RTÉ chiefs uneasy with Harris’ Late Late role
At least 600,000 viewers saw Harris, who was subsequently appointed to the Seanad by Mr Ahern after his electoral success last May, praise the personal and political achievements of the Taoiseach and push for his re-election.
RTÉ director-general Cathal Goan and director of news Ed Mulhall both said yesterday they were concerned by Mr Harris’s appearance, given the national broadcaster’s responsibility not to sway public opinion, especially in the crucial days before an election.
“I am not doubting the power of the presentation by Eoghan Harris, in this case that close to an election. In retrospect I am not comfortable with that,” Mr Goan told the Oireachtas Communications Committee.
He stressed that the Broadcasting Complaints Commission later ruled that the show did not breach its obligations to be fair and impartial.
“People independent of me have adjudicated that there was not a lack of balance,” he said.
However, his comments about his own discomfort contrast with the station’s formal response to the broadcasting commission in the wake of the controversy. That stated: “RTÉ believe its election programming was impeccably fair.”
Mr Mulhall said he did not know what impact Harris’s appearance had on voters, but he preferred to see such issues discussed in a news context rather than in a cultural entertainment programme.
“I was uncomfortable with it, particularly during a general election,” he said.
Both men rejected that there was a general imbalance in the station’s coverage of political issues and rejected claims of political interference in the dropping of outspoken oncologist John Crown from a Late Late Show panel due to discuss the failure of State cancer services last November.
“A lot of rubbish has been written on that subject. It is completely untrue, completely without foundation,” said Mr Goan who was forced to defend suggestions the station had come under pressure from the Department of Health.
He said Professor Crown had been stood down because the programme needed more balance on a panel where the majority were strong critics of the health service.
“There were no ulterior motives behind it. There was no political interference in the programme. There is nothing sinister,” he said.
