The American author and journalist Hunter S Thompson dismissed the notion of objective journalism as “a pompous contradiction in terms”. Thompson’s modus operandi was to place himself at the centre of a story, which made for great entertainment. But in serious journalism, there is something badly wrong when the messenger overshadows the message. This is currently the case both in Britain, where the newspaper industry is on trial over its methods, and in Ireland, where RTE’s practices are being endlessly debated and investigated.
How different it all seemed in November 2010, when Noel Curran became RTE’s director-general. Then, the challenges that lay before him were substantial but essentially operational; how to cope with the slump in advertising revenue; how to cut costs and staff numbers while maintaining programme output; how to modernise without substantial investment and keep Montrose competitive in the digital age. None of these problems have gone away and solving them is crucial to RTE’s future, but they have been utterly subsumed by the Prime Time Investigates debacle and the ongoing fallout from the “bogus” Frontline tweet. Practically everything RTE does is being questioned — even the routine business of setting up studio audiences and reading out text messages.
Pat McGuirk, a former poultry producer from Monaghan, alleges that The Frontline’s production team manipulated him into addressing a question to the presidential candidate Seán Gallagher that he did not want to ask. RTE denies manipulating McGuirk in any way. Perhaps it helps to understand how television programmes with studio audiences actually work.
Of all media, television is the most artificial and the least flexible. It is technically more cumbersome than radio, print or online and while it goes to great lengths to appear natural, it is anything but. During any TV programme, a director needs to work out when to move his or her cameras. If an audience member is going to speak, the director needs to know in advance. The producers or editors also need to know that the audience member’s contribution will add to the programme and not be libellous or repetitious. Just as a presenter’s questions must sound articulate and pertinent, so must those from the audience; hence the prior preparation. So there is nothing sinister about teeing up audience questions; it is usual practice in TV programmes all over the world. The only dispute here is to what extent McGuirk had words put into his mouth.
Advertisement
Was broadcasting the “bogus” tweet a mistake? Yes. Should the mistake have been rectified sooner? Probably. Did Pat Kenny and his team want the presidential debate on The Frontline to be as lively as possible? Of course. Did they set out to “gun down” Gallagher? No, but he was the front runner and there were a lot of unanswered questions floating about.
Not that the truth matters much any more, because practically anything can be and is being said about RTE now. It’s all a matter of perception. After perpetrating two journalistic errors in quick succession, Montrose is vulnerable to fresh criticism. RTE insiders profess bafflement at the way the Sunday Independent, in particular, has had a field day over their mistakes. They mutter darkly about agendas, although the simple truth is probably that the newspaper smells blood.
The last thing that Ireland needs is a public-service broadcaster that is too scared or neutered to tackle the issues confronting the country. Curran and the RTE Authority chairman, Tom Savage, will shortly appear before an Oireachtas committee to explain the mess their organisation is in. They will need to be pretty damn convincing, or RTE will continue to be the story.