Is he Rabbitte-ing on again or is he right?

PAT Rabbitte has been getting it in the neck for the last week or so, since he offered another of his frequently entertaining opinions. Rabbitte had a cut at the media, a hazardous business at the best of times.

“You are dealing with a very cranky media, who advocate tough decision-making, and when they get tough decisions they start piddling around at the edges trying to unravel it,” he said in an interview with the Irish Times. “There is an all-pervasive negativity in the media that is not helping the mood of a people that is in distress and difficulty. I don’t think the media give a damn about where this is going to bring politics. It is worthy of some thought on where the constant denigration of politics is going to bring us.”

All hell has rained down on him. Opinions in print and on the airwaves (including from this columnist) pointed out the glaring flaws in his analysis. Much of the opinion was entirely valid. Politicians, through their stewardship of the economy, abandonment of a so-called democratic revolution following the last general election, and a half-hearted approach to stamping out their own featherbedding, have done plenty to contribute to cynicism and negativity.

True to form, Rabbitte didn’t run for cover, but engaged, appearing on The Frontline, on RTÉ television, to offer further insight into his views. He got hammered again, and, once more, the criticism was largely grounded in sound analysis. It was rightly pointed out that there was no better boy to decry the state of the country when he was in opposition.

Rabbitte said that his original comments didn’t refer to the denigration of politicians, but of politics. It was a notable distinction that got lost in the noise.

Voices in the media naturally took issue with him. Opposition politicians smelt blood. Micheál Martin played it safe on This Week, by saluting the conduct of the media. On The Frontline, Sinn Féin’s Eoin Ó Bróin used the opportunity to denigrate Labour. Within Sinn Féin, it seems, even intelligent voices like Ó Bróin switch onto auto-pilot ‘attack Labour’ anytime a microphone appears.

The reaction from the opposition killed any broader debate. Instead, the whole thing was used as a gift-horse for political point-scoring. Anyone for some denigration?

So Rabbitte got his comeuppance, much of which was undoubtedly due. But let’s, for a moment, separate the messenger from the message. Did he say anything at all that was worth considering?

The media (hold the front page!) are not flawless. Neither should they be above criticism, nor examination. At a time of great upheaval, as is upon us now, the media can be as susceptible to a lapse in its function as any other element of society.

There is no doubt that great swathes of us in the media have less respect for the working of politics at the moment. This chimes with the general mood of the public. Are the media leading public opinion, or meekly following?

Rabbitte says the media are largely leading it. On the Frontline, he said that a number of people had been in communication with him agreeing with his analysis. Of course, like many of these kinds of claims, that one is largely unverifiable.

But here’s one example where the media appears to be following the herd, rather than observing from the sidelines. Rabbitte said that elements within the media “advocate tough decision-making and when they get tough decisions they start piddling around at the edges trying to unravel it”.

It’s true that most of the media — as with most of the body politic — are largely on board with the general thrust of the policy of balancing the books. Opinions differ on which sections of society are being screwed, and which are getting off lightly.

The extent to which unrelenting austerity can be endured is a constant theme. There is also debate on how best to get the bank debt off the back of the citizens.

But there is broad general agreement on the main aims.

Yet when cuts are made, or new taxes introduced, cries of pain often go unchecked in the media. Particularly on the airwaves, citizens make claims that the latest tax or cut is going to cripple them, whether it be a ‘victim’ of the mansion tax, somebody who can’t afford to send a child to the most expensive fee-paying school, a person who is suffering genuine deprivation, or strapped mortgage holders being put to the pin of their collar. These claims are often accepted indiscriminately. Often the cries are entirely justified and needed. Other times, they merely reflect the self-preservation instinct at every level in society. If I have less, it matters only that I have less, and I am in pain. Yet, frequently, those who make these claims are not subjected to the same scrutiny that is applied to the actions or utterances of politicians.

Elsewhere, there is a tendency among some voices with an economic background to claim that there is an easier, low-pain route out of all this, if only the politicians would listen up to their betters. Sifting the plausible economic analysis — of different political bents — from the self-aggrandising kite-fliers is far from easy for those interpreting and analysing on all platforms.

Other prevailing factors require the media to be vigilant about balance. During the ‘bubble’ years, precious few among us disputed the prevailing wisdom of a gee-whizz economy.

There were many who abhorred the ‘bling,’ but few were calling time on the madness. (Back then, I, for one, thought a bond was a movie)

Won’t get fooled again. It may be that many among us are reluctant to accept positive vibes from ‘official Ireland’ because they missed the flaws last time around.

Then, there’s the question as to whether or not the fourth estate stray into the third? A healthy democracy requires government, opposition and media. When one of the three is weak, a vacuum opens up.

The opposition houses many fine individual voices, but it lacks the coherence of a big party.

Does the media sometimes stray into that vacuum? Some elements certainly do. After all, we’re only human.

Whether any, or all, of these factors have really come into play is a matter of dispute. Rabbitte obviously believes that the media are negligent of their primary function. Others among us don’t think so, but, at a time like this, vigilance is required in the media, and particularly from those presenting opinions, like this one. Just because politics is in the doghouse, and many who practice the trade can be accused of cynicism, it doesn’t mean that other arms of democracy are justified in taking the eye off the ball.

So, at least the minister may have offered some food for thought. You don’t have to agree with his opinions to accept that he did raise matters worth considering. A little self-analysis never did any harm to anybody. It could go a long way for Pat Rabbitte, too.