From top: Pat Hickey and Michael Clifford

Anthony Sheridan of Public Inquiry, writes:

Journalist Michael Clifford was full of admiration for (recently arrested) Olympic Council of Ireland President Pat Hickey in yesterday’s Irish Examiner.

…On Minister Shane Ross’s attempt to get answers from Hickey:

Mr Ross discovered, as many before him had, that Mr Hickey is a wily old dog who can bite as well as others might bark.

On Hickey’s refusal to cooperate with Ross:

Take a hike, minister, this is my baby, the long-standing OCI president conveyed.

On Hickey’s patronising dinner invite to Ross:

Say what you like about Pat Hickey, but you gotta love his chutzpah.

On Ross’s intention to seek the advice of the Attorney General:

You can imagine the sheer delight Marie Whelan would enjoy if told that Shane Ross was on the line.

Just a few short weeks ago, Miss Whelan was subjected to acute embarrassment at the cabinet table when Mr Ross rejected her advice on the abortion issue as “just an opinion”.

Now the same minister plans to run to her seeking some form of advice that might save his ego from abrupt deflation.

On Ross’s poor handling of the scandal:

Perhaps Mr Ross should take up the invitation to dine with Pat Hickey. The latter would undoubtedly be able to tell the politician a thing or two about politics.

The question Irish citizens have for establishment journalists like Clifford is: When are you going to address the rampant political corruption that has destroyed our country?

Journalist Michael Clifford: In praise of Pat Hickey (Anthony Sheridan, PublicEnquiry

MICHAEL CLIFFORD: Shane Ross left red faced but you gotta love Pat Hickey’s chutzpah (Michael Clifford, Irish Examiner)

Earlier: Pat Hickey Arrested And Hospitalised In Rio

Previously: To Clear A Good Name


Sponsored Link

164 thoughts on “Chutzpals

  1. Formerly known as @ireland.com

    The OCI need a good man like John Delaney in charge.
    (Then we might be able to have someone with integrity and intelligence – Niall Quinn would be my choice – could run the FAI.)

    1. Sheik Yahbouti

      Quite apart from Mr. Hickey, on whom I have commented on a different thread – it is heartening to see someone at least TRY to take on the likes of Clifford, who has angered and exasperated me for years. Many thanks indeed to the authors. On another note – I eagerly await the ‘Golden Age’ which will ensue when Mr. Delaney takes over the reigns from his corrupt mentor. It’s great to be alive in these wonderful days.

      1. Otis Blue

        Word is that Delaney et al are going to try and spring Hickey from sing sing in Rio.

        Serious money sought for movie and merchandising rights on this.

    1. K

      Indeed. While cherry picking quotes from the article, Mr Sheridan seems to have missed two of the more important paragraphs in Clifford’s piece.

      “While Mr Ross nurses his considerably bruised ego, there are nevertheless some serious questions that must be addressed in any inquiry. We know that the OCI awarded ticket allocation to a company called Pro10, yet this outfit apparently did not have the capacity to physically issue tickets to purchasers. Why then was the contract awarded to Pro10? Surely a basic requirement for any agency awarded the contract should have been capacity to distribute tickets.

      The man detained in Rio, Kevin Mallon, is a director of THG Sport, the agency that previously had the contract from the OCI to distribute tickets but which it lost to Pro10 for these games. Was he sub-contracted by his rival Pro10 to distribute the tickets, and was this known to the OCI?”

      1. rory

        Thats a very good point. But the article primarily focuses on the apparent flaws of Ross; the final line of the article especially lands with a thud in light of recent events.

        Saying that, the Examiner/Clifford have written some great articles about the GSOC bugging, when another prominent paper was writing codswallop.
        I don’t read every article he writes, so perhaps i’m cherry picking myself, but, all things considered (including that Mary Boyle opinion piece*), I wouldn’t label him an ‘establisment journalist’ as of yet.

        * http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/michael-clifford/everybody-wants-justice-for-mary-boyle-but-that-is-nowhere-near-as-simple-as-is-portrayed-in-a-fevered-social-media-campaign-411902.html

    2. Tish Mahorey

      “Hauld yer whisht. Clifford’s piece was entirely tongue in cheek.”

      That’s what I was thinking too. I thought Clifford was the opposite of an establishment shill journalist.

      1. forfeckssake

        He is still having a go at Shane Ross who has essentially done the right thing when others were saying he should be supporting Hickey without the facts having been established.

        1. :-Joe


          The Fine Gowls & Dennis ” The Haiti (Disaster Capitalist Clinton) Menace ” Media party are openly toying with Ross and have been enjoying making him squirm now that he is forced to take part in their lame, self-serving, shamble of a faux government and pseudo democracy.

          If the head of the IOC can’t open his own mouth without a lawyer dictating his words to him there’s not much more you need to know.

          The dirty corrupt bunch of scumbags probably had an effect on the Irish team losing those decisions in boxing… Brazil wants Ireland out.


    1. Andyourpointiswhatexactly?

      I disagree. I think he’s very principled and a good journalist and pundit.

  2. gallantman

    You totally misjudged the tone of Michael Clifford’s piece. His hyberbole highlighting how shamelessly these people can get away with this type of behaviour.

  3. ahjayzis

    The media in general seem to really have it in for Ross.

    Love him or loathe him, and he can be a bit caustic or whatever, he has outted some pretty significant scandals in his time. Is it that he showed the journalists up for the sideline commentators they really are?

    1. Kieran NYC

      Isn’t it time Ross showed that he’s not the sideline commentator he seems to be and actually does something as a Minister?

      Anyway – I have great time for Clifford.

      “The question Irish citizens have for establishment journalists like Clifford is: When are you going to address the rampant political corruption that has destroyed our country?”

      – this is absolute horsepoo. Clifford was all over Noonan over the foster home scandal before the election.

      1. forfeckssake

        He just has. He refused to back Hickey and demanded an independent person be part of the enquiry.

        He was heavily criticised for this on the Marian Finucane show at the weekend (hosted by Brendan O’Connor). The panelists said he should have stood by Hickey even though the facts were not clear and Hickey was not cooperative.

  4. Moroccan rug dealer

    Clifford has got too big for his boots. The auld wans hang on to high posts in Ireland like grim reapers. Look at Noonan….. Minister of ” Justice” my eye….left a trail of misery behind him to this day. And look at Fianna Fail….they put a dying Brian Lenehan out to face the press as Finance Minister when country was bankrupt and Aherh ousted. Spin # Corruption # No accountability # Fat Cats # Shame of Ireland #

  5. Joe

    “The question Irish citizens have for establishment journalists like Clifford is: When are you going to address the rampant political corruption that has destroyed our country?”

    There are plenty of journalists you can fairly level this question at. Clifford ain’t one of them in fairness.

  6. smiffy

    Clifford’s piece also includes the following, relatively substantial, points:

    “While Mr Ross nurses his considerably bruised ego, there are nevertheless some serious questions that must be addressed in any inquiry. We know that the OCI awarded ticket allocation to a company called Pro10, yet this outfit apparently did not have the capacity to physically issue tickets to purchasers. Why then was the contract awarded to Pro10? Surely a basic requirement for any agency awarded the contract should have been capacity to distribute tickets.

    The man detained in Rio, Kevin Mallon, is a director of THG Sport, the agency that previously had the contract from the OCI to distribute tickets but which it lost to Pro10 for these games. Was he sub-contracted by his rival Pro10 to distribute the tickets, and was this known to the OCI?

    Pro10 issued a statement last week outlining its version of how things had unfolded. “We explained that the tickets Mr Kevin Mallon, an employee of THG group, had in his possession were held on our behalf to be made available simply for collection by Irish and other European customers of Pro10 in Rio.

    “These had been made available for sale through the authorised ticket reseller process and were sold to legitimate customers of Pro10 at face value plus the allowed ATR reseller fee.”

    Up to 1.000 tickets are understood to have been seized by Brazilian police following Mr Mallon’s arrest. If this is the case, then where are the shortchanged customers who bought tickets online yet never actually received them?

    Irrespective of the cack-handed manner in which the Minister for Sport has approached this issue, those questions require proper answers.”

    Of course, you have to read the whole thing to get to it, which might be too time-consuming a task for intrepid, Citizen Journalists of the internet.

    1. forfeckssake

      I don’t see what people think Shane Ross has done wrong. Can anyone explain?

      From my perspective he wanted an independent person on the inquiry which was entirely appropriate. Pat Hickey opposed this and the minister did not back down. Hickey has now been arrested and the police claim to have evidence that he was involved in the incident.

      Ross was right not to back Hickey and right to demand a proper enquiry.

    1. Sherdy

      Or has he been flogging Olympics tickets on the black market for the past 30 years?
      If so he’ll be able to afford a bloody good lawyer!

  7. gallantman

    Now we’ll have Irish journalists coming out and saying how they all knew about Pat Hickey for years but couldn’t/wouldn’t /didn’t say anything. Makes you wonder what the point of the fourth estate is in this country.

    1. Tish Mahorey

      “Makes you wonder what the point of the fourth estate is in this country.”

      It’s for lying to the public.

  8. Turgenev

    All this shows the tragic need for an irony font.

    Clifford’s a good, straight journo, and a stringent researcher. His ironic tone got lost for those who skimmed.

  9. LiamZero

    Hey, Anthony Sheridan of Public Inquiry: you should do a piece exposing that guy Borat. I’m almost certain he’s not really a journalist and I don’t think he’s even from Kazakhstan.

  10. Mick Clifford

    Hmmm, somebody in Broadsheet doesn’t like me. Would be nice to know who in order to determine what their motive for this stuff might be. Two chances of that happening I suspect.

    1. Andyourpointiswhatexactly?

      I wouldn’t be boo-hooing too much about the eejit who wrote the piece not liking you.

    2. LiamZero

      Ah come on now. No one has time to be reading full articles anymore. Grab a few random quotes out of someone’s piece, put your own dopey conclusion at the bottom, and let your readers make up their minds on that. That’s how to internet journalism, stoopid.

          1. Skeptical O'Hare

            The defence to the nonsense article above is: “Ask Cynthia Owen”, “Ask Cynthia Owen”, “Cynthia Owen”, “Cynthia Owen”, “Cynthia Owen”, “Cynthia”, “Cynthia”, “Cynthia”, “Cynthia”, “Cynthia”.

            The Chewbacca Defence!

          2. rotide

            Let me rephrase.

            The answer to this sh1t article is ‘someone that’s not us go and do a proper article’?

            What exactly is stopping you going and interviewing these people and publishing your resulting article?

          3. Bodger

            Rotide, we have spent the Summer interviewing and researching this story, This is why we found Mick’s interviews with Frank Mullen so disturbing. We will have a post very soon.

          4. LiamZero

            And so you’re going after him in this instance by completely misinterpreting and misrepresenting his article? Yeah great work there Bodger. Living up to your name nicely. If this is your level of discourse, you’re already tarnishing whatever future post you’re referring to.

          5. Buswells Babe


            Firstly, the article was not by Bodger. It was by a contributor.

            Secondly, and this is the key point, it does not distort or misrepresent Clifford’s article.

            Clifford’s article – while not condoning Hickey’s actions – was ruefully admiring of his ‘neck’ in the way that some Irish journalists used to be ruefully admiring of Charles Haughey.

            For anyone who believes corruption is a serious matter, and needs to be fought, articles like this, which make it seem like a joke, are worrying.

            I’m not suggesting Mick Clifford is himself corrupt. I read his articles regularly and he seems like a competent and honest journalist. But perhaps he has the occasional blind spot about certain aspects of Irish life?

            Really, whether any given reader agrees or disagrees with the piece above depends on two things, neither of which are necessarily pejorative.

            Firstly, do they find it funny? Whether they do or not probably depends on whether they – or a family member – have suffered as a result of corruption. That kind of thing tends to knock out your sense of humour a bit.

            Secondly, are they a journalist themselves? If so, they’re going to be up in arms at any online criticism of the mainstream media in any event.

          6. rotide

            Just to correct you there babe.

            The article might not be by bodger but it is by a long time “staff” contributor, not a random submission. Unlike the ‘mainstream media’ that the soft headed like to deride, there is no real names available anywhere for this website. We have no idea who the staff are, or the editors (haha, as if) and even the name of the owner is censored. You can’t actually type it out or you go into moderation.

            It might well be one person posting all this stuff under different names. It’s probably 2 and they probably comment here under different names and a lot of people can probably guess who they are.

            If you think this doesn’t distort the article, you probably should stick to the buswells bar there.

          7. Buswells Babe

            Looking for the chat, Rotide?

            Let’s not get distracted into who the article is by, whether I’m a babe or a bloke or where I go for my Friday pint, because really, that’s just ad hominem all over again and you must be so bored by that now, surely?

            My other point – that the piece is a fair and objective criticism of Clifford’s efforts to be funny about not really a very funny subject – still stands after your response. Anything to contribute on that?

      1. Mick Clifford

        Ah right I get it now. You didn’t like the Frank Mullen interview. You think some voices have no right to be heard. Very establishment attitude that

        1. manonfire

          Mick throws his lot behind Frank Mullen who is filthy rich (somehow) very cosy with the guards and who is also implicated in a very nasty case of child sexual abuse, and than wonders why people question his integrity

          1. Saturday Night Newsround

            Can’t speak for Bodger, but I think it’s great that Frank Mullen chose to tell his story to you, Mick, as it promotes open discussion of a very disturbing rumour. Mullen was an extremely powerful man in the Ireland of the 70s-80s, not just in Dalkey, but, as head of the Garda Representative Association, in Ireland generally. Any allegation against him dating from that period needs to be fully and comprehensively discussed and – given the mainstream media’s reluctance to rely on the defence of fair and reasonable publication – wasn’t going to be until he chose to talk about it himself.

            However that doesn’t mean that the way in which you chose to deal with this story should be immune from criticism. Over a relatively short period there was what can only be described as a ‘Mullen blitz’ with two radio programmes organised by you telling his story as well as a news article. This seemed a little like overkill

            Furthermore, I couldn’t, for instance, see the relevance of posting photos of Mullen with his wife, and her view that he was innocent, in circumstances where we’ve had a trawl of cases through the courts involving wives who stood by sexual abusers even in the face of all the evidence.

            Personally, I wasn’t fully convinced by Mullen’s denials that he had known Cynthia Owen. If you look at old newspaper stories on Mullen, he’s described as involved in everything and anything that goes on in Dalkey – he literally ran everything, and knew everyone. In fact one article describes him in one such article in jocular terms akin to your Hickey piece as great at putting the bite for money on people in terms of fundraising. His assertion that he didn’t know Cynthia Owen entirely conflicts with the level of his involvement in Dalkey life as detailed in these articles. For instance, in relation to the Howard fire, in addition to investigating the fire, he actually identified the body of Louise Howard who lived across the road from Cynthia as someone known to him already. So he was obviously familiar with the White’s Villas area. In fact if you go on you-tube, there’s a video of him and some others morris dancing round the corner from White’s Villas during a 1980s King of Dalkey festival. I think this should have been looked at more fully.

            Another big focus of Mullen’s defence is the unlikelihood of the allegations of ritual abuse. In fact a lot of people (and not just Jimmy Page) got up to very silly things in the 1970s with that sort of thing and there are newspaper stories from that period about evidence of such idiotic ceremonies on Dalkey Island and on Dalkey Hill. If nothing else, adding a bit of cloak and dagger to the mix would frighten children into not talking. I think you should at least have done some research into whether or not there were reports of satanic abuse in Dalkey during the relevant period before dismissing Cynthia Owen’s allegations on that basis.

            One further point occurs – Cynthia Owen’s story, insofar as it related to her maternity of the child discovered, has been confirmed by a jury verdict. That must surely be a reason to look into further allegations made by her fully and comprehensively. It’s important not to take anything at face value – but a search of the archives shows that Cynthia Owen’s story is backed up by contemporaneous reports in a way that Mullen’s isn’t. The discrepancy should at least have been put to him.

    3. mildred st. meadowlark

      Lots of people defending you here too. We can’t have everything now, can we?

    4. ivan

      To mangle the words of Ian Hislop…If Mick Clifford is an establishment journalist, then I’m a banana…

    5. rotide

      Watch out Mick, You’re going to have ‘Aaron McAllorum’ patrolling twitter for anything suspicious related to you from now on.

    6. Buswells Babe

      Mick, why do you assume that any criticism of your articles is directed at you personally, rather than simply a disagreement with your analysis or approach.

      I can only remember one other occasion in which there was any criticism of you by Broadsheet, and that was in relation to your interview with retired Garda Frank Mullen regarding allegations made against him by Cynthia Owen. Bodger links to the piece below. I’ve followed the link and reread it, and it’s a detailed and very comprehensive criticism of your interview, with no personal attack on you whatsoever. If anything, it’s a compliment to you that someone took the trouble to critique your work so thoroughly.

      Criticism is not necessarily designed to ‘get at’ someone. Perhaps such detailed and painstaking analysis is an acknowledgment that your contribution to journalism is sufficiently weighty to merit discussion? Also, fair critical opinions based on facts (being a test which as far as I can see Broadsheet’s analysis of your work satisfies) is integral to a healthy journalistic community.

      PS your work first came to my notice through Broadsheet’s (very favourable) coverage of your articles of the Maurice McCabe case.

      1. smiffy

        “I’ve followed the link and reread it, and it’s a detailed and very comprehensive criticism of your interview, with no personal attack on you whatsoever. If anything, it’s a compliment to you that someone took the trouble to critique your work so thoroughly.”

        Except that it’s not thorough at all. That’s the problem. It selectively picks out a few quotes from the early part of the article, which are relatively light-hearted, and complains that Clifford doesn’t deal with serious issues, while completely ignoring the substantial questions that Clifford actually puts forward in the article.

        It’s a very poor piece of writing or ‘critique’, but from a reading of other pieces on the website, it seems pretty much par for the course.

        1. smiffy

          Sorry, misread the context here. Thought it was about the piece on Pat Hickey, rather than the Mullan interview. Oops.

    7. Andy


      You had the temerity to question the Mary Boyle documentary.

      Broadsheet ain’t going to like that given the amount of copy GO’D gives them.

    8. Paddy

      I listened to and read what you said. Now, I am aware that you are a journalist, not a comedian. If you were a comedian I would then realise that this was a send up. As you are a journalist, and didn’t give an inkling that it was a send up, what I listened to/read is taken by me to be your true views.
      So, future articles, will you give us a clue as to whether they are to be taken as journalism, or comedy?

  11. Declan

    Yesterday there was the piece about buying gold (which totally wasn’t a promo) and today this. Editorial review please????

    If you call someone an establishment journalist you can pretty much guarantee someone’s got a chip o their shoulder or have blinkers on

    1. rotide

      Declan, they also posted that John Oliver piece about falling standards in journalism a week or so ago.

      Irony overload.

      1. Kieran NYC


        Speaking of “falling standards in journalism”, where’s the geography teacher gone?

        1. Dόn 'The Unstoppable Force' Pídgéόní

          These comments do you no favours Kieran in NYC, don’t be a twit

  12. Eamonn Clancy

    It appears his wife told police that he had left for Ireland when they came knocking. So either he was lying to her or she was lying to the police.

  13. rotide

    Just when I thought this day couldn’t get any more entertaining, along comes this piece.

    Not only did whoever posted this completely misunderstand a standard piece of tongue in cheek journalism, all the usual doommongering suspects jumped right in on cue.

    Bodgers contribution of ‘Talk to Cynthia Owen’ is just dripping with ‘WHAT THEY WONT TELL YOU’ comedy as well.

    1. spudnick

      +1. This is extraordinarily petty stuff. We posted this unrelated crud because we don’t like what you did over there. Looking forward to the insightful ‘Leather Jacket Guy Reacts To Pat Hickey Video’ special.

  14. :-Joe

    Clifford is on air right now standing in for George Hook on Newstalk.ie

    “The right hook” show is Denis “Uncle Creepy” O’Brien’s regressive Fianna Gael media propaganda tool. Very mild compared to the US media but serves the same purpose with the similar sinister intent.

    Anyone working on that show and many in that news channel are all regressive elitist morons of the highest caliber but thankfully like their fox news counterparts they are transparently dumb and only a small part of the web of corruption that keeps this country from being a more equal and progressive society.

    Clifford is a journalist who works for Denis “Disaster Capitalist ” O’Brien(A.K.A Fathead the greedy scumbag) / Fianna Gael and can research a story and write about it…

    Woop de fupping Hooooo…

    Tell him what he’s won folks..
    – A fupping job as an apprentice entry level journalist.

    One or two decent articles from time to time does not a repectable journalist make.

    Broadsheet is literally the only reliable place in Ireland for unbiased news coverage and opinion.
    – Correction : Waterford Whispers and some other small internet pockets of wisdom are good too.

    You can agree or disagree but people need to wake up and educate themselves and each other then do something for the good of us all.



      1. :-Joe


        -for being a troll… or just being petty and nitpicking over the symantics of a fairly pointeless issue.

        Good one though, I like trolls, trolling and the whole business of wasting people’s time with silly comments..

        I wouldn’t give up the day job though, whatever that could be.

        GL, HF, Thank you and good night – much love.


        1. rotide

          You can’t tell the difference between news media and blogs and I’m being a troll?

          ok then.

          1. :-Joe

            Ahh… Once again, the wise sensei shows the ambitious student his first glimpse into the philosophical understanding needed to be gained to master the true meaning behind the ancient art of the pre-emtive reverse Trolololooo…..

            You have much to learn my hungry young warrior….. but don’t lose your way on the path to enlightenment and be digouraged from true enlightenment.

            It is like the hand that points to the sky…. don’t look at the hand or you will miss all the heavenly glory.

            MUAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



          2. :-Joe

            I left you another little treat to bite on in that last post… did you see it?

            Oh you want to bite on it… Don’t you…?

            I know you do but you might be more cautious this time in case I reel you in again?


          3. manonfire

            @ rotide, just a note news media and current affairs blogs are the same, its all news media just sometimes from different perspectives, what you are doing is trolling

          4. spudnick

            Jaypers, the thickos are out. All we need is a few ‘Wake up sheeple!’s and we’d be full bingo. If you disagree, you are of course, ‘trolling’.

          5. manonfire

            A pointless unnecassary and confidentally put while being totally incorrect assumption on a point is called trolling

  15. Kieran NYC

    One thing I’ll say for Michael Clifford. When he writes his pieceshe puts his full name to them.

    Not an anonymous username.

    1. Frilly Keane

      He also gets remunerated
      He also gets promos for his novels
      He also gets his expenses covered

      So again

  16. Cynthia Owen

    I’m Cynthia Owen and want to point out that
    I have never been questioned or charged with wasting police time or of giving false information while Mullen by his own admission is an official suspect in my case.

    It’s not that people liked or disliked the Mullen interview it was the fact that in such a serious case a chief suspect would be given the front page of a newspaper and a 30 min radio interview to discredit a victim whose daughter was murdered while giving hardly any time/space to the victim to defend herself and that Clifford would believe the ridiculous claims Mullen made that I just picked his name out rather than speak to the team investigating the case for clarity or taking on board if I was just rolling names out out of malice I would be prosecuted.

    There was no balance or fairness in the interview and Clifford with no real groundwork or homework done in that the article was totally based on Mullen’s word alone who by his own admission he is still a suspect.

      1. Saturday Night Newsround

        The Hickey and Mullen stories are pretty close to Kate Fitzgerald, actually. All involve cases of serious allegations against people in current or past positions of significant power, and the way in which the media has dealt with these allegations.It is in the public interest to discuss these matters.

        Regarding legal fees, I don’t see anything in Broadsheet’s coverage of Clifford going as far, in terms of malice, as your comments about Broadsheet above. Are you talking to yourself here?

        Funnily enough there were also threats of ‘good luck with the legal fees’ in the Kate Fitzgerald story.

      2. Kieran NYC

        Sorry – this comment was supposed to be a general one, not a reply to Cynthia. Deepest apologies Cynthia.

        A lot of comments last night came pretty close to being defamatory, accusing Mick of all sorts. Broadsheet used the dog whistle and the dogs came running.

        1. manonfire

          To be honest, Mick puts his opinions out in public to be accepted or critiqued, any fallout from his commentary is all part and parcel of his decision to do this

    1. manonfire

      The human rights social justice thing is just an act, once they get the call they fall into line just like Mick

  17. Frilly Keane

    Ah here
    Clifford can FRO

    Typical Irish Touring Jouno

    Traveling from Miriam t’Marian t’Hook

    And all from his base camp in Cork
    Give over Bhoy

    Ye’ve all had a 10 plus years Head Start on every other market to open up the can a’worms on Trickey Hickey
    And ya didn’t.
    Even from the Atlanta Games ya had at least 3,000 words, with sponsors conflicts, dodgy credentials, and swimmers …

    Ye sat back and waited for another jurisdiction/ media market to open it up
    And ye now follow safely and spread it on the Weekend supplements and radio shows

    You’re a Follower Michael

    1. Saturday Night Newsround

      Very well put.

      The fact that Clifford is one of the better journalists out there does not make him immune from scrutiny.

      In fact the better he is, the more weight his articles carry, and the more important that people be in a position to give their opinions on them.

      Also, being a journalist is not just about getting rave reviews. It’s also about getting criticism, and getting information which causes you to review and challenge what you have previously written, to consider the possibility that you may have missed something, or misjudged a particular tone in your writing. What differentiates the best journalists from the best of a bad lot journalists is that they constantly self-criticise and engage with the public regarding their writing.

      To be fair I should say that Clifford’s postings above are a form of engagement and the fact he cares about how his work is perceived is commendable – even if he does seem a bit petulant at being criticised by the contributor.

  18. nellyb

    If Broadsheet is a biased blog (often implied by regulars like rotide, NYC guy and so on) – then why is there influx of ‘established Ireland’ stampeding to publish/comment here and preferably on a regular basis, like what’s his name heavily blinkered xFF PR?. Why is Mick Clifford paying attention to what Broadsheet says – does Mick do same on other blogs? I used to like his articles, but in my opinion he is merging with corrupt Ireland, underplaying its lethal gravity with sarcasm and euphemisms. Just like them TDs on the Dail floor, sparring in questionable wit over grave matters.
    Hickey ain’t a poor man, he’s got steady olympic cash flow. So, why this petty ticketing scam? How much money is enough money for the likes of him? It sure looks like pathology. May be he needs psychiatric evaluation before legal proceedings.
    Ross isn’t a saint, but nobody is. But I’d give a legion of Hickeys for one Ross any day.

    1. Saturday Night Newsround

      It has to be said: the only reason why someone would be a persistent and ubiquitous commenter on a site they disapprove of constantly criticise (in terms far stronger than any criticism Michael Clifford has ever been subjected to, here or elsewhere) is if they are seeking to undermine that site for some reason or alternatively have some kind of mental disorder.

      I suppose Rotide could be a Broadsheet false flag but I think they’re better than that, somehow.

        1. nellyb

          extreme greed is on addiction spectrum, sometimes referred to as ‘instability’. could also be reaction to protracted grief and emotional distress. not saying Hickey’s gone beyond the pale, but he is in the hospital now, isn’t he?

          1. :-Joe

            Ye, I would go along with that, and also the factor of insecurity in a competitive enviroment that prevents people from seeing the wood from the trees.

            Many of these people can’t even comprehend the idea that they are doing anything wrong, much less getting caught and convicted.

            A lack of understanding, empathy and character with a backbone.


      1. nellyb

        Broadsheet needs rotide. He challenges people and ‘extracts’ interesting comments from them. It is a good thing. I mentioned him/her because he/she is consistent in playing devil’s advocate. And yes, now that you’ve suggested a false flag and his handle is an editor backwards – it’s probable, but do Broadsheet lads have time for that stuff? It would be a loss to commentary if rotide called it a day.

        1. Saturday Night Newsround

          It would. He puts his heart into it in fairness.

          He’s the only one intelligent enough to be a false flag but I think Broadsheet’s better than false flags somehow.

      2. MoyestWithExcitement

        He’s just a curtain twitcher. He’s referenced the owner of this site a few times. He also regularly addresses the main admin regularly, as if he has a relationship with the admin and isn’t an irrelevant anonymous poster in a comment section. He’s just a no mark that wants to feel like he has high status in *some* sort of social setting, the Broadsheet comment section in this case, so he name drops and criticises content because it makes him feel important. You give him too much credit even considering that as a remote possibility

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            No, unfortunately. Good luck with your Junior results next month. Remember after your inevitable tears upon opening them, they don’t really matter and your ma still thinks your cool. Nobody else does obviously but you’ll always have your ma.

        1. spudnick

          So calling out hivemind uncritical comment brigading warrants the full angry-Moyest treatment?

          I’ve often found myself agreeing with the sentiment in articles (e.g. Pat Hickey) while at the same time being tempted to be a devil’s advocate thanks to the comments.

          1. Saturday Night Newsround

            Possibly that’s what some of the people writing those comments are trying to tempt you to do.

            Be strong, Sputnik.

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            People shouting ‘wake up sheeple’ don’t tend to be very bright and all they’re doing is stroking their ego. Everyone wants to feel unique. Most people have skills and talent to give them that feeling. Others just delude themselves and come up with words like “hive mind” so they can just *tell* themselves they’re smarter than everyone.

          3. Saturday Night Newsround

            I think it’s more than that.

            I think they’re afraid of the world that they exist relatively comfortably in being overturned.

            They’re afraid of the good guys being found to be bad, and the values they’ve lived by being held to be topsy-turvy.

            The problem is, if they don’t at least explore the possibility that that might be so, there’ll always be that nagging, underlying sense that things aren’t right that won’t go away. And maybe, if they’re unlucky enough to inadvertently annoy the men they admire, or threaten their safe berth, an even more tangible proof of this.

            No one should be immune from being criticised and judged.

            Presumably that’s why Broadsheet puts up with all the people on this site (NOT Rotide) who write the same criticism of every post?

          4. spudnick

            I wasn’t thinking of the ‘wake up sheeple’ contingent. I think you’ve got your definition of ‘critical’ a little off.

            Now, for this, am I a) a moron, b) a no-mark, c) a racist bigot? Give me a ‘Good lad’ at least.

          5. MoyestWithExcitement

            “I think they’re afraid of the world that they exist relatively comfortably in being overturned.”

            People like junior here do all seem to expect people to respect authority and will belittle anyone who questions it. There’s obviously some emotional reason for it and that one sounds plausible. They don’t want to consider the possibility that they’ve benefited from luck or ‘bad’ actions. Probably why they also like to believe poor people can only blame themselves for their situation. Whatever the reason is, it’ll come back to ego and image. Always does.

            “Presumably that’s why Broadsheet puts up with all the people on this site (NOT Rotide) who write the same criticism of every post?”

            I don’t think they regard the comments section is that important. (Although it never ceases to entertain me watching grown adults act like it is) Do you think all the multinational brands advertising on the journal still would be if the insanity on their comments section mattered?

          6. MoyestWithExcitement

            “I think you’ve got your definition of ‘critical’ a little off.”

            I’m not the one claiming Rotide’s whiny drivel is an example of ‘critical thinking’.

            “Now, for this, am I a) a moron, b) a no-mark, c) a racist bigot?”

            You think Rotide is smart and his posts are important. a) and b)

          7. spudnick

            I was hoping for ‘bitter shut-in’. Never mind. There’s always next time. Keep on devoting 80% of your working day to the cause.

          8. rotide

            I don’t think they regard the comments section is that important.

            Do you think all the multinational brands advertising on the journal

            These two things are linked. I’ll let you work out how.

            Here’s some hints:
            A. No one really cares whats actually written in the comments.
            B. Clicks.

          9. manonfire

            No one really cares whats actually written in the comments.

            As he posts daily, yea yea whatever fits the argument eh rotide

          10. MoyestWithExcitement

            “These two things are linked. I’ll let you work out how.”

            No thanks. I already know how it works. Thanks for adding weight to my posts about you today though. I forgot ‘states the obvious but pretends he’s an industry insider while doing so’ from my list.

        2. manonfire

          He whinges about editorial or lack of and moderation on broadsheet and than shows up everyday with the same bitter face, make sense of that what you will.. devils ad/trolling

          1. rotide

            Looks like I can add ‘is Mick Clifford’ to my growing list of alter egos

            Must run that past the israelis and make sure they’re cool with it.

          2. :-Joe

            If you’re into getting your information from the religious, that is.

            BTW: Hello MOSSAD and the paranoid international Zionist Israeli hacker movement…

            Welcome to the comments section of Broadsheet.ie… home of the absurd and sometimes beautiful use of the English language, filtered through the prism of internet commenting… anger, frustration, hope and C Class drugs.


    2. sǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq

      @ Belly Knee-jerk;

      I like the jist of your jab..You have an admirable eloquence about you.

      But the two phrases that stood out were:
      …underplaying its lethal gravity with sarcasm and euphemisms…
      …sparring in questionable wit over grave matters.

      I hope you weren’t talking about me… ;-)

  19. Guy Bague

    Clifford: Another up-from-the-country loudmouth who thinks he can write and has something to say about the state of Irish society and politics.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link