criminal, yet Ryan chose to trial him by media. Feelings aside, he just came across as trying to gain one over on Gerry, hassling and harrying his every twitch.

Then it came, Ryan's face lit up as he asked the million dollar question-how do you sleep with blood on your hands? , or something along those lines. Then Gerry gave a response that shook the nation and brought the big man back to earth. Ryan looked as if he soiled himself (in nice terms). Gerry’s response was that the time for violence was over and he pointed out the fact that Ryan's grandfather was at one time in the IRA. Maybe Ryan shouldn't have gone on the ‘Who do you think you are?’ show after all. The joys of being a public figure I guess.

Tubs stuttered for words and all he could muster was that 1/3 of the audience had a granddad in the IRA. Pathetic. Yet, he got all the plaudits from the crowd. I think Ryan’s statement got lost in translation, because he lost the battle. It was all his own doing though, he just couldn't wait. He launched in without fuel, and he certainly couldn't stand the heat.

I am a fan of Ryan's but he seems to be very controversial and disregard the rapport that is needed to gain the trust of his interviewees. On the same show he quizzed a member of the Nationwide team about the death of his wife with the first question. As a journalist I know we are required to go the hard yards and ask the difficult questions, but this struck me as half-hearted and depressing.

http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1066427

To be honest Gerry’s comments weren’t that controversial. Yet, it seems that the media have nothing else to discuss. Then again, anything that takes away from the ‘R’ word is a welcome advocate, just look at Jedward. The Belfast Telegraph lead with the headline: Chat show Tubridy riled over Gerry Adams IRA remarks.
Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/chat-show-tubridy-riled-over-gerry-adams-ira-remarks-14682606.html#ixzz0fiTsMUKy

Gerry played a clever game, but that’s what politicians do, they deflect attention somewhere else. I’m not supporting Adams here, but I think he played his cards and controlled the interview. He was right when he said the time for change and peace had come. I’m just sorry they hadn’t seen it that way from day 1 and it took the atrocities of the Troubles to bring this resolve.

My grandfather was in the IRA too tubs, so you are not alone. Back then it was probably like joining the boy scouts, for the thrill of it. If you’re going to get offended every time someone puts the spotlight on you, you really shouldn’t be there (Give me your job). As for my Nan, she prefers Kenny. Better late than never.
D.K

The latest polls

reposted from tomfelle.com

THE latest poll in today’s Irish Independent brings some good news to Fine Gael and should settle party jitters following a tumultuous week, but Enda Kenny’s position is far from safe.

The loss of George Lee, who explained cogently why he left and what was wrong with Fine Gael and Irish politics on Pat Kenny's Frontline program last Monday night, does not appear to have significantly damaged the party.

Fine Gael, at 34 per cent, would undoubtedly be in an incredibly strong position to form the next Government. Were that percentage repeated on election day, the party should be able to comfortably win around 60 seats.

This can be accounted for by the built in “big mo” bias, to abuse a West Wing phrase, in the Irish PRstv electoral system. The party would under a list system get 34 per cent of the available 166 seats, about 55. However a typical seat bonus of of anything from five to 10 seats would be normal under the Irish system, as the final seats in tight races and five seaters usually fall toward the party with momentum. 

The reverse is true of Fianna Fail. Where its electoral results repeated on election day, the party would likely lose 30 seats.

Garret FitzGerald, writing recently in The Irish Times, suggests that the media were misreading polling data wildly, and were ignoring the margin of error built into every poll (the confidence interval around a point estimate, for example a poll suggesting a two per cent rise for Fine Gael, or a one per cent dip, is meaningless as the confidence interval is almost always +/- three per cent).

This is undoubtedly true, and screaming headlines of recent Fianna Fail come backs after slight gains in one poll were unfounded. However there is now very strong evidence, from a range of opinion polls and during a number of months, that Fine Gael is at or around the low to mid 30s, Fianna Fail is at or around 25 to 27 per cent (historic lows) and Labour are stuck in high teen percentage support.

Equally, it is evident from all polling data that Enda Kenny has failed to connect with the Irish public and just one in four people are satisfied with his performance as leader. 

The belief in the public that Kenny is a lightweight and somewhat cold and aloof sits uncomfortable, some might argue, with the reality. Kenny is one of the most affable in the Dail, in person he is warm and generous and is extremely hard working.

However he has never been a good television performer, he is not a naturally aggressive debater or orator, and in one and one counters with Brian Cowen he has come off as loser on many occasions. That may be why the public at large view him as weak.

Given Lee’s resignation, and talk of “murmurings” within party ranks, and lets be honest the party’s love of building guillotines to cut off it’s leader’s head, the question remains, how long more can Kenny last?

Some years ago the former Fine Gael TD Austin Deasy famously said there was “blood on the walls” following the ousting of John Bruton. Bruton survived an initial challenge but lost the leadership some months later after a second heave.

TDs within the party say Kenny has their full support, but privately a number concede his position is secure only “for now”. No one in the parliamentary party has as yet openly challenged him, but unless his own performances drastically improve in the coming weeks and months that may well change.

TF