The Irish Gerontological Society has found that, compared with racism, there is under-reporting of ageism in society. Its researchers went to the trouble of scanning six newspapers including both this one and the Guardian, and I'm glad they had nothing better to do with their time. They found that The Irish Times had just 61 articles on ageism between 2000 and 2004, but 2,085 on racism. The Guardian had 6,252 articles on racism, and only 301 on ageism writes Kevin Myers.
Other researchers did an analysis of 15 British and Irish national newspapers for references to older drivers. Fifteen references were considered negative, seven were considered as balanced and four were considered positive - and stay awake at the back of the class, because even I'm falling asleep here.
Desmond O'Neill, professor of medical gerontology at Trinity College, Dublin says he intends to send the results of his research to schools of journalism and media studies for a "module" to be formed around them. If God is good, they will be thrown into the bin, but more probably, those temples to the politically correct will grant him his module. No, I don't know what a module is either. A kind of cyst, isn't it? No, that's a nodule. Sorry, can't help you.
A suggestion to the gerontologists. Go back to the electronic archives and tap three words into them - "young male drivers" - and what you'll get back is three zillion articles condemning them unconditionally. Here you have sexism and ageism at its most flagrant, and most justified.
When gerontologists start giving us lectures on ageism, I find myself asking - what kind of patients do they treat? Young motorcyclists injured in collisions? People with VD? Children with scarlet fever? Rugby players with torn ligaments? None of the above?
Oh. So who do they treat? They treat old people. Take your child with whooping cough or a steel JCB he's shoved up his nose to gerontologists, and the gerries will point you down the corridor to that other inveterate ageist, the paediatrician. Similarly, take your little boy with a urinary infection to gynaecologists, and they'll direct to the medical male equivalent, which is, oops, non-existent. Because the medical profession does not merely define itself on ageist grounds but also on sexist grounds - which apparently qualifies it to wag its collective finger at us in the media on such things.
As a matter of interest, would anti-ageist members of the Irish Gerontological Society prefer to be behind an 85-year-old woman driver or a 19-year-old male driver? And on the other hand, which would you prefer to have behind you with a blind bend coming up and a double white line? Answers on one side of paper only please, and no conferring.
Now maybe we in the media should take the gerontologists seriously, and increase the number of stories about ageism. Clear the front page! Eighty-year-old who sought a place in a kindergarten gets short shrift! Undergraduates who presented themselves at the post office for their pension treated to a similarly abbreviated dismissal! New-born babies rejected for Aer Lingus pilot-training! Yes, our sales amongst anti-ageist gerries would rocket, and each morning they would quiver in rage that yet again the Army Ranger Wing has refused to employ a single centenarian. Such worthiness is the brown rice of journalism: it sounds good but nobody buys it, and we journalists who are put out of work can chance our arms enlisting in our primary school or claiming the pension.
Of course, the gerries are right when they say that there are more reports about racism than ageism, because the media, being largely recruited from white, guilty, middle-class left-liberals, probably over-report racism. Racism has become a self-fulfilling accusation: it makes the accuser seem either a victim or virtuous, possibly both, and convicts the accused as charged, because the accusation itself is the proof. In reality, there probably isn't nearly as much racism in Ireland as we flagellate ourselves about, notwithstanding the extraordinary story of the Nigerian Aderonke Rasaq. She was sacked for "stealing" three bananas, which had never even left Campbell Catering premises.
Would an Irishwoman have been sacked in such circumstances? No, and I was delighted she got €15,000 compensation, not least because of the vile Styrofoam cup containing a teabag that I got from a place masquerading as "Bewley's" at Dublin airport recently. That in itself was worth a €15,000 fine.
But I suspect that Aderonke's was a highly unrepresentative case. However, if in our media we endlessly and inaccurately portray ourselves as bigoted racists, then that is precisely how immigrants will come to think of us. Worse, every other minority that feels it is being discriminated against will seek parity of coverage with our alleged victims of racism.
For example, a new and vociferous group has emerged in recent times, consisting of dedicated anti-vowellists. They ask, pertinently - why has "racism" no "e" in it whereas "ageism" has? On what grounds can that discrimination against the letter "e" be justified by the race relations industry? The concrete noun "race" depends totally on "e", for without that heroic vowel, the word would sound like a framed horizontal surface, conjoined ribs of lamb, or an instrument of torture. But when it becomes to forming an abstract noun, with all sorts of exotic theory attached to it, with Ph.D.s galore and all-expenses paid conferences in the Seychelles, the hard-working "e" is ruthlessly dropped: a clear case of discrimination.
We e-ologists are studying what is a truly scandalous state of affairs. We will e-mail you the results.