RTE accused of backing British analysis on North

RTE news and current affairs divisions have been accused of supporting "the British analysis" in its coverage of the North since 1973. An article in the Irish Witness newsletter said the station had done "a very poor job in generating debate on the North" and had been "neither impartial nor fair-minded" in its coverage. The station was also accused of censorship in its implementation of Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act.

RTE's director of public affairs, Mr Kevin Healy, has rejected the criticisms and said they were "insulting to some of the finest journalists and broadcasters in Ireland. We are proud of our coverage of the North over the past 30 years, which is not to say we didn't make mistakes like other media organisations from time to time".

The Irish Witness describes itself as an independent (Catholic) church newsletter. It is published at the offices of the Centre for Human Rights in West Belfast. Its editor is Father Joe McVeigh. Contributing editors include Father Des Wilson, Father John Dear SJ, and Father Daniel Berrigan SJ.

The article, by Mervyn Jackson, says that in the context of the Belfast Agreement, "it is perhaps time to take a long, unbiased look at RTE", which had "played a central role in the propaganda war" during the conflict.

The station had taken the stance "that the British government was neutral in the conflict, and the British army, the UDR, and the RUC were basically trying to keep the two sides apart". These were generally referred to as "the security forces", with the RUC called "the police". The IRA was "the provisional IRA", its activists were often referred to as "terrorists" and its units were called "gangs".

"RTE identified more and more with the British side . . ." he writes. When the IRA claimed responsibility for an attack, RTE changed the word "claimed" to "admitted", while British soldiers were "murdered" and IRA activists were "killed".

The station had not even sent a camera crew to cover the South Tyrone election count won by Bobby Sands, it was so convinced "that `a convicted terrorist' would not win." Most nationalists in the North knew he would win, Mr Jackson writes.

RTE had "failed absolutely" to devote air time to the fears of nationalist citizens in the North while "always quick to interview unionist spokesmen".

But "the single area where RTE failed its audience most, and of which it can be least proud, is `censorship' through its use of Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act."

Mr Healy said that where Section 31 was concerned RTE had to operate within the confines of the relevant Broadcasting Acts "which placed constraints on our coverage with which we were never happy".

On the accusation that the station had interpreted the Act too rigidly, he said it had to be remembered "that an RTE authority was dismissed and a senior RTE executive went to jail as a result of our interpretation of the directives under the Act".

Mr Healy pointed out that RTE had also been accused by critics of being a "Provo sympathiser". But RTE was not afraid of "a reasoned consideration of the role all media played in the coverage of the North over the past 30 years".