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.
Updated 4.25pm
RTÉ IS TO make a statement about its coverage of part of the Corrib ‘rape tape’ claims.
It follows a complaint to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) by Jerrie Ann Sullivan, one of the women whose arrest led to a senior Garda and his colleagues recording themselves talking about the women who were in their custody.
The BAI said that RTÉ’s coverage of the deletion of files on the camcorder that recorded the controversial audio caused Sullivan “undue distress and harm”.
Shell-To-Sea said the correction will be broadcast before the 6.01 News and Nine O’Clock News this Wednesday, 7 December.
The complaints were made by Sullivan under the Broadcasting Act 2009 section 48(1)(a)(fairness, objectivity and impartiality in current affairs) and section 48(1)(b)(harm and offence – Code of Programme Standards: section 3.5.2 factual programming).
She stated that the news report about the outcomes of the investigation by the Garda Siochána Ombudsman Commission into sexually threatening remarks allegedly made by members of the Gardaí broadcast on the Six One news programme was incorrect.
Her complaint centred on the headline ‘Ombudsman says Mayo arrest tape was altered’, which she said was factually incorrect.
She also stated that RTÉ broadcast the line that “part of the recording of the arrest of two women about whom Gardaí were alleged to have made sexually threatening remarks was deleted and overwritten”, which she said was false.
Sullivan said that part of the recording of the arrests was not deleted, and that instead an unrelated file on the camera was deleted and overwritten.
She said the GSOC is aware of that and it did not state that part of the recording was deleted.
The GSOC report states that “footage of the original incident giving rise to the GSOC investigation was recovered from the device along with a number other files that had been deleted and overwritten”.
Sullivan said that RTÉ misinterpreted the GSOC report and broadcast false information that was offensive and harmful to her, and that it damaged her credibility as well as causing offence to the wider community in Kilcommon, Erris Co Mayo.
The report was broadcast during the course of the 6.01pm and 9 O’Clock news.
RTÉ said it believed the studio introduction and report were fully accurate and there was no breach of impartiality or objectivity.
The BAI said that the findings of the GSOC report as summarised in the introduction to the news report are not supported by the GSOC and the report was inaccurate.
It said the “phraseology” used in the report didn’t sufficiently distinguish between the recording that was being investigated and other files on the camcorder; and that this phraseology and inaccuracy in the introduction would have reasonably resulted in a view inferring that the recording being investigated had been tampered with.
The BAI committee was of the view that the report would raise unfounded questions for viewers about the integrity of Sullivan, so it was in breach of section 48(1) of the 2009 Act, and that the report casued undue distress and harm to Sullivan.
It did not agree that the report would have caused undue stress to the community of Kilcommon, Erris.
Sullivan said:
I am relieved that at least one aspect of the misinformation put out by state bodies about this incident has now been corrected.
In correspondence with me prior to the BAI decision, RTE attempted to vigorously defend their inaccurate reporting, citing Minister Alan Shatter’s also misleading comments as a basis for the news.
Dublin Shell to Sea spokesperson Caoimhe Kerins alleged that the situation with the digital camera was explained by telephone to RTÉ, but they ignored this information.
Communications minister Pat Rabbitte, meanwhile, has ruled out the prospect of amending the Broadcasting Acts in the wake of the settlement reached between RTÉ and Kevin Reynolds.
Rabbitte said he would not consider a change in the law requiring RTÉ to publicly declare the extent of its out-of-court settlements, in response to aparliamentary question from Fine Gael backbencher Bernard Durkan.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Seems that this report is more about teachers’ standards and professionalism online than about cyberbullying
Teachers are adults and better able to look after themselves. Trying to control young people’s internet access is like pushing water uphill – they will get round it. A top-down sanctions approach or simply saying this is wrong will not work – you need to do the work with the students in schools in groups, with properly trained facilitators. It is an important and critical matter for young people. Remember David Coleman in Bullyproof – he got that young woman who had been bullied to stand up and talk to the other students in her year and tell them how it felt for her. You have to do the emotional work or nothing will change. To make it into good and bad people is not realistic – probably many go along with it out of fear that if they stand up for their classmates they will also be targeted, and they say that people who have been bullied may do the same themselves as a reaction. So if we are serious about tackling it, there are many evidence-based approaches that can be taken in schools that will make a difference – the will is all that is lacking.
I really can’t believe this
advice on how the teacher protects themselves
Nothing at all about the real problem of children been bullied or how prevent their deaths..
can I just add if a teacher is too dumb to understand risks of getting students to have to use facebook and other social media for school related activities then they should be replaced
How to stop cyber bullying – block or delete , then toughen up
Useless. A top down sanctions approach has not worked so far. Nor have anti-bullying weeks or information. Of course there need to be guidelines and information, but without doing the emotional work with students and group work to explore the issue nothing will change. They need skilled and trained people to work with the young people in groups in schools to help them to understand at a cognitive and emotional level the real impact of this kind of behaviour, and also of peers not standing up for individuals. School that have a whole school approach to social and emotional literacy have dramatically reduced bullying and better and more trusting relationships between all members of their school communities. Probably any young person is as capable of engaging in this behaviour as they are of being at the receiving end, or of being afraid to stand up for their friends…
‘School that have a whole school approach to social and emotional literacy have dramatically reduced bullying’
That is clearly the approach that should be absolutely required. Three suicides amongst young people says it all. ‘Guidelines’ are not enough. Social and emotional education should have as much of a priority in schools as science or maths. It says a lot that there are huge pushes to increase science education because the economy requires it, but what is needed by young people themselves just gets some guidelines.
Education should be targeted towards helping to educate young people for life, not just for jobs.
“Teachers have also been asked to become familiar with the terminology used on the internet, for example ‘likes’, ‘tweets’, ‘re-tweets’ and MEMEs.”
If they aren’t familiar with those basics they have no place talking to young people on the dos and don’ts of social media. If schools don’t have the understanding of the area they need to bring in people that do for workshops and talks and it should all be based on understanding the emotional impact this can have on others.
Pretending parents can monitor their kids online activities is a waste of time as they can’t. Standing and lecturing about ‘cowards behind their computers’ will be met with indifference.
I agree with you, but the problem is that teachers who know too little can end up picking ‘experts’ who know too little.
My 14 year old son’s school had a so-called expert in yesterday to give them a talk about avoiding cyber-bullying (not crazy about that term, but it’s what we’ve got). The talk mostly addressed Facebook and Bebo. Yes, Bebo. Also, oddly, Wordpress, which was described as a social network.
Shortly after he started the part on Facebook privacy settings, hands began to go up:
“Sir, that’s different now since they introduced the new timeline”.
“Oh, is it? I’ll have to have a look at that”
“Sir, I can explain it if you like…..” And so some guy in the audience educated the expert.
The other part that was … interesting … was his advice that they should “NEVER go anywhere near Reddit or 4chan”. Reasonable enough advice, except probably more than half the class had never heard of Reddit or 4chan. Those who had filled them in afterwards. Guess what they’ll be checking out this week?
He didn’t mention Google+ at all, for some reason. :)
Yeah, It’s a big problem now a days. But i believe every problem has a great solutions. Yeah, All of you are right. There is a good solution to parenting online to keep our child safe from such problem. It is a software called PG Guard. I have mentioned it’s features following.
-PG guard is a simple to use service that safeguards children on facebook.
-PG guard safeguards children regardless of devices they use or their location.
-PG guard constantly monitors your child’s entire social environment.
-PG guard uses unique artificial intelligence algorithms to profile each user.
-Each social interaction is analyzed according to the profiles of the users involved.
-PG guard informs parents of suspicious interactions in child’s social environment.
-PG guard allows parents to educate, encourage and set boundaries online.
for more details you can visit https://pgguard.com/ here
I think the Journal’s opening line is wrong. It says “TEACHERS SHOULD NOT use their own personal social media accounts for school-related projects”. The actual advice quoted in the body of the article says “Avoid connecting directly with students by using Facebook ‘pages’ – in this case a student can access the page without having to be ‘friends’ with the teacher” – this is better advice, and contradicts the opening line. Teachers SHOULD use their own personal social media accounts, but should use these via pages to create a layer of protection.
Hi Shane,
The first line comes from a separate part of the document, which reads: Teachers should not use their personal Twitter or Facebook account for any school-related projects but should set up separate Twitter or Facebook accounts to use for school-related projects.
The line about ‘pages’ is a separate piece of advice.
Thanks
Sinead
Thanks for the clarification, Sinead. In that case, I think that particular bit of advice – to open a seperate account – is bad advice. If a teacher gets on top of FB privacy settings, they should have no fear about using their FB account for school projects, using FB pages or groups as suggested in the article.
@ Shane, it is actually written now in the code of conduct and professionalism for teachers that personal FB accounts etc must not be used by teachers to make contact with their students. It is imperative that the relationship between teacher and pupil is strictly professional as it can be easy for lines to get blurred. This is for the protection of the children but also for the protection of the teachers.
Jane, it depends what is meant by ‘making contact with the student’. I absolutely agree that teachers should not be in social contact with students on Facebook or other social networks. However, it would be very valid for a teacher or school to set up a FB page or group for the school, or for a school project, or for a class. If a student asks ‘what date is the next project due’ and the teacher replies giving a date, is this considered to be ‘contact with a student’?
Schools seem to be running scared of social networking with absolutist guidelines like this. They’d be better off setting out decent guidelines that encourage schools, teachers and students to make sensible use of these facilities, instead of being scared off. Students will learn from teachers role modelling how to use social networking. Students will learn nothing if they don’t see their teachers using these networks,
have your say