Where’s me eye-patch?

 

imgresimgres-1

Maybe it’s the nature of the media or maybe it’s the nature of those who project themselves through the media, but I am constantly amazed at the ability of people to sketch a partial picture. Or even a purblind one.

Take the Nelson Mandela story. On Prime Time last week, it was clear that Charlie Flanagan of Fine Gael and Martina Devlin of the Irish Independent  weren’t going to make any reference to Nelson Mandela’s years in prison and, more importantly, his reasons for being there. In fact Mandela was instrumental in establishing the ANC, and it was because of his refusal to disown the ANC that he spent so many years in prison. (The ANC were a paramilitary group, Virginia. Sometimes known as subversives or terrorists). To have added these uncomfortable facts would have made for obvious parallels with our own bloody past. And when I did draw the parallel I was told by both Charlie and Martina  it was outrageous to do so.

Another point that none of us mentioned  last Thursday on Prime Time, nor have the vast majority of commentators: Nelson Mandela’s installation as President may have destroyed apartheid in South Africa. It may have held the country together, averting a potential black-white division between  South Africans. What it didn’t do was move the great bulk of the black population out of grinding poverty. Yes, the black middle class has expanded but  tens of thousands, maybe millions of black South Africans remain in  lives  that are as threadbare and lacking in prospects as they have ever been. The dream of Mandela bringing equality along with freedom remains just that: a dream.

Sometimes the partial picture isn’t in the account of a figure like Mandela or some political circumstance. Sometimes it comes through a total lack of self-awareness or maybe a  one-eyed picture of oneself. On yesterday’s Sunday Sequence,  my old UCD class-mate Ruth Dudley Edwards (don’t bother asking her, Virginia – we moved in different circles back then) was on along with Danny Morrison. In the course of the discussion Danny made some point and Ruth’s  response was “Danny Morrison is of course a skilled propagandist”.  Leave aside the fact that Morrison was at the time citing indisputable facts. To call someone a propagandist suggests that they manipulate the truth. Ruth has produced a book titled The Orange Order: The Faithful Tribe. You don’t have to go beyond the title to know what image of this sectarian organisation Ruth is going to project.  Yet for her, the skilled propagandist on the panel was not her but Morrison.

Verily, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

8 Responses to Where’s me eye-patch?

  1. neill December 9, 2013 at 10:16 am #

    Verily, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

    Perhaps you should ponder on this yourself Jude?

    • Jude Collins December 9, 2013 at 11:31 am #

      I’d consider the mainstream media in Ireland and beyond does a good job on one eye; I try to provide the other. Quite right, not much of a balance there, but whatchgonnado?

  2. michael December 9, 2013 at 11:04 am #

    anyone with a republican viewpoint appearing on rte is to be commended they are always going to get a hard time from the carefully selected panel as the state broadcaster they should be duty bound to be impartial

  3. Argenta December 9, 2013 at 4:41 pm #

    Regardless of our views on R D Edwards,is it not accurate of her to say that Danny Morrison is /was a “skilled propagandist “.Surely that’s the job he did so well for Sinn Fein during the Troubles.But I suppose any,even mild criticism of your good friend Danny is not well regarded on this blogspot!

    • Jude Collins December 9, 2013 at 6:16 pm #

      Argenta (what an interesting name):(i) how do you know what my relationship (if any) with D Morrison is? (ii) DM stopped being Press Officer for Sinn Féin nearly twenty years ago (do keep up); (iii) I welcome all comments on this site, except they’re mindless abuse. Haven’t you noticed?

      • Argenta December 9, 2013 at 10:50 pm #

        Isn’t it just an interesting name.I’m aware that D M is no longer a Press Officer for Sinn Fein but presumably the talents that made him a great spin doctor have not deserted him totally!One has only to look at You Tube to see you launching Danny’s last book and conclude that you two are hardly strangers.If you feel that my comments are “mindless abuse” you are perhaps more sensitive than I thought.

  4. neill December 9, 2013 at 5:16 pm #

    Speaking of fair objective media treatment you should have a quick look at this….

    By Jim Gibney (for Irish News)

    Gerry Adams has been a public figure for the best part of the past 40 years. For at least 30 of those years he has been an elected representative with a poll-topping record the envy of many other political leaders.

    For the same period sections of the establishment media, especially the BBC and RTE have relentlessly pursued him and treated him with hostility the most recent example being TV3’s programme last Monday night – Sinn Fein: Who Are They?

    Few other political leaders in this country or indeed in Britain have been scrutinised to the same degree of bias as Gerry Adams.

    The pursuit of Gerry Adams has all to do with what he believes in and represents and has little or nothing to do with claims by journalists that they are objective investigators.

    Claims of ‘objectivity’ are a self-perpetuating and self-serving myth, especially by Belfast-based journalists ensconced in the BBC and Dublin-based journalists in RTE.

    Both are advocates of the status quo: a partitioned island with a unionist bias in the BBC and an anti-republican partitionist bias in RTE and both agencies are riddled with class-prejudiced journalists.

    Most of the establishment media are opposed to what Gerry Adams stands for: a united Ireland and a different society based on the socialist principles of equality; the sharing of wealth and the empowerment of working-class people to ensure they are in the governmental institutions that run their lives.

    There is a political and class prejudice in the media against Gerry Adams.

    His working class Ballymurphy republican roots and his outstanding ability to represent the republican cause and see off his detractors in the media fuel the prejudice. His self-educated background inside and outside prison; his self-taught writing skills as an author and columnist are a mark of distinction and particularly infuriate those university-educated journalists who prey on him.

    If, when using Irish (for which he should be congratulated) he makes a mistake, it becomes the occasion for derision.

    The establishment media resent the fact that as a republican leader Gerry Adams has built up a considerable political following which can be seen in the electoral growth of Sinn Fein, north and south, and the considerable potential for further growth of Sinn Fein, particularly in the south.

    He is also highly regarded by many people who do not support Sinn Fein but do appreciate his contribution to Irish politics. But there are journalists with an agenda – who pompously think their ‘story’ will be the one to topple Gerry Adams.

    Rather than the Sinn Fein grass roots deciding who their leaders should be, they think they have that divine right.

    When the armed conflict was taking place the media mantra was “Sinn Fein/IRA” and Sinn Fein was held responsible for every IRA action.

    Next was the media obsession over whether Gerry Adams was a member of the IRA.

    Its treatment of him before and after his brother Liam was convicted for sexually abusing his daughter is perhaps the most shameful episode of the contrived media campaign.

    Despite this campaign abysmally failing to dent Gerry Adams’ popularity it is pursued with a renewed vigour, as one group of journalists (younger and keener) replace the aged and burnt out cases who are left to cheer from the side lines.

    None of this of course surprises republicans nor does it affect the standing of Gerry Adams as leader of Sinn Fein.

    Gerry Adams is revered by party activists and the more he is criticised the more his personal integrity shines through.

    Of equal importance the media has abysmally failed to undermine Gerry Adams’ personal standing and Sinn Fein’s poll ratings.

    But this reality will not deter those self-appointed guardians of public probity.

    What may, however, put the brakes on an unaccountable and out of control clique is a Patten-style investigation into the media.

    In this post-conflict era they are the one agency left to regulate their own behaviour and set their own standards.

    They were ‘players’ during the armed conflict and are still. This abuse of power has to end. It is time the media was democratically regulated and made accountable to the public, certainly those journalists in the BBC and RTE paid by taxpayers.

    Off course that would suit SF down to the ground afterall who likes to be critised by the media….

  5. ugg classic short December 23, 2013 at 7:35 am #

    ugg a vendre