RTE ban Rossport fundraiser ad

by old codger - pensioner Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:05

RTE is state controlled and works entirely for the Fianna Fail state and does not serve the interests of the people. The people that know that this is a fact should unite and refuse to pay a licence to a body that works against their interests.
Pat Kenny Joe Duffy, etc have repeatedly shown bias in their reporting of the crime in Rossport.
A very simple point needs to be asked of these people
WOULD YOU BE HAPPY TO HAVE THE VALUE OF YOUR HOME AND PROPERTY REDUCED TO NOTHING?
Who will buy a property that has a pipeline running through or near it that potentially can incinerate your family
WHEN YOU ELECT CROOKS , YOU GET LIES AND CRIME. VOTE NO TO LISBON 2

by John Jefferies Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:25

RTE have been carrying ads for the Insitute for International & European Affairs (IIEA) on their website even though it is a political organisation campaigning for a Yes vote for the Lisbon Treaty. Double standards from RTE as usual.

by Fred Johnston Wed Aug 05, 2009 13:30

It's good to see writers taking part in this gig. The silence of our artists around things political in this country has been sadly deafening.

by New Recruit - Non Aligned Wed Aug 05, 2009 13:47

I am unsure about Shannonwatch if they hope to post on this.. but the Rte report on the one o'clock news just give the most biased and uncritical reportage about the 'edge' Shannon airport will now have with the extension of the US border into the airport etc. etc.

"Terrorism may not respect borders, but neither do states in pursuit of border control. The result is a trend toward the decline of geo-political borders as the limit of state jurisdiction or assertion of power over noncitizens." - Macklin

"When the geopolitical system of nation states has to confront a globalization of its own making, the resulting geographical conflict
is stark. In the words of Admiral James Loy, head of the Coast Guard: to “sustain prosperity, we open the gates. To ensure security, we close the gates. We clearly need to get beyond the metaphor of an opened or closed gate” (quoted in The Economist 2002). Today Homeland Security officials grapple with this crisis of the national border in a globalized economy. They are working to develop new forms of border control that support these contradictory spatialities, effectively reconfiguring the geographic location of the national border as well
as the legal and social technologies for governing workers, migrants, citizens and commodities. One “main thrust” of post-9/11 “layered
security” thinking is that America should “extend [the US] zone of security outward so that American borders are the last line of defense,
not the first” (Homeland Security 2005). This is precisely the goal of the Container Security Initiative (CSI), which installs US border patrols
at ports around the world. In effect, the national borders of the US are extended to Singapore and Vancouver, Sydney and Honduras. US
geopolitical power is earned via global geoeconomic extension." - Deborah Cowen and Neil Smith ' After Geopolitics? From the Geopolitical Social to Geoeconomics' in Antipode a Radical Geographical Journal

Caption: Video Id: iI6w1C29yqg Type: Youtube Video
Neil Smith

Caption: Video Id: f0eg91f09lw Type: Youtube Video
Deborah Cowen

by James Kelly Wed Aug 05, 2009 16:10

This is the second time (at least) that RTE have refused such an advertisement.

Last week they were sent press releases re the incarceration for eight and four months respectively, of Niall Hartnett and Maura Harrington. They blacked that information as well.

It is well past the time that a visible and decent protest was held outside Montrose.

RTE does not hold itself out as a Pravada like news organ, parroting the Government line and blanking out what is uncomfortable information for the government, from the public airwaves.

In fact if one reads the Irish Constitution Article 40.6,you will see that there is a "grave import" assigned in that document to the "education of public opinion" and to the ventilation of views "critical of Government policy".

It is long past the time that RTE were made adhere to the standards which are set for them by the State's own basic legal instrument.

Mass picket to demand this; Anyone ?

by John 3: 16 Wed Aug 05, 2009 16:21

"Afri described the decision by RTE as a blatant form of censorship and
questioned the independence of the station and the nature of its relationship
with big business"

welcome to the land of media censorship, lads. you are in the good company of THE IRISH CATHOLIC, VERITAS & THE POWER TO CHANGE etc when it comes to censoring advertising. the Catholic adverts were related to Christmas & Easter time promotions. it's the churches near-perogative, in regards to universally accepted calendar dates. the POWER TO CHANGE advert censorship was based on spurious legal small-print stuff and probably was merely sectarian.

censorship is not only caused by the dynamic between editorial, advertising & big business. censorship is also based on predjudice, be it political, philosophical or religious....

by Damien Thu Aug 06, 2009 01:05

Im up for it James keep me informed

by Q&A Thu Aug 06, 2009 01:16

Shell spend plenty of money laundering their polluter image. They sell themselves as a green company then back out of their deals to support green energy after they get the good PR from it. Yet RTE is more than happy to show their blatant lies. They show stuff about anti government campaigns in china, Iran, etc but not anything about Irish campaigns. Why are Irish campaigners excluded? Where in it's charter does it say that any Irish campaigns cannot advertise with the national broadcaster? The advert was only an attempt to get a few people to attend a fundraiser. Pretty harmless really.

RTE are traitors. And the only program that they decide to cut from the schedule when money gets tight? Questions and answers, the one and only flawed opportunity the Irish people had to put their corrupt scumbag leaders on the spot on live TV. Yeah, like that saved them a fortune.

by clarification Thu Aug 06, 2009 03:39

any thing with a hint of politics is banned in advetiseing under the advertiseing guidelines standards. big deal a few years ago for a book of short stories by gerry adams and something else for some youth defence type organisation. on the down side small groups are denied acess to the airwaves on the plus side welty groups can't get more which is neglegabile i suppose concidering they have it sown up all ready. but what they'd say back to you is if FF or FG decided to buy an add today it would be illegal, same as.

by GoggleEyedPotatoZombie Fri Aug 07, 2009 00:24

I'd rather watch a few badly done FF political ads than all the current ads telling me that "there are things wrong with me I never imagined but some expensive toxic untested product I buy will save me", If it gave the little guy access to national TV..

FF and their corporate friends already have a firm grip on the stations balls so it would make little difference to the imbalance, except in a good way!

All they would need to do Is limit the maximum budget for political adverts and ensure they were not paid for with taxpayers money.It might put some well needed cash in the RTE coffers too. Maybe they could even reduce the licence fee we pay to watch all these adverts selling us crap we don't need. Maybe also then they could afford to put Q&A back on the air again. Apart from the stupid football questions, it was often the only program that attempted to address reality in any way all week!

Anyway, shell to sea are not actually a political party. And where would be the harm of one single "democracy now" type program on RTE in the sea of predigested propaganda we now get? Can we not even have that much for our huge licence fee?

By the way, not paying your TV licence and being a shell protester are more likely to get you incarcerated than actual white collar criminal behaviour.

by don't drink and drive Fri Aug 07, 2009 03:06

google eyed potato zombie. yeah would agree with you in principle, the only palce i know it happens is america and iam not sure it's that democratic, the wealty have an advantage but maybe a cap on spending, good idea. would require a law change though. this add won't get through by the time it happens. so wider capmaign.