Television and Terrorism
| Date: | 15th November 1987 |
|---|---|
| Organisation: | Irish Television Producers Association |
| Author: | Eoghan Harris |
| View: | View Document |
| Discuss: | Comments on this document |
| Subjects: | Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act |
Please note: The Irish Left Archive is provided as a non-commercial historical resource, open to all, and has reproduced this document as an accessible digital reference. Copyright remains with its original authors. If used on other sites, we would appreciate a link back and reference to The Irish Left Archive, in addition to the original creators. For re-publication, commercial, or other uses, please contact the original owners. If documents provided to The Irish Left Archive have been created for or added to other online archives, please inform us so sources can be credited.
Commentary From The Cedar Lounge Revolution
23rd January 2012
This is a document written by Eoghan Harris in 1987 as a ‘critique of the liberal case for the abolition of Section 31’. Although not explicitly positioned within a left discourse Harris was at that time still a member of the Workers’ Party - despite the WP taking an anti-Section 31 line, and his thoughts had some currency during the period.
It argues on the first page that it is ‘a commentary on the crucial concept of concensus(sic); a critique of the pseudo-professional concensus which together with a leaky national concensus is certain to offer major propaganda victories to Provisional mouthpieces’
And it continues that it contains: ‘some proposals for assisting the emergence of a less leaky concensus in Southern attitudes to the North’
It notes that:
This treatise is meant to be read in tandem with a video of role-playing exercise on Section 31 carried out by the staff of the RTE Training Department at Booterstown who simulated the realistic studio conditions…
The document takes as its starting position the idea that there are three groups who wished to lift Section 31. Firstly ‘a tiny tantrum of liberals who believe all censorship is wrong… There is nothing printable I have to say to them’; Secondly ‘Hush puppy broadcasters who think the abolition of Section 31 will do the Provos a lot of good’ and finally ‘the majority of honest broadcasters… Who believe that abolishing S31 would expose the Provisional case…’.
He writes:
The first fact of life is that Mr. Gerry Adams appears regularly on the BBC and UTV and nobody has yet made bits of him. The second is that the Provos are very anxious to lift S31 which hardly argues any fear of being reduced to smithereens. The third is that there is no possibility of the Provos ever being exposed on television as long as the National Concensus leaks like a sieve and we have no adequate theory of television. This has nothing to do with the Provos having a good case. The Provos admitted themselves that they had no case after Enniskillen. The point I wish to make and that is reinforced by the videotape is: A Provo spokesperson could appear one hour after Enniskillen and without any defence of that particular case, win support for the Provos general cause provided the spokesperson exploited the professional and national concensus which governs the praxis of production in RTE.
Subsequently Harris wrote in the Sunday Independent that:
…far from being furtive, our advocacy of Section 31 was carried on openly among RTE trade union members and was the subject of a document - which I publicly circulated to my producer and union colleagues in 1987 called Television and Terrorism - and which is never mentioned by certain commentators. Irish Independent
And also, in a response to Caomghin O Caolain SF TD:
Let us hope Deputy O Caolain’s charges against Deputies O’Dea and Hayes are more accurate than his reference to my 1987 RTE document, Television and Terrorism. Deputy O Caolain inaccurately describes as an “internal paper distributed by Harris in RTE and subsequently leaked” (my italics). Far from it being “leaked”, I printed off hundreds of copies of the document, circulated them to colleagues all over RTE, sent copies to all political correspondents, and generally looked for, and got lots of publicity for its central political prediction which, of course, turned out to be correct that if Section 31 were lifted the Provos would walk all over RTE reporters, especially those who were “hush puppies”. At the time, my document was reviewed at length by Conor Cruise O’Brien in his widely read Saturday column in the Irish Independent. I am told there is even a copy in the Linenhall Library, and that it used to be regularly consulted by republicans anxious to pick up media tips. Some leak! Irish Independent
So clearly, by his own words, this document was intended for public distribution and review.
Whether one is convinced or not by the argument presented it is made in a distinctly forceful style.
Comments
No Comments yet.
Add a Comment
Comments can be formatted in Markdown format . Use the toolbar to apply the correct syntax to your comment. The basic formats are:
**Bold text**
Bold text
_Italic text_
Italic text
[A link](http://www.example.com)
A link
You can join this discussion on The Cedar Lounge Revolution
By: WorldbyStorm Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:19:21
In reply to Jim Monaghan.
That’s very true Jim. It is a bit of an oddity the Irish state.
Reply on the CLR
By: Marxman Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:22:20
In reply to Ed.
The incident Eoghan Harris could be reffering to was a near tradgedy that happened on the 10th February, 1984. The provos fired a RPG rocket-propelled grenade at a British Army saracen troop carrier as it went up the Whiterock Road in a very built up area of W. Belfast. Missing its target, it slammed into St. Aidan’s primary school, penetrating a classroom wall and emerged through the blackboard and finally hit the classrooms opposite wall. I heard the massive bang as it hit the gable wall of the school, I live in sight of the school. Now here’s the thing, the class was full of children reading to their teacher, Mr. Logan and almost unbelievably, the ‘war head’ didn’t explode! Children covered in plaster, glass and dust ran screaming from the room into the arms of waiting teachers. My friends son was in that class and is now married with young children of his own. He is still recieving specialist treatment for ruptured eardrums.
Reply on the CLR
By: Ramzi Nohra Wed, 25 Jan 2012 01:14:28
In reply to WorldbyStorm.
The ridiculous idea that the provos were going to launch a coup was used by Harris and CCOB to justify all sorts of authoritarian action
I remember reading something Harris wrote last year in a newspaper (not the Sindo) about how the heavy gang was the only thing standing between the Irish public and a Provo take-over.
Reply on the CLR
By: Dr. X Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:33:42
In reply to Marxman.
You may be right, but if so why didn’t EH explicitly refer to that incident?
Reply on the CLR
By: Shay Guevara Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:46:28
In reply to WorldbyStorm.
“RTÉ staff continued to vote against Section 31.”
This is true, but I think the Harris type invective must have played some part in the way they opposed it. When a Section 31 type ban came in in Britain broadcasters made a mockery of it. They put subtitles under Gerry Adams, a voiceover, even professional actors doing an impression of him. (Although they never got it quite right!) In RTE they voted against it but didn’t use their position as broadcasters like that. Instead they loyally filtered SF members out of everything, even phone in programmes on how to improve your gardening.
But I think Harris’s position in RTE had more to do with it than his intellectual critique. He was a producer and had a fair bit of say on how someone’s career in RTE would progress (or not progress). To a new RTE journalist who opposed censorship, this diatribe from Harris would have been a warning of what you would face if you raised your head above the parapet.
Reply on the CLR
By: Garibaldy Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:11:23
In reply to Marxman.
I think this debate demonstrates some of the problems when it comes to people dealing with Harris and his arguments. There is a (perhaps understandable) tendency to exaggerate and lose nuance so angry does he make people.
There were numerous occasions when I suspect every paramilitary group endangered the lives of children at schools (I think there was one in Twinbrook by dissidents within the last few years). It was far from unheard of for mortars to overshoot their target and hit the likes of churches or houses nearby (even if they often failed to explode). But because it’s Harris saying this, we get an overheated reaction that, as Marxman has amply demonstrated, goes too far, and misses the reality and the recklessness that was often displayed by paramilitary groups during the troubles, and especially those using explosive devices in built up areas. On top of which, Harris is faulted for his hypothetical while no note is taken of the fact that the incident is not entirely beyond the reach of probability.
Harris was wrong about Section 31 as with a great many other things, but some perspective seems in order too when discussing what he has said or does say.
Reply on the CLR
By: Left Archive Index now updated to October 2012 to March 2012 – and some items of particular interest « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Mon, 09 Apr 2012 02:54:16
[…] There’s the Irish Television Producers Association document written by Eoghan Harris in 1987 and found here. […]
Reply on the CLR