It is unusual, to say the least, for a Minister to anticipate the findings of a Commission of Inquiry which has been set up by one of his Government colleagues. But, perhaps unintentionally, Mr Gay Mitchell leaves himself open to such a charge with his weekend call for the establishment of a media council to lay down standards on the role, purpose and state of the media, including their needs.
For the past eight months a commission under the chairmanship of former Chief Justice Mr Tom Finlay has been examining the state of Irish newspapers, inquiring inter alia into the precise questions raised by Mr Mitchell. That commission, it will be recalled, was established by Mr Richard Bruton shortly after the demise of the Irish Press group of newspapers last May.
Not that Mr Mitchell is not entitled to have his say. But it might be more appropriate for members of the Government to await the outcome of the Commission's deliberations on the very complex issues of standards in the media, of accountability and right of reply, of monopolies of ownership and ideology. It may be that Mr Justice Finlay and his colleagues will come out in favour of some body such as that proposed by Mr Mitchell. But they may not. For there are valid arguments against the idea too, particularly in a jurisdiction where publishers and journalists already operate under a great range of restrictions and penalties probably the greatest in any EU state.
Mr Mitchell's remarks undoubtedly reflect a wide spread mood of public concern over media standards especially those in certain national newspapers. There has been a perceptible lurch to sensationalism and many journalists and editors must stand accused of at best downright carelessness. But those who work in the newspapers are entitled to ask what steps were ever taken by Mr Mitchell's party in government or any other party to halt the drift to market dominance by one large group or to allow Irish newspapers to compete on level terms with mass produced British imports?
Mr Des O'Malley is entitled to some credit for his latter day endeavour to halt the march to monopoly. And Mr Bruton himself took the potentially far reaching step of instituting the Finlay Commission's inquiry. But beyond these relatively recent measures, Irish newspapers have been left to sink or swim.
There are some cogent observations in Mr Mitchell's critique. But there are also some dangerous generalisations. Not all newspapers have their policies dictated by the marketing department. And some this one included will proudly claim a solid track record in addressing the sources of societal division and injustice. To say that little editorial thought is given to the causes of problems such as crime and drugs is simply untrue of this newspaper and at least some others.
Mr Mitchell's speech is welcome in view of the rarity of any politician taking the trouble to look beyond the headlines of the day in considering how Irish newspapers are faring. But he has jumped too readily to conclusions. No more than the politicians, newspapers are not a homogeneous species. They are entitled to be judged on their separate merits.