Maman Poulet | Clucking away crookedly through media, politics and life

Newspapers thinking money grows on links

May 11th, 2012 · Irish Media

Did you hear the one about the organisation ‘representing’ newspapers copyright in Ireland sending threatening letters to voluntary organisations/charities who publish links to newspaper articles on their own websites about items that may be of interest to readers? (Breathe it’s a long sentence I know, sorry).

That’s links dear reader- not complete articles or scans of them.  Links.

Women’s Aid – the organisation which works to provide support to those  who experience domestic violence are one of the groups who have been asked to pay for linking to content.  You can read the very detailed and rightfully challenging response of their legal team to the Newspaper Licensing Ireland efforts.  (oops I just linked there to something, my bad, phew it’s not on a newspaper site!)

These same newspapers have buttons on their websites encouraging people to  SHARE those articles via their friends and followers.

You know the buttons-

Some of these newspapers encourage us to leave comments on their pages and engage in conversation for the benefit of other readers (and oh maybe to feed our own egos by spouting off and possibly pissing off columnists for having our own opinions about their opinions). It’s all about the social.  It’s taking years to get used to and develop and some publications are better than others and the disruption of their industry has been one very long saga.

These newspapers do not charge for reading their websites.  They have some advertising.  Some have apps where you can buy the edition for your mobile device (I even pay a subscription to one of them).  But mostly for the last few years they have either been pulling their hair out about how to survive or sticking their heads in the sand.

I spend a lot of time pointing over 6000 followers on twitter and hundreds of friends on facebook to articles I think they are/should be interested in – in fact many journalists and writers send me messages asking me to tweet links to various things to my readers.

These links get retweeted on or shared on facebook or emailed to others and it spreads. Some may buy a paper on the basis of seeing the article or subscribe to an online service, some may click on advertising on the webpage.

I do this a) because I can b) for the betterment of humankind (bear with me) and c) because that is how media consumption and comment has developed. It’s like ‘What it says in the Papers’ ala moi – I wonder have the NLI sent letters to RTE looking for money to be paid for talking about the content of papers in radio and tv programmes.  I have for years linked to content on this blog, in email lists and message boards. I regularly send links to colleagues in work about items that are or interest.  Where I have been in charge of the content and discussion I have discouraged the publication of copy on other sites as I believed it was an infringement and unfair.  Links were the way of protecting people and making sure that readers read things where they should be read.

Some of these newspapers link to my website – I don’t charge them, in fact I am very happy (in fact honoured) that they do so. On a not very related point  I also have not charged them for the stories they have stolen over the years or ideas that writers have obtained by following up on something I have written about.

It appears that the organisation which represents the interests of newspapers  wants people or organisations who link back to their content to buy a licence.   They think that we are broadcasters or reproducing their content and should pay for the privilege of sending readers to their pages to read their content.   I await my invoice.

Dear newspapers (or the organisation which represents you which may be on a solo run)  if you do not want people to link to your content and comment on your articles and read your output put up a fecking paywall and stop scaring the voluntary sector and other vulnerable bodies with your twisted logic and latest money making wheeze. The huge crisis facing newspapers and publishing in Ireland is not going to be solved by charging for linking to your content.  Reading it?  Maybe.  Who knows.

No doubt to be continued.

Share

» 4 CommentsTags:

Claiming Our Future – Reinventing Our Democracy

May 10th, 2012 · Equality, Irish Politics

Claiming Our Future are holding a major public event on Saturday 26 May in Croke Park on democratic and political reform.  The movment is about alternatives and has organised events in the past twelve months on income inequality and sustainable development and economics. This time the debates will centre on local government and the way power and decision making  is structured in Ireland, how people can be more involved in decisions that affect their lives and the constitutional convention and how it should be organised and what it should be talking about.

The event is free and open to everyone and you do not have to be a member of any group or organisation to attend. Discussions are held in small facilitated groups throughout the day interspersed with short videos and inputs which are intended to initiate discussion.  There are short documents on the issues which can be read before people take part. You can register here.

Mary Murphy from Claiming Our Future gives a preview.

Share

Comments Off on Claiming Our Future – Reinventing Our DemocracyTags:

On message, everywhere, all the time

May 1st, 2012 · Irish Politics, Social Media

Earlier today from Fine Gael Campaign HQ to their crack squad of social media troops. (Thank you Simon Coveney!)

Sure enough after 2pm there were tweets from people at the launch indeed TD’s who have not tweeted in months are suddenly in lurve with de twitter. Welcome back deputies and Ministers. Social media is not just for christmas elections!

And then tonight before the Europe Debate on TV3

This was followed by another text to tell the faithful to go vote in the Politico.ie online poll that was running during the programme.

I don’t know how much of this referendum campaign I will survive but of course if you email me bits and pieces you might give me the will to blog 🙂 tips (@) mamanpoulet.com

Share

» 8 CommentsTags:··

Rónán Mullen is still responding

April 23rd, 2012 · Abortion

Rónán Mullen wrote this evening to his supporters about the last few days and the accusations that have been made online and in ‘mainstream’ media. His mailbox must have been jumping. I thought you might like to see the spin. Some of it will be deeply hurtful to the parents who have come forward in the past week to talk about their experiences of losing their much wanted babies and seeking terminations and support.

Dear X,

You may have seen or heard a news story in relation to a briefing I attended in Leinster House last Wednesday. A number of people were in Leinster House campaigning for legalising abortion in such circumstances where a child is likely to live for only a short period after birth. This group included some women who had aborted their severely disabled children and it has been alleged in various fora that I was discourteous.

I want to stress that while I expressed my view that abortion is unjust I was respectful and courteous to all the people involved at all times. I was deeply conscious of how personally sensitive this issue was for all involved. Some of the women had undergone an abortion only a matter of weeks previously.

Today it has been reported that I accused a husband of one of the women of “having an agenda”. The report is inaccurate and misleading. I attach below a letter I have sent to the Irish Times today on the matter, in response to what it reported.

To those who have contacted me about this issue, I hope this clarifies. Please note in particular the last two paragraphs:

“I want to put on record that I deeply sympathise with the women in this case while remaining true to my own view that even severely disabled babies with a short life expectancy deserve to be allowed live their natural life. I strongly support the establishment of facilities to support women and families in this tragic situation.

I do regret any attempt by various lobbying groups to use such sad cases to pursue a much wider abortion agenda. I also regret any attempt, whether by misrepresentation, scorn or invective, to marginalise the contribution of pro-life persons or to intimidate them from entering the debate. I am surprised that such a brief exchange, which was entirely courteous on my side, should cause such a furore on social media and provide the basis for an article in the Irish Times. I call on the media to treat everybody fairly and with respect, and to ensure a balanced treatment of these very sensitive issues at all times.”

Yours sincerely,

Rónán Mullen

***
***

Sir, – The report in today’s Irish Times (April 23rd) concerning my conversation with a group of women and men who came to Leinster House last Wednesday is inaccurate and misleading.

The group, which included women who had ended their pregnancies by abortion because of very serious foetal disabilities, came to Leinster House to advocate that abortion be legalised in such cases.

Over the weekend, I was informed that there was a large amount of abusive commentary on social media following a statement by one of the women on the Late Late Show that a politician in Leinster House had been unpleasant to them.

I was contacted by a number of journalists because a blog post allegedly from the group who organised the briefing in the Oireachtas said that I was the politician in question.

The context of what happened is this: I was not able to be present for the start of last Wednesday’s briefing in the audio-visual room but it is not uncommon for politicians to come and go from such meetings as their schedule dictates. I arrived at the meeting and signed in, but had missed the introductions and the names of each person. Other politicians arrived later.

Not long after I arrived, a man at the top table who was clearly from one of the families involved, invited anyone present to explain why abortion shouldn’t be allowed in their situation. After a moment of silence, I tentatively offered my hand.

I was not called by the chairperson and it was only after several other speakers that I was invited to speak. Like other politicians, I was deeply conscious of the sensitivity of the situation and the respect due to all persons present. I sympathised with the families and offered my perspective on why I felt that abortion was not the best response in that situation.

At one point, the same man accused me of smirking while I was speaking. I was taken aback by this. It was absolutely untrue. I felt that it was a comment designed to portray me unsympathetically. I did however feel uncomfortable at that point with the atmosphere that had been generated in the room and I replied that I was probably grimacing. I invited the families present to be in touch with us individually for friendly and respectful dialogue, independently of their involvement with the Irish Family Planning Association and the National Women’s Council who appear to have arranged the meeting. I have concerns about the policies of both organisations in relation to abortion and their disregard for the rights of unborn children, and I have addressed this publicly before.

The chairwoman of the meeting, who was from the National Women’s Council, finished by saying that the abortion bill before the Dail that day (proposed by Clare Daly TD) was just a first step. If that day’s bill were to pass it would effectively provide for abortion without time limits on a mental health ground, which I believe from the experiences of other jurisdictions would amount to abortion on demand. The most up to date studies show that if anything abortion increases mental ill-health among women – it certainly is not a treatment for it.

As the meeting finished and we were leaving, I made it my business to shake hands and speak with some of the persons present and other politicians were doing likewise. Finally, as the others were talking, I offered my hand to the gentleman with whom I had the earlier exchange. He took my hand reluctantly but said he disliked me and my argumentative style. When I tried to explain that I wanted a sincere and respectful exchange of views, he bristled and motioned me away. It was at that point that I asked whether there was a separate agenda here as this was not what normally happened when politicians came along to follow up with people who came in to lobby them. The question was not asked in either a rhetorical or leading manner. I only asked the question once because it was clear that the man did not wish to speak with me.

When Aoife Carr of the Irish Times contacted me I told her that all the politicians had been respectful at all times and, asked about my interaction with the women, I said that all my comments to them were in the open forum. I invited her to come back to me with any precise comment by a particular person and I would try and confirm or otherwise then from memory.

In today’s Irish Times it is reported that I twice said to a man called James Burke, “You’ve got a bigger agenda here James, don’t you.” This was not put to me by the Irish Times. Had this been put to me, I would have explained what actually happened, how the question was not put in this way and the fact that I did not know James’s name at the time.

I want to put on record that I deeply sympathise with the women in this case while remaining true to my own view that even severely disabled babies with a short life expectancy deserve to be allowed live their natural life. I strongly support the establishment of facilities to support women and families in this tragic situation.

I do regret any attempt by various lobbying groups to use such sad cases to pursue a much wider abortion agenda. I also regret any attempt, whether by misrepresentation, scorn or invective, to marginalise the contribution of pro-life persons or to intimidate them from entering the debate. I am surprised that such a brief exchange, which was entirely courteous on my side, should cause such a furore on social media and provide the basis for an article in the Irish Times. I call on the media to treat everybody fairly and with respect, and to ensure a balanced treatment of these very sensitive issues at all times. Yours, etc,

Senator Rónán Mullen,
Independent Senator,
National University of Ireland Panel,
Seanad Éireann,
Kildare Street,
Dublin 2.

Share

» 7 CommentsTags:

Una voce?

April 19th, 2012 · Irish Politics, Social Policy

I saw the Minister for Children, Frances Fitzgerald, this morning. We were both in Croke Park.  She to attend one meeting and me to attend another.  I was lost.  I could have gone over and said hello and asked her about the Scandinavian model of childcare that her colleague the Minister for Social Protection had talked about the night before in the Dáil during the beginning of the Social Welfare Bill 2012 debate.  Childcare that would help parents who are parenting alone enter the workplace.  But I was hassled as I was in the wrong place and didn’t have a car to bring me around to the other side of Croker to where I was expected.  Anyway I would not have got an answer and it might not have been fair that early in the morning.  Later that morning the Minister had an answer for the press saying it was cabinet policy.

We’ve seen no white paper on childcare or debate on how it will be organised in the run up to this.  Yet legislation is being passed on the basis of it maybe happening in the next seven months.  We don’t yet have Children First on a statutory basis which I think is the Minister for Children’s priority followed by the Children’s rights referendum.

Bringing in affordable childcare for all parents whether they are parenting alone or otherwise is not on this government’s agenda.  Until last night.  And even now I’m not so sure it’s there at all.  (Offers to bring everyone together and organise it by Christmas are being made by some – they must have a money printing factory out the back.)

So the issue of childcare is not the real issue here. (It is definitely an issue but not the issue). While people speculate about the games being played here either inside or outside the government or the individual parties, there is a fundamental issue which might again get lost in the midst of this.  That of those parenting alone and their children who are the most at risk of poverty in this state.

So rather than feeding the speculation further I want to leave the final word for the moment to Frances Byrne, the CEO of OPEN who yesterday spoke at a media event by those involved in the 7 is too young campaign. Because the last four months and the last 6 years of policy and negotiation and real reform are the issues which should be under debate.  Not opportunities for people to belittle lone parents (some of the back bench speeches tonight in the Dáil were shameful in their bitter bigotry) or for those in government to stake claims or go into denial. This issue has some time to run but hopefully supporting those parenting alone and their children will remain the focus of discussion.

Share

» 2 CommentsTags: