Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE BROADCASTING AUTHORITY of Ireland (BAI) has rejected five complaints made about the use of bad language which the complainant said in some of the specified cases was used “without apology ” on the national airwaves.
The Executive Complaints Forum of the BAI considered and rejected 12 complaints in meetings held in January and February of this year.
Among the twelve were five complaints made by the same person over programmes on Newstalk, Today FM, and RTÉ.
In all five cases, the complaints were submitted under principles one, four and five of the Code of Programme Standards.
The Code requires that broadcasters should have respect for community standards, be mindful of the needs of children and have respect for persons and groups in society.
The first complaint relates to the use of the word shitty on Newstalk’s Moncrieff on 13 December 2019.
The complainant claimed that he tuned into the programme at the end of an audio clip from a film featuring Ryan Reynolds. Following the clip, Moncrieff stated: “I love the way I’m allowed to say ‘shitty’ but Ryan Reynolds isn’t”.
He said he found the use of the word offensive and objectionable, especially given the time of day “when children might reasonably be expected to be listening”.
In response, Newstalk acknowledged that the complainant was offended but did not consider that the use of the word shitty contravenes the Code when used on a one-off basis and considered in context.
The BAI ruled in favour of Newstalk, noting that the programme and segment are aimed at an adult audience who are likely to be familiar with the tone and content of this regular segment.
‘Without apology’
Three of the five complaints about the language used on the airwaves were in relation to programmes on RTÉ radio.
The first was about the language used on the Jennifer Zamparelli show on 2FM during a discussion with a reporter about the Kardashians on 13 November 2019.
The complainant claimed the word shit was used on two separate occasions, while the words Jesus Christ and God were also used as swear words, “without any apology being made”.
The complainant contended that later in the programme the presenter warned two phone-in guests that they were live on-air and stated that they should not curse. The presenter repeated this later in the programme when one of the guests said shit.
In response to the complaint, RTÉ said that the word was used inadvertently by the programme’s entertainment reporter when she was using a phrase which contains the profanity.
“The broadcaster states that the language and phraseology was used in the course of a conversation and it was not the intention of either the presenter or the reporter to cause offence. However, the broadcaster acknowledges that the comment did offend the complainant and states that the complainant’s concerns were shared with the editorial team,” the report notes.
The BAI’s Executive Complaints Forum noted that the language was offensive to the complainant, however, the Forum did not consider that it caused undue offence.
“The Forum considered the programme in the context of the likely audience, the station and programme type and determined that the content did not infringe the Codes as presented by the complainant. As such, the complaint was rejected.“
The second complaint related to the language used during a discussion on bullying on Liveline on 13 November 2019.
The complainant took issue with the word shit and the use of a clip of a malicious message, re-recorded by an actor, originally sent to a person on snapchat.
The complainant states that while the name of the person was bleeped out on several instances, the words bitch and fuck were uncensored.
RTÉ said the clip originated as part of a longer recording done by a young boy, which was then sent to a 15-year-old girl. An editorial decision was taken to include the clip as it “demonstrated the nature of the material which is on social media and was relevant to the debate”.
RTÉ added that since Liveline is a live programme in which listeners often give frank accounts of their experiences, sometimes “course language” is used to describe sensitive issues.
The BAI sided with RTÉ and did not consider that the broadcast infringed the Code of Programme Standards or cause undue offence.
The third complaint relates to the language used on RTÉ Radio 1’s Arena on 21 January during a discussion on the career of political satirist and producer, Armando Iannucci.
The complainant takes issue with the inclusion of several uncensored uses of the word fuck during an extract from a programme Iannucci created, called The Thick of It.
In response, RTÉ stated that Arena is an arts and culture programme and it believes that, given the genre, listeners understand that art often contains language which some people find challenging adding that a warning of bad language was given prior to broadcast.
The complaint was rejected by the BAI after it considered that Arena is broadcast between 7-8pm on weekdays, is aimed at an adult audience, and a prior was given.
The final complaint was made in relation to language used during a discussion on songs used by political parties during election time on Today FM’s The Last Word.
“A clip was played from a campaign video made by a former TD and now MEP, featuring several of their contributions during their time in Dáil Éireann. The complainant states that the clip contained the word fuck. The complainant objects to this word being repeated six or seven times without any censorship,” the report states.
Today FM said that a warning was issued in advance of airing and that the clip was part of a wider topic concerning Irish Election Songs.
In its rejection of this complaint, the BAI was of the view that the music segment is a regular feature on The Last Word and audiences would be familiar with the adult-nature of the programme. It noted that a warning had been issued prior to the clip which contained bad language.
“The Forum was mindful that the language used was offensive to the complainant, however, it noted that there is no guarantee that programme material will be free from offence. The Forum considered the type of programme, the time of broadcast and the inclusion of prior warnings and did not find the content to be unduly offensive.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Nothing to see here…
@Brian Houlihan: Authorisation= identification = firing .
@Brian Houlihan: This is only the tip of the Garda iceberg.
@rory conway: Perhaps the suppliers of the program, and support to the program, Pulse – or the IT gurus in the Garda department have some questions to answer. For instance, if I’m logged onto my office system and haven’t used it for 20minutes, I have to provide my passwords again. I can imagine that some authorized users would leave the station to go home after a hard days counting mouthpieces for breathalyzers and leave the computer live with them still logged on. Handy for someone to cancel some points.
Accountability is for the little people
Why would superintendents talk to the ordinary garda
I wonder how long it will take before some enterprising barrister brings up some of this to question the integrity of some Garda giving eyewitness testimony in some criminal trial. It’s something any barrister worth his salt would check once the prosecutor sends the list of witnesses to them. Imagine a small drugs seizure for example where the defendant claims the drugs were planted by the arresting Garda… First question the Garda would be asked is if they’ve a history of lying on the job or any other misconduct..How can they be credible once it’s shown point blank they’ve a history of this crap…
@Jason: it wasn’t guards that cancelled anything. It was superintendents
@Michael Devlin: Superintendents ARE GARDAI !!! And this is just another clusterfuсk in a long series clusterfuсks…. The true extent of which will start to become evident once criminal trials start collapsing… Imagine the same scenario above with the drugs search… imagine the defence knowing that a Gardas superintendent has a history of fiddling records asking the Garda if his superiors have a history of tampering with evidence records behind arresting Gardas backs ? What’s going to happen when that drops during a criminal case ?
@Michael Devlin: and well done to them.
@Michael Devlin: yes but on the basis of supers acting then does this suggest the officer was acting incorrectly
I have worked with many systems in organisation private and public. For anybody to override a decision or action by law a full audit trail is required. On top of that if it is anything important the users are forced to enter supporting evidence. If the gardai system doesn’t have the audit trail it in breach of data regs which is highly unlikely. It would take minutes to look up the data and tell them all to enter the reasons. Why this hasn’t been done is very questionable. It is not a massive investigation that should be halted.
@Kal Ipers: People often talk about a luggs brannigan who all the sc***s were frightened of in his day (when dublin was a town) and kept feral kids in their place and how that’s what we need today. In opposition to that we are eroding all discretion that the force has ever had in dealing with sc)m and making them less and less potent. There’s a fine line to thread, power can corrupt and people hate another to have power over them but the force must be allowed to police. If we make them say please and thank you at every turn and fill out a report on every time the break wind we make them incapable of effectively detering, detecting or solving serious crime.
@Carpentoza: Luggs Brannigan was a thug…another example of the type from that time period that abused their power. He was part of a force that turned a blind eye to the abuses of the likes of the Catholic Church, that gave us the “heavy gang” and that buried or fabricated evidence as it suited them.He himself used to administer summary beatings to suspects. He appointed himself judge and jury in a lot of cases. Those who want his likes around are looking back with rose tinted spectacles… anyway his type would be put in a shallow grave somewhere up the Dublin mountains if they tried that nonsense with today’s crims. Him being one of Gay Byrne’s heros should be enough to raise red flags considering his track record of “knowing how to pick em”…
@Kal Ipers: The Pulse system is what, 20 years+ in operation? I doubt that was taken into account when it was installed. Probably a log in named Admin for every station.
@Carpentoza: eh you better get to the Jax quick pal coz yer mouth appears to be expelling shite at an alarming rate.
@Jason: Ah now Luggs was a saint! He even used to refer to prostitutes as ‘ladies of the night’ or something and believed in showing them respect at all times. Then again, he was probably one of their most regular customers!
@Anthony Halpin: so was your grandfather
@Phil Swan: cheers Phil, what happened was you read it and then you burst out with an insult. It’s all part of growing up don’t worry.
@Jason: yes Jason he was a thug, you didn’t understand the point I made but massaged your opinion and offered to sell it for more than it was worth. #justsaying
The worst thing is nothing will happen to these Garda, rotten to the core from top to bottom no confidence whatsoever in them
@Jonny: infantile commentary which is common place unfortunately.
What’s the cost of a TV license relative to bringing someone to court for not having one? Cost/Benefit is not always just about the case at hand.
A few sample prosecutions for obstructing the law could have been good value for money if found to be sustainable.
@Nydon: I genuinely wonder why someone always has to mention the tv licence??? The gardai dont prosecute someone for not having a licence!!!!
Build confidence, not a hope.no consequences for 2 million false breath tests,no consequences for this.country is a joke.
So redacted has used the high court to shut down the Sunday business post from reporting on the commission looking into the Siteserv (now known as Actavo) scandal!
@John Dman: it was the commission who didn’t wan
The 744 across 17 counties is most interesting.
The 744 should be charged with interfering with the course of justice.
Are these the same superintendents that can have you put away for IRA membership based on their word lol
So basically if you knew the right Garda all your offenses could be literally cancelled just like that.
Well done to that person/s who cancelled those points.
@Deirdre D’Arcy Murphy: Saved you a driving ban, did it, Princess?
The gardai can do what they want. Mass fraud & nothing done. Great country. Quick give them another payrise. Criminal behaviour.
Different strokes for different folks
God be with the days a guard could do you a turn. Youre b*ll!xed now if youre caught doing 65 in a 60 zone. I dont see the big issue. They werent exactly letting big criminals off the hook
And why would the dog consult the tail
What’s the point in being in with a super anymore if he can’t get u off a few fines, country is gone to the dogs!!
have your say