RTE Guilty of Appalling Errors but "Left-leaning" Accusation Is Wrong

Irish Independent
April 7, 2012

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/james-downey-rte-guilty-of-appalling-errors-but-leftleaning-accusation-is-wrong-3073936.html


YET another Irish institution is in crisis. Like all the other institutions, RTE stands in need of reform. And, as so often, it has to reform itself in an atmosphere of angst and confusion instead of our old friend calm deliberation.

An institution comparable to the Catholic Church, the political system or the banks? Certainly. Much as print journalists like myself may dislike it, television is the most powerful communications medium yet invented. It is far more influential than the "social media" and will remain so.

As a means of delivering serious information, of course, it can never come close to newspapers or even radio.

The social media, meanwhile, can never attain the authority of either print or broadcasting. Anybody can tweet anything he or she pleases. It may be important or it may be complete rubbish. Or it may be deliberately designed to lie and mislead. This was the case with the presidential election tweet which generated such an uproar.

RTE itself, in its new guidelines to staff, agonises over how to handle dubious messages whose true origins may be unknown and whose authors are not subject to the constraints of the mainstream media, such as the defamation laws and the obligation to cleave to accuracy and fairness.

In my opinion, it should not have bothered. The best way to deal with tweets is to ignore them. In the rare instances they appear to convey earth-shattering information, they can be checked with a reliable source.

This did not happen in the affair of the tweet which falsely claimed that Sinn Fein was about to produce a witness to a financial transaction. Secondly, RTE failed to correct it although it could have done so while the programme was still on air.

But all of this was far less significant than the defamation of Fr Kevin Reynolds, accused of rape and fathering a child in Africa -- although he had offered to undergo a test which would prove that he was not the father. More than a year on, and after the establishment of no fewer than four inquiries into the incident, we still do not know the answer to the central question. How on earth could such a thing have happened?

There is a second question. Which heads should roll?

As always happens when passions are aroused, there have been near-hysterical demands for the heads of the director general and the chairman of the RTE Authority. This week brought two resignations. One was that of a high-ranking executive Ed Mulhall, one of the most admired and respected people in the organisation.

Curiously, Mulhall's resignation preceded the imminent publication of the report on the incident by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. It does not help us to understand how an appalling mistake was made and who was at fault for the evident breakdown of procedures. Presumably the BAI report will enlighten us. But if so, one has to wonder why any need should exist for the other three inquiries.

I also wonder why RTE chose a time like this to publish new guidelines for staff. They are exactly what one might expect. They are the principles of good broadcasting and good journalism -- to which, in fairness, RTE has typically adhered. The most fundamental feature of the national broadcaster is that it is a part of the establishment. Not exactly "an arm of the State", though, as Sean Lemass demanded. It has considerable independence, which inevitably implies frequent friction and sometimes confrontation.

RTE executives and broadcast staff are intensely conscious of their status and of the thin lines they tread. They take their mission very seriously.

But they also run the risk of falling into the danger of self-importance. This risk inevitably arises in any section of the establishment, and it must be aggravated by the enormous salaries lavished on some stars. But RTE is not guilty of one fault frequently attributed to it. It is not "left-leaning". It can't be. When the chips are down, it observes the requirement for "balance" because it believes in balance and not just because of legal requirements.

I don't like everything in the guidelines. I don't like, for example, the way they use the word "challenging". What precisely does that mean? But by and large RTE has fulfilled its mandate and earned the trust of the viewers.

I hope it comes -- chastened, a little wiser, if possible stronger and more professional -- out of the present crisis.