A Question Of Balance

An interesting story about a High Court case ahead of the recent European elections caught my attention the other week. The Evening Herald reported that Fiachra Ó’Luain, who ran for a seat in the North-West constituency in the European elections, accused RTE’s election coverage of being unbalanced as Declan Ganley received as much airtime as sitting MEPs and representatives from the major political parties despite being, in Ó’Luain words, an “unelected businessman.” RTE of course denied the accusation and ultimately Ó’Luain’s actions proved to be unsuccessful, although Ó’Luain states the judge acknowledged that he had substantive grounds but could not grant the injunction because the Primetime Special was due out that evening.

In Ganley’s defence, he was polling well and his party also played a key role in the defeat of the Lisbon Treaty in last year’s referendum. However, the question of balance is an interesting point to raise given that a second referendum will take place in the autumn. As discussed previously, I attended a recent Cleraun media forum where representatives from RTE and the Irish Times were at strains to highlight that their Lisbon Treaty coverage was 50:50 balanced, but some other publications were anti Lisbon. The Independent Broadcasters of Ireland (IBI) also complained about the challenges broadcasters faced having to give both sides equal airtime. IBI chairman Willie O’Reilly was quoted in the Irish Times as saying, “By giving equal time to both sides we gave the No case more credibility and less scrutiny than it deserved,” and added that the rules for 50:50 balance in a referendum “make a megaphone for any argument regardless of its own merit and or the credibility of its proponents.

You can see why Ó’Luain would have cause for complaint given that a couple of months ago, representatives from groups with no electoral mandate and with little scrutiny were given ample airtime. It’s an issue that is likely to be discussed ahead of the next referendum. With Ganley reportedly resigning from political life folowing Libertas’ poor showing at the polls and Mary Lou McDonald’s failure to regain her european seat, will we see the microphone swing back to Joe Higgins and the alliance of the left, who could genuinely now claim to be the voice of the no vote.


2 Responses to “A Question Of Balance”  

  1. 1 PK

    “…now claim to be the voice of the no vote.”

    The 50:50 principle makes it unnecessary to have legitimacy in order to be the voice. How will the 50:50 principle be applied when there is finally a referendum on Children? Will RTE give 50 per cent of time to those that don’t want children to be protected? (I won’t descend into the bad examples this could lead to.)

    Saying no is like deciding what you don’t want for dinner. There are infinite combinations of possible alternatives, but these discussion often don’t mention what we have in the fridge. Not to mention, if your cooking for 500 million it can be difficult to agree.

    That said we need a reasoned debate on whether what’s on offer is the best we can do. Much of the Lisbon 1 debate was about how undemocratic the EU system was and that a better solution was necessary. A No vote was actually for the status quo or at best a desire for less. Yet this is precisely the opposite of what many No campaigners said that they wanted.

    I’d prefer having the referendum commission supervise RTEs editorial. This would hopefully limit the number of political wanabes trying to make a name for themselves out of the 50:50 principle.

    The media should foster a debate on the issues. Not the personalities from either side. Wishful thinking I know, but the 50:50 principle is pathetic at best. I recognised some of the local election posters from the Yes campaign, they had removed the vote yes sticker and put a #1 instead.

  2. 2 Piaras

    That’s a really good example to show up the weaknesses in the 50:50 principle

Leave a Reply