Dáil debates

Thursday, 8 March 2012

Topical Issue Debate

Broadcasting Services

4:00 pm

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister will be aware that a special meeting of the RTE Authority has been called for tomorrow following the upholding of a complaint by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland about the unfairness of the final television presidential election debate on RTE last year. Everyone will remember this issue well because between 800,000 and 900,000 people watched the programme live. The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland stated the station had made no apparent effort to verify the source and accuracy of a tweet broadcast during the "The Frontline" programme. The tweet was incorrectly described by the presenter, Mr. Pat Kenny, as having been issued by the official Martin McGuinness campaign. Since the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland's findings were released, RTE's Noel Curran has apologised for the mistake made in the programme, but, importantly, he has refused to countenance an inquiry into the matter. Although he stated, "We have been found against and we have to learn from that," I do not consider this to be sufficient, which is the reason I am raising this matter.

RTE accepts it made two errors. First, the veracity and source of the first tweet, the text of which is well known to many by now, should have been checked. In addition, RTE also accepts that the second tweet, correcting the earlier one, was received approximately 28 minutes before the conclusion of the programme and that it should have been mentioned during it. The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland stated the radio programme broadcast the following morning, coincidentally with the same presenter, Mr. Pat Kenny, had exacerbated the unfairness of the debate on "The Frontline" by failing to clarify the tweet. The RTE compliance committee, chaired by Mr. Chris Morash, has stated it agrees that Mr. Kenny did not take the opportunity to verify the content or provenance of the tweet with Mr. McGuinness during the debate. It has also stated it notes that information was available during the programme that clarified the tweet account at the centre of the complaint was not an official Sinn Féin Twitter account.

To some extent, on the face of it, the RTE compliance committee is dumping on Mr. Pat Kenny. RTE is a public service broadcaster. The board must appoint an independent investigator to establish the facts and the sequence of events that night. Everyone, including the Minister who spoke on the "Morning Ireland" radio programme, accepts that it had an impact on the outcome of the election campaign. I cannot say by how much or by how little, but the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland is not going down that road. While it would be impossible to establish at this point, owing to the privacy of the ballot box, no one disputes that it had an impact on the outcome of the campaign.

The reputational damage to RTE in this instance is extremely serious. In fairness to the staff at the station, particularly Pat Kenny, it is important that corrective action should be taken. It is also important that Mr. Kenny should take the opportunity both to preserve his good name and clarify the position. I am of the view that Mr. Kenny acted in a genuine and above-board way in respect of this matter. He has an extremely good reputation as being one of the best broadcasters in Ireland. It is clear that the tweet in question was received in RTE but the compliance committee of the BAI has stated that Mr. Kenny did not avail of the opportunity to put it to Martin McGuinness, MLA, during the programme. Some people might presume that Mr. Kenny was aware of the information and did not broadcast the fact that there was a second tweet. I do not know what was the position but I suspect Mr. Kenny did not have it. However, it would be in his interests to clarify the position.

RTE must put in place protocols, similar to those which already obtain at the BBC, in respect of social networking. I ask that the board of RTE appoint an independent person to carry out an investigation in respect of what happened on the night in question. I make this request because since the original complaint was lodged with the BAI, the management at RTE vigorously defended its actions right up until the authority issued its report. Those who manage RTE have not been willing to accept that mistakes were made. The RTE Authority must appoint an independent person to carry out an investigation.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sure Deputy Sean Fleming will permit me to point out that both the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, and RTE are independent bodies, each with clear roles and functions established under the Broadcasting Act 2009. The compliance committee of the BAI is charged, under section 48 of that Act, with investigating and deciding upon different categories of complaints. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the manner in which the BAI conducts its work, just as it would be inappropriate for me, as Minister, to interfere in the editorial affairs of RTE. I am sure the House will understand that I must be circumspect in what I say for a number of other reasons, not least because of the fact that the RTE board has not yet considered the BAI's findings or issued a formal statement on the matter. I fully accept, however, that, as Deputy Sean Fleming stated, this is a serious matter. I am sure most people will agree with the adjudication of the BAI to the effect that the use of the relevant tweet in this fashion was ill-considered. There are lessons to be learned from this matter by everyone involved in the media in this country.

I agree with the Deputy's comments to the effect that the presenter concerned is an eminent broadcaster who has an unparalleled record and reputation in the area of public affairs programmes. However, this matter is serious from a number of perspectives. News and current affairs in RTE, which is a public service broadcaster, are generally regarded as the gold standard for broadcast journalism in this State. People have the right to expect the very highest of standards from a public service broadcaster, even more so in cases as important as this which relates to one of the final debates of a presidential election campaign. It is also serious because it calls into question the manner in which traditional broadcast media deal with and report on new media. In that context, I welcome the fact that RTE, through its director general, Mr. Noel Curran, has already acknowledged that mistakes were made in the course of the programme in question and that the relevant tweet should have been handled quite differently. Mr. Curran has apologised to Mr. Gallagher.

There are a number of larger points in question here. First, it is clear that the extremely competitive environment in which the media operate should not be allowed to impugn journalistic standards. Second, it is also clear that substantial lessons need to be learned from this experience in respect of the manner in which journalists deal with material garnered from social media. The arrival of widespread Internet access and social media have come to pose huge challenges for traditional broadcasters, not just in the context of a major increase in the number of sources but also in terms of the massive increase in competition for audiences. Broadcast media clearly feel they have to be seen to engage with this new media in case they might be seen to be slow and cumbersome or as being somehow unreflective of the zeitgeist. This does not mean that basic journalistic standards can be allowed to lapse. I am, however, encouraged by the fact that the director general of RTE has confirmed that a new set of guidelines for programme makers at the station will reinforce protocols around the authentication of social media and other inputs to programmes.

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Minister, I do have to put it to you personally that the central issue here we are talking about revolved around a political donation. My understanding is that-----

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputy repeat that?

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The central issue here involved the content of what the tweet was about, namely, a political donation. My understanding is that the Minister personally canvassed for the successful candidate in the presidential election. I do not know whether he signed the candidate's nomination forms. I understand that he personally made a financial donation to the successful candidate. The Minister had a personal, financial, vested interest in the outcome of the election campaign. I thought the least which would have happened, given the Minister came before the House today, was that he would have declared his personal interest in this campaign, in view of the fact that we are talking about a political donation. I was surprised he came before the House to take this matter when a Minister of State took the earlier matters.

I genuinely believe that the proper procedure here would be to have a Minister other than Deputy Rabbitte, and possibly other than a Labour Party Minister, who made a financial contribution to the campaign of one of the candidates to deal with this specific, narrow issue. I am not talking about RTE which does a great job, but to this specific, narrow issue. In the interests of impartiality and fairness, I think the Minister should personally step aside from dealing with this particular issue because of his declared financial interest in the election campaign and his contribution. The good name and reputation of RTE are at stake. In the interests of RTE, please have some other Minister who is not personally compromised or conflicted in relation to the particular campaign and the outcome of the election result deal with this particular issue from now on.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not often lost for words but in all my time in this House I have never less anticipated a line of questioning than we have just heard from my friend, Deputy Fleming. The innuendo is outrageous. Of course, it is a matter of public record that I canvassed on behalf of my former parliamentary colleague - of course it is true. I was canvassing with him on the day on which the programme in question was broadcast. Of course it is true that I made a financial donation to his campaign. That donation was twice the size that has been reported in some quarters. I understand that matter has since been corrected with the appropriate authorities.

To suggest that because I campaigned on behalf of my former parliamentary colleague has any bearing on an investigation of a complaint on behalf of a defeated candidates in the presidential election is little short of outrageous. I did not conduct this inquiry. Under the Broadcasting Act 2009, the investigation is a matter for an independent body, namely, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. It is a matter for the authority to consider certain categories of complaint. The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland considered this complaint and found that, in the particular regard referred to, it was unfair to Mr. Gallagher. Earlier this morning I said most reasonable people in the country would agree with that conclusion. That continues to be my view. I do not know how in heaven's name Deputy Sean Fleming can think that I am conflicted in my approach to this issue. It is a matter for an independent statutorily established body, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, to investigate a complaint such as this and it has done so. It has found grounds for the complaint and it is a matter for the RTE authorities to respond as appropriate when the board meets.