The recent RTÉ Radio 1 signiture tune programmes rebranding and realignment fiasco is yet another serious miscalculation by RTÉ’s head of audio and senior ‘new-direction steering’ management team.
In line, however, with RTÉ’s general disconnect with most radio audiences, it sets out to ‘modernise’ something, simply for the sake of it — to be seen to be doing something, when a fundamental understanding of the RTÉ Radio 1 audience and its advertiser support is obviously absent.
This comes on top of some recent strange ‘tweaking’ of the Radio 1 daily schedule. Why, for example, would anyone hand a 6pm radio slot over to sport, when many are still driving home at that time, wanting to catch up on the day’s news events? This decision forces many to switch channels to, say, Newstalk — from where RTÉ’s head of audio came from — to catch up on the day’s events.
Was that the greatest plan on Earth?
Also, why would anyone remove a 9am light-hearted upbeat programme providing much-needed relief — after the heavy news of Morning Ireland — and replace it with, yes, something very similar and yes, somewhat boring?
Why would anyone change an afternoon audience engagement slot at 3pm running for many years with a ‘music only’ slot containing music choices aimed at a younger audience which does not know Radio 1 actually exists?
The last Joint National Listenership Research figures for this slot didn’t exactly reveal that this was a wonderful decision. And oh yes... why would anyone not start any proposed radio revamp process with 2FM, a station that has lost its way? Many other radio stations must have gained a lot of listeners for those specific decisions which have diluted the Radio 1 brand.
As many have said in the backlash, this major rebranding error — a signiture tune is exactly that, programme-specific first and channel-specific after that. Making any change, as per the recent rebrand, dilutes the programme brand immediately and then the channel.
So I would ask the RTÉ board: As you now dilute that powerful branding, which took years to build up, achieve, and hold, how do you say a good job is being done?
Employing a head of audio from the commercial sector may have seemed a great idea at the time. What would the ABC1 Irish public know? And The Late Late Show will be farmed out from Montrose, and the Radio Centre will be sold off by then anyway, to keep the show going for another few years — in order to pay totally overpaid and inept management; as they go, “decisions unchallenged”, into another decade, while short-changing the Irish public now and for a long time to come. Market forces may have something to say about that, however.
Remember, technical equipment has gone way up in quality and become more affordable, allowing many individuals and companies to produce stunning home-grown radio and TV programmes which often have to go outside of this country for both support and airing — while RTÉ pays big money for current mainline shows to companies based in the North and outside the 26 counties. Where is the discussion on that spend? This is the same RTÉ that rejected Father Ted, which then had the foresight to approach Channel 4. That was 30 years ago. What has changed in that time?
Why can’t RTÉ balance its books and transmit quality programming that Irish audiences deserve and demand, and leave things that advertisers currently support and which aren’t broken alone? Will someone please shout stop?! What the hell are ye doing?
Gerry MacBride
via email
Firm Luas timeline
The unveiling of the preferred Luas Cork route ( Irish Examiner, April 17) is genuinely good news for the city. The worry is what is still missing: A firm construction timeline.
We have had an emerging preferred route, and now a preferred route. The next milestone needs to be construction, not another round of maps. The quicker the sod can be turned on this project, the better for the city.
One further point. The Transport Infrastructure Ireland team that has designed this line should be kept together and moved straight on to a second line serving the northside. The northside has been completely left off the map, and the expertise built up on line one should not be dispersed just as it becomes most useful.
Build Luas Cork now, and start designing the northside line while the crews are still in the ground.
Conor Daly
Dublin Hill, Cork
Words of a dream
Considering the ongoing friction between the two most famous Americans, I reread the famous dream words of Martin Luther King Jr. I think that every person needs to dream the dream, especially all our leaders. I suggest that Pope Leo, as a fellow American, should take the lead from Martin Luther King and read it to Donald Trump.
“I stand before you today with hope in my heart, because I still have a dream. A dream that we will see one another not as strangers, but as sisters and brothers,” he said. “A dream that truth will rise above lies, that kindness will overcome anger, and that justice will not be delayed.
“A dream that no one will be forgotten — not the poor, not the lonely, not the overlooked. A dream that all dictators will become peacemakers. And I believe that if we hold on to that dream, and live it in small, faithful ways each day, then one day we will look around and say: We are becoming the people we were meant to be.”
Fr Tom Grufferty
Knock, Co Mayo
Pope’s challenge
While the ‘institutional’ Catholic Church continues to grapple with an ongoing crisis of trust due to past and present scandals, the standing of the Pope’s moral authority continues to be very high — as Donald Trump has been finding out in recent weeks.
It is very encouraging to observe the quiet but confident emergence of Pope Leo XIV on the global stage at a time when the world is in dire need of a moral compass.
By challenging unctuous political and military rhetoric, and focusing on the “crucified humanity” — which he referred to during his Palm Sunday homily — the Pope has asserted a peerless ability to strip away the sanitised language of current manipulative statecraft.
A leader who judges world events based on human dignity rather than national interest, and with the moral standing to speak of a world that “is being ravaged by a handful of tyrants”, as the Pope recently did during his African tour in Cameroon, is reassuring.
Michael Gannon
St Thomas’ Sq, Kilkenny
Guarding humanity
On April 7, the Irish Examiner set a journalistic standard. US president Donald Trump’s threat for an “entire country to be taken out in one night”, did not make the front page.
Instead, a headline, ‘Stolen Innocence’, dominated, along with colour images of 15 child victims of bombardment, famine, and terror. Below, a piece by Colin Sheridan outlined the prospects for those who survive. They will be forever marred by their trauma or loss of loving carers.
For Irish readers, two of the images produce guilt. Stunned Palestinian three-year-olds are comforted by their injured brother. Next, a Lebanese child, her scarified, blasted face forced her eyes shut, amplifying her terror.
If only Ireland had the courage to implement its innovative Occupied Territories Bill and championed the world to enlist, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine could have been halted. Lebanon and this girl would have been spared this triumphed model of war.
Graphic sharing and tolerance of human suffering have coarsened humanity. The bluster of power, money, and tyranny has to be replaced by a rigorous world order of civilisation, intolerant of such outrages. In the 1950s and 60s, Ireland was central to such conciliation among nations. Despite a population of only 4.2m and a struggling economy, the minister for external affairs, Frank Aiken, played an anchor role at the UN.
As a pioneer of independence, Ireland guided emerging nations from their pitfalls, initiating provision of peacekeepers.
Aiken never hesitated to have constructive differences with major powers on issues such as nuclear testing. Such contributions strengthened Ireland’s influence and sovereignty.
By sad contrast, Ireland’s failure to implement the Occupied Territories Bill was not due to its empathetic people, but its purposeful exclusion by its democratic system to represent their mandates.
The bill has gained repeated, overwhelming public and parliamentary support over the last six years. There has been no clear explanation for its omission.
This must be a matter for ongoing scrutiny. Our current deferential timidity is undermining our potential to contribute to a new world order. Independent thought and idealism still flourish within Irish society. They must be allowed to rekindle our democracy and to create a world where all humanity is precious.
Philip Powell
Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin
