|
|
||||
|
Comment: Irish Media-Caged or Paper Tigers? See also: Darfur, the Media Loop and When News of Mass Killings is News Click for Comment Archive at bottom of page
June 7,2004--The news that an independent Irish press council protected by law, is to be facilitated in forthcoming legislation is welcome. The current defamation laws dating back to 1961 were copied from earlier UK legislation and given the prohibitive cost of civil law procedures in Ireland, wealthy individuals and politicians have been the principal beneficiaries of the protections. Should the general public expect a significant change in the approach of the media to in-depth investigation of issues of public governance and other matters of common interest, in the aftermath of the planned changes? While the libel laws have inhibited the media from exposing significant wrongdoing in the political, business and religious sectors of society, it is ironic that Radio Telefis Éireann (RTE), Ireland's State broadcaster, has been to the forefront in the past three decades in focusing public attention on public and private corruption. RTE not only has had to contend with the legal hurdles but has never been free of the intimidation of politicians who control the bulk of its revenue through the annual licence charge that is levied on owners of television sets. The Irish newspapers generally have played a more passive role and the ownership structures have not had a discernible impact on this situation. The case of former Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) Charles Haughey supports the argument that the defamation laws were not the only factor in the reluctance of the media to seriously address corruption in past decades. In the early 1980's almost every dog in the street was aware that Haughey had an overdraft of over €1.3m with AIB Bank. Beyond the deluded, the electorate knew that his wealth could not have been accumulated from his earnings as a politician. Irish media organisations folded in the face of a powerful politician. Given the record of the recent past, the planned changes in the legal framework may not usher in dramatic changes in Irish journalism. The key test for the Irish media will be the willingness to significantly increase the budgets for comprehensive research and investigation. Breaking stories based on whistleblower tips are manna from heaven but investigations such as RTE's recent Prime Time programme investigation of the systematic breaking of planning laws in different parts of the country, takes time and resources. Columnists tend to dominate Irish Sunday newspaper coverage and the focus of non-news sections of the daily newspapers is often on lifestyle issues. Business news departments have to fight for limited space, never mind allocating staff to investigations which may take weeks to yield any results. There is often a lack of a follow-up on what may be the story of the week, when some other topic takes over media attention. When a spokesperson for the former Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin Cardinal Connell announced that his boss was negotiating with RTE's Prime Time on the request for an interview on child sex abuse, the churchmen were running out the clock and won. This was an illustration on the limits on the power of the media in Irish society. Another pertinent example is the control which an Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) retains on media availability. There is seldom a problem with providing soundbites when opening festivals or pubs but it is rare for the media to have access for the style of interview conducted by NBC's Tim Russert on the US news programme Meet the Press. The revelations from the public abuse of power tribunals have resulted in some baby steps towards greater transparency in society. However, secrecy is the knee-jerk response in the public and private sectors. Fifty years after television was instrumental in exposing Irish American Senator Joseph McCarthy as a fraud and bully, audio and TV are excluded from the Irish public corruption tribunals. Should we wonder that the tribunals are virtually operating in a separate universe? Media organisations are as secretive about their affairs as other self-interested sectors of society and the excuse of commercial confidentiality is often a convenient fig leaf. A media organisation which promotes greater public transparency cannot have credibility if information on itself that it would publish in respect of a competitor, is suppressed. Intra-industry bitching, particularly in the Sunday newspapers, is generally the route through which unflattering news about media companies reaches the public. No organisation is perfect and the Washington Post journalist Howard Kurtz recently wrote in relation to the revelations of fabricated stories by journalists: 'as the implosions at USA Today and the New York Times make clear, newsrooms are sometimes more dysfunctional and paralyzed than the government agencies they cover, with top editors uninformed about problems with subordinates, missing obvious warning signals or intimidating their staff against bringing them bad news. When Karen Jurgensen was prodded into resigning as USA Today's editor...in the wake of Jack Kelley's serial fabrications, she did not address her staff or take questions from the press. Neither she nor the two top editors who are also leaving their posts assumed blame or apologized.' It's said that a good salesman is usually a poor administrator and the same could be said about good journalists. In a recent UK survey, it was reported that 75% of press releases that are issued by public relations firms are immediately binned and as many press releases issued are succeeded by attempts to contact an editor on the phone to check that the release has been received. The lot of editors is not an easy one but administration in some media organisations is better than others. Recently I experienced a contrasting example of dealing with an Irish print media organisation and the Financial Times (FT). John Lloyd, the Editor of the FT Magazine responded to an e-mail inquiry when received and a week later in relation to a separate issue, a colleague e-mailed us on when material we provided would be published in the FT. In contrast, 3 similar recent contacts with the Irish newspaper did not result in any response. The planned changes in the legal framework for the Irish media provide opportunities to have a more assertive role in society following decades of corruption and poor public administration. However, media organisations will have to reflect on the changes that they will need to make themselves if they wish to make both an impact in the future while having the credibility to point a finger at others. This is the challenge irrespective of ownership structure, be it a public body, charitable trust, a multinational public limited company or a private company which still has a family involvement after more than a century and a half. - Michael Hennigan See also: Darfur, the Media Loop and When News of Mass Killings is News
Our Comment feature has been incorporated in the:
The
Finfacts Ireland News & Comment Service
from October 2004
|
|||
|
|
||||