Sir, – Conor Brady (Opinion, July 27th) criticises Battle Station, RTÉ’s series on the relationship between public service television and the State, for not dwelling sufficiently on a “broader context”, seeming principally to consist of The Irish Times. The accusation of indulging in “inward looking narrative” is in this case misdirected.
A wave of liberalisation affected Ireland during the 1960s that was reflected primarily through television as a new and powerful medium of expression, but to some extent by it also. However, the official backlash and attempt to regain control of the dominant discourse affected RTÉ most of all. The 1969 tribunal of inquiry into an RTÉ programme on money lending and the subsequent 1971 imposition of State censorship under Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act was pivotal in that regard.
I was surprised at the extent of self-criticism. Particularly welcome was discussion of Conor Cruise O’Brien’s highly important 1973-77 ministerial legacy and related mistreatment of broadcasters such as Mary McAleese and others during the 1980-81 hunger strikes. RTÉ had not previously addressed how Section 31 poisoned the working environment and institutionalised self-censorship. There were important aspects of that story hardly touched upon and full articulation is possibly too raw a prospect.
However, because of its legally defined public service remit, the keeping of records and their release to researchers, RTÉ is perhaps in better position in the long term to reveal its particular warts than, say, The Irish Times (notwithstanding Brady’s excellent memoir, Up with the Times ).
In this case, unlike on previous occasions, the tendency to be too self-referential and reverential was held at bay by John Bowman and his production team. – Yours, etc,