|
|
Blog Feeds
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
|
National - Event Notice Thursday January 01 1970 The Irish Times: Past and Present national |
history and heritage |
event notice
 Friday April 11, 2008 21:18 by IPR Group
 Book Launch, Friday 18th April 2008, 7.30 p.m., Liberty Hall, Dublin. Author: JOHN MARTIN Main speaker: Conor Lenihan T.D., Minister for Integration This book is a comprehensive review of the history of The Irish Times since its foundation in 1859, drawing on archival records, interviews and other primary sources – including the British Public Record Office. It covers the early development of the newspaper as the organ of Anglo-Ireland, and examines the positions it adopted throughout the turbulent century and a half that followed. by Corkman Fri May 02, 2008 11:59  There will probably be a more detailed review of the John Martin book in either by Justin Morahan Sat May 03, 2008 13:34 Like "media consumer", I too used to have a high regard for the Irish Times although I never fell for the myth that it was the Paper of record. When the late Michael Mills began to write for the Irish Press, I regarded him as the fairest and most independent journalist in Ireland. by media consumer Sat May 03, 2008 15:24 Many years ago I heard the editor of the Irish Independent (not Vinnie of recent decades) describe a daily newspaper as "the poor man's university". To my mind that could be the ideal function of a broadsheet newspaper. I have childhood memories of seeing working men, some of them retired, perusing firstly the sports pages of the Independent and the Irish Press and making notes for their daily flutter on the horses. Then they scanned the national news and maybe read the headlines and intro paragraphs of foreign stories. These men had finished formal schooling at age 14 but they could read and enjoy reading the sports pages at any rate and they had an impressionist awareness of Ireland and the world during the 1950s and 60s. I won't idealise the week-to-week lives they led trying to get by on their modest earnings from manual labour. They enjoyed their pints, playing darts and following Saturday afternoon racing on the wireless and later on pub black/white television. by Renegade White Nigger Tue May 06, 2008 14:03 The quality of writing has slipped, true, but the standards of Irish print media are appalling. The only articles that are correctly spelled, syntactically correct and unambiguous are either pasted off a newswire or opinion pieces (and the current crop of lunatic fringe and right-wing mainstream writers do possess some fine writing skills). But there is undeniable political bias to both the PD agenda and a resurgent family-values underground where some notable public figures (ombudsmen and presidents for example) are given uncritical free reign. by John Martin - Irish Political Review Wed May 07, 2008 08:56 “Renegade white nigger”, am I correct in saying that you don’t think that British State influence over an Irish newspaper is an important issue? by Renegade White Nigger Wed May 07, 2008 17:52 No, I certainly do think that ANY influence on media freedom is potentially problematic, as should be obvious in my comments above. The historical British influence on the IT's editorial line was clearly not in the public interest - but what about the far greater current influence that British and US interests exert on the Irish Independent? This is particularly problematic in light of the INM board's refusal to reveal conflicts of interest, their incestuous and cross-group appointments and their failure to adopt common ethical standards. by Miriam - MediaBite Thu May 08, 2008 11:28 I wish we had probed more on the issue of the IT trust too, John - a definite oversight in the article. To be fair though, it was more about Joe MacAnthony's personal story. He touched on many fascinating issues that deserve more attention and hopefully we'll all be hearing more from him in the near future. by John Martin - Irish Political Review Fri May 09, 2008 10:47 Miriam, I was perhaps a bit hard on the MediaBite article. MacAnthony was making a few off-the-cuff remarks about his experiences in The Irish Times well over 40 years ago at the time Alec Newman was Editor (Newman was sacked as editor in 1961). The Trust was not set up until 1974. And Major McDowell didn’t join the newspaper until 1962. by Renegade White Nigger Fri May 09, 2008 20:08 You might disagree with the tenor of my comments, but if you take a step back from your obsession with the Irish Times and the Trust, then you might appreciate that there is nothing more pernicious than the annihilation and assimilation of an entire culture, which is what is happening to Ireland now. by John Martin - Irish Political Review Sat May 10, 2008 12:20 Renegade white nigger, all your contributions in this thread attempt to undermine the significance of the “white nigger” letter. From calling yourself “renegade white nigger” to saying that Fianna Fail people use the same expression. (Personally, I have never heard a Fianna Fail person use this expression). by Arek Fri May 23, 2008 16:38 Interesting review of the book on the Glor Anoir programme on Raidio na Gaeltachta. by Arek Fri May 30, 2008 08:29 Click on the link below for a review by An Phoblacht by shirt no tie Fri May 30, 2008 11:17 A good snappy review in a fringe periodical I rarely read. Newspapers like to beat a drum about themselves (or is that blow a trumpet?) and let readers know that the papers are on their side. The British tabloids are resolute in exposing bent businessmen and corrupt politicians...up to a point. In exchange for occasional populist moralising against cheats and bullies they make sure readers wave the flag when "our troops" are sent somewhere to make the world safe for democracy and big business. by Arek Mon Aug 18, 2008 21:09 The link below is a recording from the "Talking history" programme on Newstalk 106 (10/8/08). Tommy Graham interviews John Martin about his book. |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (41 of 41)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41That's Conor "Kebabs" Lenihan, in case you were wondering.
The IPR, along with Eoghan Harris, is blaming the media for Ahern's resignation. This is the old 'blame-the-messenger' ploy. It won't work: Ahern was forced to resign because he received large sums of money from 'developers' and then lied about it under oath.
"We don’t know, and may never know, what words passed between Ahern and his benefactors as they handed over the money he was later to commit perjury about. What we can say is that there’s a connection which only fools would miss between taking large sums of money from property developers and big businessmen and then enacting policies which serve the interests of property developers and big businessmen.
Economics apart, Ahern has facilitated a million US troops passing through Shannon en route to the oil war which has claimed as many as a million Iraqi lives. He leaves office with their blood on his hands. He has refused to acknowledge, much less take action against, CIA ‘planes carrying kidnap victims to torture sites landing in the Republic."-Eamonn McCann
http://www.sundayjournal.ie/eamonn-mccann/The-most-ruth...18.jp
Its time to examine the regressive political activity of the Aubane Historical Society.
Anybody with misgivings about the IPR and the Aubane Society can analyse it to their heart's content and publish articles, maybe even a book. Now however, the aubaners have published a detailed historical study of the "liberal" IT. Look, I was raised since my teens on the myth that the IT was the only decent paper on this island. That it was the reliable paper of record. That its writers were the best practiioners of the queen's English. That the paper stood up for the underdog. That it put thought before sensation. That it sought to promote progress. That its lively Letters page was a paragon of open debate unrivalled by any other paper. That its ownership through a legally constituted Trust guaranteed reportorial impartiality and political independence.
Some of these youthful inculcated tenets survive while a few others have suffered a loss of faith.
I look forward to reading this book, and hope its findings and opinions will receive diverse scrutiny on indymedia as well as across the commercial media. I think it is good for citizens to study the Irish media and to publish their observations. The media have a powerful influence on how we think, react and act or fail to act. The mass media drive our cultural lives.
I googled the IPR and am wondering, what if anything Conor Lenihan and Ger Kennedy
have got to do with Plasma research?
What on God's Earth is the IPR?
Why is the Aubane Historical Society scary? (They have not updated their site since 2006)
+ finally why does everyone on the newswire assume (wrongly) that everyone else
is au fait with the intricacies of the Press in ireland.
And when will someone apply these lattitudes to the current editorial of this freepress.
which has nothings got to do with IMC (at all)
This link will give you some gen on IPR
http://www.atholbooks.org/review/ipr_articles.php
Is the author John Martin of the IRSP Ard-Comhairle by any chance?
"There is Difficulty Lower Down Whereby Sometimes Unauthorised Items Appear"
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/64231
'The Fourth Man' or 'Who Else Was in the Queue in Kew?'
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/64944
The above articles (exclusive to Indymedia) should whet appetites for any new stuff discovered by John Martin.
That's Douglas Gageby in the photo, the Protestant editor the Protestant proprietor thought had betrayed his caste [click to read]
In 1985, Athol Books in conjunction with "Church & state" magazine published Angela
Clifford's book “ The Constitutional History of
Eire/Ireland”. Page 184's quotes are quite revealing. Discussing the
IT in the 1950s:
“In those days the “Irish Times” kept up a
liberal criticism of the Catholic State. Since the appointment of
Douglas Gageby as editor it has been motivated chiefly by
a detestation of Ulster Unionism, and has been anxious to explain
away the Catholic State in order not to be saying the same thing
as the Unionists.”
The introduction to the book thanks Brendan Clifford,
JOHN MARTIN and David Morrison for helping her with
the book.Obviously, none of them had a problem with
her comments on Gageby.
McDowell and Angela Clifford were both saying the same thing-
Douglas Gageby was a traitor because his paper published material
critical of the Ulster Unionists.
"Aubane is at war with Eurasia: Aubane has always been at
war with Eurasia".
"McDowell and Angela Clifford were both saying the same thing"
It is as plain as the nose on your face that the views of the two people concerned are not the same thing, not even remotely.
It is a rather easy task to demolish an argument you wish your opponent had put. Fortunately, you have given us the benefit of Angela Clifford's view, and so have merely undermined your own preposterous position.
There is an interesting discussion to be had about the evolution of the views of those who used to constitute BICO, but this is not it. It is merely an attempt to divert attention away from the books being launched. If the fans of this great expose were really keen on the importance of their project, they would start a thread on the subject. They don't, because they are just juvenile gate crashers.
“In those days the “Irish Times” kept up a
liberal criticism of the Catholic State. Since the appointment of
Douglas Gageby as editor it has been motivated chiefly by
a detestation of Ulster Unionism, and has been anxious to explain
away the Catholic State in order not to be saying the same thing
as the Unionists.”
Premise A: Angela Clifford states that since Douglas Gageby
became editor of the Irish Times, it has become hostile to
Ulster Unionism,and is trying to "explain away" the Catholic
state. Brendan Clifford, John Martin and David Morrison
have no objection to being credited on a book
viciously critical of Gageby and against Irish nationalism as
a whole.
Premise B: Major McDowell criticises Douglas Gageby
for his coverage of the Civil Rights Movement, which is
a threat to the Ulster Unionist dominated Stormont
government. He places himself fully in support of
the British government and against Irish nationalism.
Aubane's playground bully insults can't magic away
the fact they were on the same side as
Major McDowell.
Pope Benedict XVI claims infallibility on matters
of faith and morals. The Aubane/IPRG claims infallibility
on every single subject.
Those comments of Starkadder are infantile.
Major McDowell, Athol Books and anyone else are perfectly entitled to disagree with any aspect of Douglas Gageby’s politics. It doesn’t follow the people disagreeing share the same politics as each other. Nor does disagreeing with Gageby mean that the person with the disagreement regards Gageby as a traitor.
However in the case of Major McDowell, his disagreement led him to seek help from the British State.
His conversation with the British Ambassador (Sir Andrew Gilchrist) implies that because of Gageby’s Protestant background, McDowell felt that Gageby was not entitled to hold his views on Northern Ireland. According to Gilchrist, McDowell regarded Gageby as being a “renegade or white nigger” on Northern matters. McDowell was (per the British Ambassador), in effect saying that Gageby was betraying a “superior” ethnic group (Protestant unionists) for an “inferior” one (Catholic nationalists).
McDowell has denied that he used the term “white nigger” about anyone. But as Professor Ronan Fanning has said why would a British Ambassador lie about this to his own superiors. Also there is another document in the Public Records Office from a British Foreign office official who had a separate meeting with McDowell in November 1969. This official (Kelvin White) confirms in a letter to Sir Andrew Gilchrist the substance of McDowell’s views as expressed to the Ambassador at the “white nigger” meeting.
If Starkadder cannot distinguish between Athol Books’s disagreement and McDowell’s disagreement and how the latter prosecuted that disagreement, maybe he should go back to the playground.
There is an interesting thread on this, 'From Peking to Aubane' elsewhere on Indymedia.
The fact is that Clifford and co thought that they could carry off this huge scam by moving from being ultra-unionists to ultra-nationalists and were so clever that nobody would notice. But the Linenhall and the National Library are valuable resources and the volumes of BICO literature where they express utter contempt for Irish catholics and nationalists are there for all to see. What are they up to? Descrediting Irish nationalism even further?
Those interested in the B&ICO's activities in the 1960-70s should consult
Sean Swan's book "Official Irish Republicanism, 1962 to 1972" or
Ian S. Wood's "Crimes of Loyalty". "Explaining Northern Ireland" by John McGarry and Brendan OLeary is also useful.
Would you buy a used ideology from these people?
And would you buy your daily news from the Irish Times?
The Irish Times has generally been regarded as a features-intensive paper rather than a news-intensive one. The late Irish Press was chock-a-block with news, even if a lot of it dovetailed into the FF view of the Irish world.
Mr/Ms Starkadder-McNulty-Nakamura,
Has a bee in his-her bonnet, which involves generating increasingly irate and inaccurate summaries of the arguments s/he dislikes. Instead of pointing to the url of the thread with the argument s/he wants to put, and departing bag and baggage, s/he is still hanging around spreading noise and disinformation. And, instead of giving us the benefit of his-her view of Gageby-McDowell, one of the subjects of the book, s/he gives us the benefit of spurious speculation around the subject. Noise and disinformation to befuddle the unwary.
James, Jimmy McNulty isn't the same guy as Hiro Nakamura, for one thing he is a Baltomore cop and Hiro is a well...superhero. Fair play to them for exposing BICO though. Stalinists one day, Fianna Failers the next, UVF cheerleaders one day, provo cheerleaders the next, intellectual inspiration for Eoghan Harris one day, for Fr. brian Murphy the next. You have to say, they got some balls.
Exposure? I thought the whole point is that they flaunt themselves openly unlike us timid pseudonymous types!
In 1962 I joined the Irish Times as a receptionist. At that time the IT advertised for staff with this addition 'Protestants only need apply' I was the first Catholic female to be employed in the 'office' . I worked on the photographic counter and also as secretary to Douglas Gageby and Art Editors George Leitch and Tony Gray.
Mr Leitch used to say he was visiting RAB when in fact he was crossing Fleet Street to the Pearl Bar, on the window of which was written BAR and read RAB from the inside. No females were allowed in the Pearl bar at that time.
Myles na Gopaleen used to come in in his black cloak and sweep past us mere minnions without as much as a 'good morning'.
That’s very interesting, Jean. And 1962 was quite an eventful year. I think Douglas Gageby along with George Hetherington was the joint Managing Director in 1962. As far as I remember Alan Montgomery was the editor. In 1962 Hetherington left the newspaper and he was replaced by Major McDowell. So Major McDowell was the joint managing director along with Douglas Gageby.
I suspect that McDowell made his presence felt because within a year Alan Montgomery resigned as editor to take up a position as a PR man within the Guinness company. It was unheard of for an Irish Times editor to resign. Douglas Gageby replaced Montgomery as editor in 1963. I imagine morale was quite low in 1962 but as the 1960s progressed the newspaper went from strength to strength.
I didn’t really write much about Myles na Gopaleen in my book. From what I’ve read about him he probably was a bit self preoccupied. As someone once said about another great man:
“I take my hat off to the artist. But I put it back on for the man”.
This sectarian bias could also explain the influx of left-wing journalists into the Irish Times during the 1960's and '70's. There was no longer a pool of Protestant reporters and writers sufficient for the needs of the paper as it grew. Rather than recruit Catholics it recruited the lapsed kind. Maybe, from the viewpoint of the Irish Times Trust, these people were like Lenin's "useful fools"?
Don't be so glumfaced about Ireland's greatest comic writer, J. Martin & J. Dunne. Myles na gCopaleen in face-to-face encounters was a humdrum personality, but when he put pen to paper he deftly satirised the cultural bores of his time. He ran riot with hibernian English, his eccentric style gleaned from much spare time Gaelic erudition. Read the paperback anthology, The Best of Myles, for more chuckles than you'll get from pictures of the Chuckle Brothers, Ian & Martin.
Its a shame that the Irish Times could not have hired a Protestant 'satirist'.
They employed this O'Nolan fella and he a Catholic from the 6 counties to sneer and jeer at the Catholic Irish Nation.
Are we to believe that there was no Protestant who could have done the job just as well as O'Nolan?
Perhaps Mr. Martin would care to comment on this obvious case of discrimination against the Irish Catholic Nation.
Jean, are you sure you were not working for The Irish Times earlier than 1962?
You say that you were working for Arts Editors George Leitch and Tony Gray. However Tony Gray says in his book “Mr Smyllie, Sir” that he left The Irish Times in 1959.
Perhaps Silent O'Moyle is being provocative. Definitely amusing! But regardless, there is a serious point there. In historic terms, merely sneering was one of the less antagonistic ways in which the Ascendancy or Anglo-Irish related to the natives. The forms in which the antagonism of the natives expressed itself is another question. Now that some degree of merger is accomplished, some residual, but recognisable, forms of these behaviours persist. But no longer really in Them and Us mode, more Us and Us, I think. I don't know whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but it is naive not to acknowledge it.
I have lost count of the number of times that the FFers have spat out the "white nigger" phrase, and still see nothing more than an idiotic turn of phrase in an otherwise unremarkable communication. If this is all that the "historians" can unearth since the paper started in 1859, then it isn't much of an indictment of a bunch of protestant pragmatic unionists in an overtly Catholic state.
Irish print media is introspective, invective and shallow; it is conflicted by financial and personal interests; it is overly concerned by the feelings of media luvvies and politicos (the former over- and the latter under-represented in coverage). The Irish Times pushes a marginal first in a broadminded world view and diversity of independent opinion, although the current editrix has led the most poisonous and destructive administration in the paper's history. The Indo is close behind, but only through uncritical reprints from the London Times; it is far more cautious of proprietorial interests and has an anti-Sinn Fein / IRA bigotry worthy of the Black and Tans. There is no other print publication worth mentioning.
Interesting article in the Phoenix on the book.