It is not without irony that during the week in which we are “celebrating” 100 years of RTÉ radio, a report should be published which openly suggests the dissolution of RTÉ as a state body. If the proposition were as simple as that, I would be the first to support it: I have openly argued in the past that all state funding should be cut from our public broadcaster. However, the proposition is not as simple as that.
The report in question was published by the DCU School of Communications, and concerned the implications of a united Ireland on the public broadcasting system. The report suggested that, in the event that Northern Ireland is reunited with the Republic, maintaining the status quo concerning the BBC in the North would be a “non-starter”. It further suggested that, in the matter of RTÉ possibly taking over the Northern branch of the BBC, “simply grafting on Northern parts to their Southern counterparts” would be a poor decision.
Attempting to have RTÉ merge with the Northern BBC would likely be a long, difficult, and costly process. However (as outlined in the report), simply leaving BBC as the main broadcaster in the North would prevent the UK from collecting TV licence fees for it. And so it seems reasonable that neither of these two is the best solution to the problem.
Concerning RTÉ, it is undeniable at this point that the broadcaster has been in a downward spiral for a long time now, and the report acknowledges this to some degree. The report speaks scathingly about RTÉ, claiming that “the persistent governance issues that RTÉ has faced in recent years” make it unfit, as it stands, “to become the main PSM [public service media] organisation following reunification”. The licence fee in the UK is described as “in terminal decline”, while it is also reported that here in Ireland there was a fee evasion rate of roughly 19% in 2023. All evidence suggests that the TV licence is not working.
It is difficult to disagree with much of this. The problem with the report is not in its identification of the problems, but with its proposed solution. What is that solution? Why, make a new broadcaster – nearly exactly like RTÉ – except this time funded by a new income tax.
What would be the result of dissolving RTÉ to create a united Ireland broadcaster? Simply that hundreds of media types would be on the job market again, in need of employment, which would incidentally be available at the new broadcaster. The upshot would be that there would be no real governance change at all; the same people who are responsible for RTÉ’s current state would fill all the spaces in Public Media Ireland, and the effect would be creating a new RTÉ under a different name.
This is not to mention the funding plan. Inspired by the Finnish system, the report proposes a 2.5% income tax on those above the bracket of €14,000. As if the current TV licence fee were not bad enough to have countless people evading it, or simply going without a television (like myself, since everything can be found online anyway), we are supposed now to swallow another tax on income for the sake of RTÉ, masquerading as a fresh new and improved platform?
Put simply, the report overlooks the fact that there is something more deeply wrong with RTÉ and the concept of public broadcasters in general than the people who happen to be in charge at a given time.
One of the most frustrating aspects of our country is the relentless defence of RTÉ by our politicians, and even the public. While we are being fed one not-very-subtly Left-wing news report after another, our leaders continue to claim that RTÉ is serving the great and higher purpose of true objectivity. Therefore, we should just shut up and take our dose of Morning Ireland without asking questions.
However, we do have to ask ourselves: what is the real problem with RTÉ? Ultimately, it is not the “governance”. It is the fact that – as a state-funded news source – it cannot be relied upon to report impartially on the state, or call it to account for its decisions.
It is old wisdom that it is unwise to bite the hand that feeds. In the same vein, we should not be surprised if an organisation tends to avoid reporting negatively on the institution that is paying it to report. In a free society, an important mission of the news media should be to hold the government to account on behalf of the people, including informing the people what their leaders are doing, so that they can voice their opinions on it. How can any broadcaster be expected to do this when its life quite literally depends on the government? Many seem not to recognise this inherent contradiction, and simply go along listening to RTÉ, often unaware of the subtle (and sometimes less subtle) messaging being pushed.
What is the real solution to the public broadcaster issue in a future United Ireland? All those considered in the report seem to be too long, too difficult, or too ineffective in tackling the real problems with RTÉ that have become so evident in recent times. The most viable solution, in my opinion, is to cut state funding from RTÉ altogether. I am not proposing the forcible suppression of RTÉ – merely that it should stand on its own two feet, if it can. No news platform is owed life support from a state body. On the contrary, it would be preferable for news platforms, if they wish to retain impartiality, to make it a matter of principle to refuse state money.
This report should not be taken too seriously for now. It is not official state policy, and a United Ireland still does not appear likely in the near future. However, it does help to highlight the prevailing ignorance concerning the fundamental problems with a state-funded broadcaster in principle. Turning RTÉ into “Public Media Ireland” will not change anything, and imposing an income tax to fund it would only heighten the growing discontent with our national broadcaster. One cannot help but suspect that those who wrote the report – like those in government and those with a pensionable position in RTÉ – have a strong suspicion that if RTÉ (or any future doppelganger) were made to stand on its own two feet, it might not stand for very long.
_______________________
Patrick Vincent writes from Dublin