Propaganda in Irish Independent

In the past couple of weeks, there have been particularly prominent examples of propaganda in the Irish Independent.  This is based on two separate stories from the newspaper containing a similar theme about the methods of claiming and spending of salaries and expenses by Irish TD.

The first story centred around the designation of a portion of Sinn Féin TD Pearse Doherty's salary and some expenses to employ previously unemployed Sinn Féin activists to work on behalf of Sinn Féin.  The second story focused on the allocation of half of Fine Gael TD Brendan Griffin's salary to fund a primary school in its attempt to hire a new teacher.  Ironically, the primary school is unable to hire a new teacher and recently had to let go of another teacher because of cuts by the Fine Gael-led Government.

Michael Brennan, Deputy Political Editor of the Irish Independent wrote of their investigation into Sinn Féin's spending:

'An Irish Independent investigation reveals for the first time how Sinn Fein relentlessly and efficiently uses the political funding system to maximum advantage here, in the North, at Westminster and in the US.Our probe also reveals how:
- Sinn Fein officials monitor the bank accounts of each of the party's 14 TD to ensure that they use part of their wages to hire constituency staff.
- Each TD only takes the annual industrial wage after tax -- around €29,000 -- from their €92,000-a-year salary.
The balance, which works out at around €18,000 after tax and pension levies, is used to pay for additional constituency staff.
- Over €250,000 was legally diverted in this way last year alone.
- The cash is given directly to staff, rather than the party, to get around donation limits'

The findings relating to allocation of personal salaries were sandwiched between reports about "How Sinn Fein TDs are breaking the rules on expenses".  It has been found that Doherty has, in fact, not broken any rules regarding spending of expenses.  It is also worth noting that the points the Irish Indpendent highlight in their article related not to his spending of expenses, but to how he spends his own salary.


The above report regarding the allocation of Sinn Féin TD's salaries could be considered a negative report, in that it does not applaud the method of the TD's appropriation of incomes.  


6 days after the above article was published regarding Doherty, Majella O'Sullivan, also of the Irish Independent, wrote the article titled 'TD donates half his pay so school can hire teacher after budget cut'.  It included the reaction of the school principal to Griffin's donation:

'..."It's absolutely fantastic, especially when we were so downhearted after losing the appeal," school principal Angela Prendergast told the Irish Independent.  "Then Brendan came up with this proposal."  Mr Griffin said he was delighted to be in a position to help.  "It's an issue I feel very strongly about and the bottom line is there will be a third teacher in the school next September," he said'.

The above abstract can be considered to be relaying the story in a  positive light. In the article relating to Griffin, there is a stronger emotional or 'humanized' (Herman & Chomsky) element created by the inclusion of the School Principal's opinion.  In this case, the School Principal is the beneficiary.  In the former article, there is no opinion from the point of view of the previously unemployed Sinn Féin campaigners, who would be the beneficiaries in that situation. 

In respect to the first story, the Irish Independent boasts extensive background investigation and analysis displayed within the report; 'An Irish Independent investigation reveals'.  With the article concerning Griffin, there was comparatively no analysis and no background investigation.

This kind of reporting is consistent with Herman and Chomsky's explanation of a propaganda model associated with enemy and friendly states, although in this case, we can substitute enemy and friendly 'states' for Sinn Féin members and Fine Gael members respectively; 'We would... expect great investigatory zeal in the search for enemy villainy... but diminished enterprise in examining such matters in connection with ones own and friendly states'. (Herman & Chomsky, 1988, p. 35)

I conclude that the two stories, although similar in nature, are told with bias, and that the bias, in this case, is in favour of the Fine Gael agenda.


Screenshot references of the online versions of the Irish Independent articles can be viewed below:
__________________________________________________________________________________________

HOW SINN FEIN TDS ARE BREAKING THE RULES ON EXPENSES

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/how-sinn-fein-tds-are-breaking-the-rules-on-expenses-3144781.html

TD donates half his pay so school can hire teacher after budget cut 

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/td-donates-half-his-pay-so-school-can-hire-teacher-after-budget-cut-3150775.html

 

Taken from Joe Higgin's press statement, 3rd July, relating to expenses:

In 2011, apart from the Party Leader’s Allowance, the Fine Gael party received public funding of €1.9 million; Labour 1.03m; Fianna Fail 1.6million; dependent on their first preference vote in the general election. According to the legislation these parties are free to use that public funding for “coordination of the activities and members of the party” i.e. for the organisation and building of their parties. Smaller parties that do not qualify for public funding based on their first preference vote would therefore be at a serious disadvantage.

ULA Must Clarify Their Stance Regarding Mick Wallace

At the time of writing this, the ULA, remain the only members (Irish Times, the Journal) of the Technical Group in Dáil Eireann not to have requested Mick Wallace to stand down after he was found to be liable of un-declared VAT payments of approximately €1.4 million. I feel that this stance is detrimental to the campaigns that the ULA are involved in. 

The prolific debate about Mr. Wallace's future as TD is one with hypocrisy evident on both sides.  Fianna Fáil cannot be completely critical of Mr. Wallace without drawing-up reminders that they were recently one of the most corrupt parties in Ireland.  Fine Gael  are not guiltless in this regard either.

Also, from the perspective of some (journal comments), it may be difficult to understand the press' portrayal of this story as it would appear inconsistent with their portrayal of other similar stories which they report (or don't report) about corruption and alleged corruption in Irish politics.

The press' portrayal of this issue is not without its own apparent bias.  The Irish Independent, Ireland's most popular newspaper, has linked the story of Mick Wallace to the Campaign Against Water and Household Tax (CAWHT) for no obvious reason.  However, one might reasonably conclude the Independent's allusion to CAWHT in this instance might be to further the Irish Independent's own particular interests.  There is no relevance between the CAWHT and the tax dodging of individual Mick Wallace except for the fact that he happened to support that campaign.

That being said, have the press acted inappropriately by highlighting this story to the public?  I believe they have not.  Highlighting this kind of story is precisely the point of having a free media. 

So, we can see then that there are certain inconsistencies in the handling of this story by politicians, and mainstream media coverage may not be completely genuine. But it still remains that the ULA's position of not suggesting Mr. Wallace stand down places them too in a hypocritical position of their own.

The ULA have achieved this by failing to fully clarify their position about a TD who has been useful to their own interests, while simultaneously criticising the Government for not completely denouncing TD's who had also been found to have acted improperly in the past.

The Socialist Party's stated reason for not completely condemning Mr. Wallace was:

'...the Socialist Party has not joined the frenzied chorus in the media demanding Wallace’s immediate resignation.  In taking this position we believe we are reflecting the view of many ordinary people in Wexford and of those who voted for [Mick Wallace], who condemn what he did but who don’t believe it means he shouldn’t be a TD to represent their area... The media are not impartial observers. A substantial part of the media is owned by billionaires and millionaires who have a vested interested in pushing a right wing political agenda. No doubt Wallace provoked their ire when he opposed the bondholder bailout and opposed extra austerity measures such as the home tax and campaigned against the Austerity Treaty in the recent Referendum.' (Socialist Party Website)

By adding their voice to the "chorus" of politicians that have already stated that Wallace should stand down the Socialist Party would not significantly undermine the Wexford electorate any further - if at all.

Conversely, not making such a statement only serves to further highlight the Socialist Party and other ULA members as having some alliance with Mr. Wallace which prevents them from condemning his position outright.  Of course any such alliance is non-existent as Mr. Wallace is not a member of the socialist party and has no affiliation with ULA other than his mutual support of the CAWHT.

As we have seen above, the Socialist Party's position on this matter has more to do with their perception of the media's agenda in this situation.  Their assessment of the media's ulterior aims appears to distract them from the more pertinent issue at hand - that of accepting the continuance of a politician working in the Dáil whose position has been compromised by a serious injustice against the State. 

Blaming the media's coverage of previous events and shrouded agendas is seen as petty in this instance .  As long as the ULA's position regarding Wallace remains irresolute, it actually plays into the hands of anyone who would like to use Wallace as an instrument against the CAWHT or the ULA who have 'absolutely nothing to do with this in any sense whatsoever' (Joe Higgins). 

Worst of all for the ULA is that they are now perceived by some to be just like all the rest.  Fundamentally, public perception is what it boils down to.  Ever critical of Labour's failings to stand up for its convictions, the ULA is in danger of being seen to do the same. 

Ultimately, if the ULA feel they are acting on principle, the outcome of their hesitant actions regarding Mr. Wallace are the same to most people; that is, to some, their principles may just appear like excuses.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE:
Since writing this, Joe Higgins (Leader of Socialist Party) has released a statement about his opinion on the Mick Wallace controversy. 

Crypt Sphinx has also written a response to this blog here.

Musings on what has been and will be.: James and Crypt

Musings on what has been and will be.: James and Crypt: Dispatches from the front lines: Me and James will be discussing various things over the coming weeks , The situation and standing of t...