The Sinister Fringe

at

90381253

julienm-226x300

Denis O’Brien, top, and Dr Julien Mercille, above

He’s redacted everyone.

EVERYONE!

But NOBODY gags Julien Mercille.

(unless you ask his permission first and use the ‘secret’ word)

Dr Mercille writes:

Last week in the Dáil, Catherine Murphy TD talked about Denis O’Brien and his dealings with IBRC. What she said is obviously of public interest, because the State owns the bank, and we’re thus entitled to know how it is dealing with its customers.

Ms Murphy said a couple of interesting things:

-IBRC apparently made loans to Denis O’Brien on favourable terms, like charging him an interest rate of 1.25% when IBRC could have charged 7.5%. If true, this means a significant loss for IBRC, because we’re talking about loans of up to €500 million.

-The former CEO of IBRC apparently made a verbal agreement with Denis O’Brien to allow him to extend the terms of his expired loans. This verbal agreement never went through the credit committee for approval.

These statements were published on the parliament’s website, so anybody can read them there.

But Denis O’Brien is not happy with the statements being circulated, so he’s now claiming that no media outlet can report them because he has a court judgment (injunction) that says so. But we don’t even know what this court judgment says, because it hasn’t been released.

Nevertheless, most media outlets in the country have chosen not to publish Catherine Murphy’s statements for the moment. They will now ask the courts this week if it’s OK to do so.

The legal issue seems to boil down to this: normally, the Irish Constitution (Article 15.12) allows the media to publish whatever is said in the parliament. But now, there is this court injunction in favour of Denis O’Brien that says the opposite. In short, the issue is: Who has priority, Ireland’s Constitution, or Denis O’Brien? Lawyers will argue over this one and we might know the outcome of their debates in the next few days.

A few points are worth bearing in mind to contextualize the whole controversy.

First, it all goes back to inequality. Ireland is an unequal country. Before anybody denies this, just pick up a copy of the 2015 Irish Rich List, and you tell me if there’s equality in this country. In fact, income inequality has risen in most nations over the last several decades, a result of right-wing economic policies.

Inequality means that a minority of powerful people have significant control over others’ lives. So to prevent this type of scandal from erupting again, we need to reduce inequality.

Second, and related, Ireland’s inequality is reflected in its concentration of media ownership and the lack of a strong alternative press. The situation now is that the owner of the bulk of Ireland’s media is using the courts to prevent the whole media from reporting on his affairs. If Denis O’Brien controlled just a tiny bit of the Irish media, and if nobody controlled more than a tiny bit of Ireland’s media, power would be more dispersed and it would be more difficult for one tycoon to determine much of what we read, hear and watch on TV.

We also need to strengthen the alternative media that prints progressive news stories consistently—and no, that’s not Facebook or Twitter.

Third, the hypocrisy of the mass media should be noted. The media has systematically supported the interests of the rich and powerful. For example, it has cheered on the bank guarantee that made citizens responsible for banks’ liabilities; it has consistently called for austerity even though it doesn’t revive economies in a downturn; it doesn’t talk seriously and to the extent needed about a range of issues like poverty and deprivation, payments to bank bondholders, how a public health care system is the best option, how Podemos and Syriza are rising in Spain and Greece, etc. (I give more details on this in my book on the media’s coverage of the economic crisis, which is now available for free in pdf here)

However, it would not be hard to report the work of those who have looked into this issue. For example, when is the last time you saw the media discussing the work of Michael Taft, the economist of the union Unite, who writes excellent economic analysis at his Notes On The Front website? Why don’t we hear more about the findings of the Nevin Institute or Tasc? Those are arguably the best sources of economic analysis in the country, but the media mostly ignores them.

In short, the mainstream media should be supported in its attempt to report on Catherine Murphy’s statements, but should also be reminded that it is in large part responsible for setting the conditions allowing the powerful to control so much of what goes on in this country.

@JulienMercille is lecturer at UCD and the author of The Political Economy and Media Coverage of the European Economic Crisis: The Case of Ireland (2015, Routledge). His new book, Europe’s Treasure Ireland (Palgrave), will be out in July 2015.

Sponsored Link

45 thoughts on “The Sinister Fringe

  1. Manta Rae

    “The legal issue seems to boil down to this: normally, the Irish Constitution (Article 15.12) allows the media to publish whatever is said in the parliament. But now, there is this court injunction in favour of Denis O’Brien that says the opposite.”

    How could injunction include the Oireachtas if it was granted before Murphy stepped up in the Dail last week?

    I agree with the vast bulk of what yer man is saying but the above seems like drivel…

        1. Manta Rae

          Even if it does, it still doesn’t make sense. Furthermore, the details of O’Brien’s injunction against have not yet been published.

    1. The Bad Ambassador

      I think the crux of the issue is that [redacted] has the resources to issue legal proceedings for every story any media outlet runs against him – and my understanding is that he does so frequently. While most of them may come to nothing, the publication in question has to commit some of it’s (more limited) resources to have their own legal team review the matter.

      If the knowledge that [redacted] will commence proceedings is enough to make an editor think “it’s not worth the time or money to run this story”, then all [redacted]’s legal proceedings that came to nothing are money well spent.

      While it may be try to say Dail privilege should trump [redacted]’s injunction

  2. Jonotti

    There is nothing sinister about this. A man took out a legal injunction which a judge agreed with. There is no political gagging conspiracy

  3. Mr S

    Seriously, broadsheet. You do amazing work at the weekend and then allow this pub-level rubbish.

    1. scottser

      in fairness, julien whatshisface has his say every week here. you can take it or leave it, but it doesn’t in anyway detract from BS’s refusal to capitulate to the great redacto’s legal threats. just treat this as a lost bike, or a sandwich that looks like ireland.

  4. ohsweetmessiah

    “lack of a strong alternative press”.oh my sweet , sweet Lord, I am praying that Mercille does not think he is that alternative.

  5. Paolo

    Income inequality in Ireland is growing (at a slower rate than the UK and the U.S. but it is growing. Using the rich list as an example, though, is a typically silly argument from the good “Doctor”. Equality is about equality of access not equality of outcome. People have different abilities and motivations. For example, the most intelligent and capable person in the country could be a charity worker on minimum wage while the richest person in the country could be a low-life chancer who is willing to do anything for a few extra shekels and will stop at nothing to punish people who question his finances.

    Julien should measure equality by showing disparity in access to education and healthcare for children (inequality of access) rather than how some people are wealthier than others (equality of outcome).

    1. dan

      As far as “equality of access not outcome” goes, who says so? That’s an ideological claim, one that goes hand in hand with privatisation and deregulation, which at the very least a large portion of the population disagrees with.
      Secondly, this is inequality of access. Do you think you could get this reaction from the media?

      1. declan

        Well they’re both idealogical claims. Money hasn’t solved all of the worlds equality problems (communism, bolivarism and alot of oil economy based socities).

        Inequality will always be with us, however if we could balance a persons beginning and give them a chance to actually be able to do what they want (but it’s not guaranteed) it’s better than a soak the rich policy as unfortunately most people woild rather like to be “comfortably” off

          1. Odis

            I liked this bit – “Bolivarianism in Venezuela is also referred to (sometimes pejoratively by its opponents)[2] as chavismo or “Chavezism”.[3] Adherents are referred to as chavistas”.

          2. Talismania!

            Yay, I learned something on Broadsheet today that didn’t involve stolen bikes or amusingly shaped vegetables!

  6. df

    leaving aside the denis o brien issue anyone who thinks that michael taft, tasc and the nevin institute dont get plenty of air time is so deluded they are obviously trying to concoct a conspiracy theory as to why left wing parties dont get more votes. taft regularly on rte and vincent browne. not only are the nevin institute frequently on rte, on more than one occasion I have heard them be called an ‘independent group’ which they are not as they are trade union funded.

    1. SOMK

      Plenty of airtime is a relative concept, you go out and buy all the newspapers on Sunday, the overwhelming weight of economic analysis is right of centre and pro business. Everything that involves more than one person is hypothetically a conspiracy, if you want to go attaching the word to any system that says one thing but acts another well you’re not going to shine any light, but similarly if you assume anyone who points out a contradiction in words and deeds and then comes up with a theory to explain that deed is a conspiracy theorist, well you’re technically right but in coming up with said concept you have conceived of a conspiracy and are thus also a conspiracy theorist, dude.

  7. Kevin M

    Well said Dr. There is no real alternative press in this country.And [redacted] has used his gaggle of lawyers to stifle a) Debate b) the truth.He is aided and abetted by a Fine Gael/Labour government.

    1. Rob_G

      A judge granted him an injunction. I’m glad that a given Govt. can’t overrule the judiciary on a whim.

  8. Mr. T.

    It’s as if all the little baby capitalists and inequality cheerleaders of the usual vainly named Business Schools are ready at their keyboards, every time Mercille’s posts are published. They know he’s right but they need to discredit him in case the people start resisting unfair economic policies.

    And they never comment anywhere else, only Mercille’s post.

  9. Barry Richards

    RTE gives plenty of coverage to the Nevin Institute. 95% of economists would not agree with Michael Taft who has made numerous appearances on TV3 et al

  10. Daz

    When did the Courts rise above the Constitution? Isn’t that a breach of the Separation of the powers?

  11. ohsweetmessiah

    “pick up a copy of the 2015 Irish Rich List”,…mmm the equivalent of Patrick Neary in his job as financial regulator picking up a copy of some journal ( can’t remember the name, as shock, horror neither could Neary) , and ascertaining that the Irish banks were well capitalised.

  12. antigonite

    Why are you publishing pieces by someone unqualified to provide accurate opinions?

    “In short, the issue is: Who has priority, Ireland’s Constitution, or Denis O’Brien?”

    No, it is not. I don’t know who “Legal Coffee Drinker” is but they are accurate and clearly qualified to provide this kind of analysis. You may as well have Marty Whelan providing analysis on this issue as the doctor above. I suppose its good for comments though.

    1. nellyb

      Bull$h!t is overflowing here. “Communism”, “constitution”, “left” blah blah. DOB is a true bolshevik here – extorts, appropriates and suggests it is enshrined in constitution. And everyone’s proverbials shrink (bar John’s – respect, man!). And the queue is immediately formed to pleasure DOB with supporting … comments. Yeah, lads, don’t don’t stop till he tells you so.

  13. Lisa

    This coverage makes me wistful for gay marriage coverage.
    How can I cure news fatigue?

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link
Broadsheet.ie