Media v's Padraig Boland

[far from croghan hill]

I read with interest this week (in the Offaly Topic) Padraig Boland's words at the recent county board meeting. Boland as PRO of the county Board is angered with certain elements of the media with unbiased and deflamatory comments on the Ken Casy affair......for the outsider are any of the users of this website familiar with what went on...Boland's gripe was the use of the word ineligible offaly footballer....now were they refering to Ken Casey or the other member of the Offaly Senior Football Panel that is ineligible??

[far from croghan hill]

is that how fickle we have become as a county mad chasing success. at one time this county had a bit of pride and we were virtuous, always adhereing to the rules regardless whether we won or lost....WE do have an illegal player and everyone knows it and the shady dealings that went with it

127 views of my previous message and yet no one would comment...enough said

[far from croghan hill]

is that how fickle we have become as a county mad chasing success. at one time this county had a bit of pride and we were virtuous, always adhereing to the rules regardless whether we won or lost....WE do have an illegal player and everyone knows it and the shady dealings that went with it

127 views of my previous message and yet no one would comment...enough said

[far from croghan hill]

is that how fickle we have become as a county mad chasing success. at one time this county had a bit of pride and we were virtuous, always adhereing to the rules regardless whether we won or lost....WE do have an illegal player and everyone knows it and the shady dealings that went with it

127 views of my previous message and yet no one would comment...enough said

[far from croghan hill]

is that how fickle we have become as a county mad chasing success. at one time this county had a bit of pride and we were virtuous, always adhereing to the rules regardless whether we won or lost....WE do have an illegal player and everyone knows it and the shady dealings that went with it

127 views of my previous message and yet no one would comment...enough said

[far from croghan hill]

is that how fickle we have become as a county mad chasing success. at one time this county had a bit of pride and we were virtuous, always adhereing to the rules regardless whether we won or lost....WE do have an illegal player and everyone knows it and the shady dealings that went with it

127 views of my previous message and yet no one would comment...enough said

[far from croghan hill]

apologies for the same entry five times computer gone mad!

[Lone Shark]

To be honest, I have to say I've been very proud of our county's record with regard to the rules. We made a genuine error with regard to Ken Casey, and I thought we acted as any county should - acknowledged the error, took the punishment at county level and defended the player who was an innocent party in the whole issue.

As regards Padraig, I think the bone of contention was two things - the county boards view was probably that the matter was sub judice, and for the local media to be presuming guilt was unsupportive. The counterpoint to this was probably that until he was appealed, he was guilty so the media was spot on.

On the other hand, I think there was an internal memo meant for clubs that got circulated to the media and published, but to my understanding it was not in any way critical of the county board and if anything painted them in a favourable light.

Still, without seeing the text of Padraig's statement, that's all speculation on my part.

FFCH, you also appear to be suggesting that outside of KC we have another illegal player in the ranks. Is that what you mean? I can assure you that's news to me if that's the case.....

[Lone Shark]

For the record, and for people's digestion, here is the text of the statement from Padraig Boland and the reply from the Offaly Independent. Also for the record, though I do work for the Indo on occasion, I wasn't involved in all this, and seeing as I know both parties involved, I'm going to keep my counsel on this and let ye make ye're own minds up.

This is a statement from the Management Committee that I was asked to
prepare as a result of a Management Committee meeting on March 15.
In my two years as PRO I made a conscious decision to build up cordial
relationships with those who promote GAA in the county - club PROs,
management of the county teams, our sponsors, PROs in other counties and
of course the media at national level and more crucially members of our
local media.
That relationship with the media is, like all relationships, based on
trust. It is a relationship of co-dependence - I try to meet their needs
as reporters, I try to give them the information openly and honestly,
trusting that it will never be used in a manner that is harmful to
Offaly
GAA. At every opportunity I have given due credit publicly to local
journalists, whom I believe do their best within the perimeters of their
diverse capabilities to report on our activities in a fair and
comprehensive manner.
It also works well for them because GAA news helps sell newspapers. I
have
always believed in given everyone the benefit of the doubt and I began
this year by doing just that when the Player of the Year Awards could
have
been compromised by one journalist doing a solo run without a ball as it
happens in an attempt to pre-judge the awards. I held my counsel - my
only
concern being that other members of the adjudicating panel would decide
not to honour a worthy recipient merely to illustrate the folly of their
colleagues actions. Thankfully on that occasion good sense prevailed.
The recent controversy regarding the ineligibility of an Offaly senior
footballer has, at the very least, stretched the trust of which
relations
with some members of the media are based. In fairness to most
journalists
reporting of this undoubtedly news worthy item was in the main well
researched, fair, honest and crucially did not possess the potential to
further harm Offaly GAA. I must say that I personally thought that the
‘he
was spotted here, he was spotted there’ approach would be more
appropriate
on the pages of Master Detective than in a local newspaper.
When the secretary of this County Board emailed each club, he gave a
frank
and full account of the entire episode, keeping a commitment made at the
March County Board meeting. Furthermore, he was using the GAA’s
internal
communication mode, our means of engaging with our members. He prefaced
the communication with a request bold and underlined to illustrate its
importance and i quote - please note this is a confidential document
intended for clubs only and should not be passed on to members of the
press or radio or be printed or reported by them. I think you will agree
that there is no room for ambiguity in that statement.
When one local journalist contacted me regarding the statement I, having
checked with the county secretary, explained that the commitment
referred
to was made to the clubs. I was asked had the statement been given to
clubs to which I replied ‘I am not sure but knowing Christy (Todd)
I’d
imagine so. Thinking this the end of the matter I was surprised to learn
within the hour that that journalist had initiated a hunt for the
statement. I then got hold of the statement myself and contacted the
journalist again. I explained that my concern was the potential damage
that the publication might cause to the attempts being made to have Ken
Casey available against Meath in the Leinster Under 21 semi final. I
felt
that those dealing with the case later in the week may well misconstrue
the publication of it as a cocky Offaly attitude and it could render all
efforts to clear Ken Casey useless. I also referred to the deeper
implications of publishing an internal GAA communication so clearly
marked
not for the public domain.
I have to say then that the Offaly Independent back page angered me
greatly as I believed, one the publication of the article displayed
absolutely no regard for Ken Casey’s chances of playing against Meath,
two
it displayed a blatant disregard for the internal communications of this
organisation, three it was a distinct breach of a trust that I
personally
and Offaly GAA collectively have built with our local media and four it
obviously meant that a club, perhaps not knowingly as a unit, had seen
fit
to pass on an internal communication to the media having been
specifically
requested not to do so.
To be honest I didn’t think it was clever journalism as other members
of
the press had the capacity to illustrate to their readers that they knew
the contents of the email without betraying any trust or revealing any
internal Offaly GAA communication.
Sanctions in this matter are unrealistic. I will continue to work as
closely with that journalist as the PRO role demands for the good of
Offaly GAA but I do feel the trust has been broken and it will take some
time to rebuild it.
There is a lesson here for clubs too. A club, perhaps in this room
passed
on, on request, an communication from the County Board intended for its
members and not for publication. It main mean that there is such a
laxity
around emails that clubs may be unaware that you are the club in
question.
Can any of us sitting here say honestly that it wasn’t our club? Do we
know all the people that know our club’s email password and can we
hand
in
heart vouch for their intentions?
When an organisation cannot communicate with its constituent members
without fear of it appearing in print for the world to see then there
are
serious issues to be addressed. Suffice to say that if an email from a
club to the County Board on such a sensitive issue were to appear in the
Offaly Independent we would be having a very heated County Board
meeting.
Heads on a plate have been called for for less. Private communications
with its members is surely a right for this organisation. It is a right,
that in this instance, we believe has been violated.
The purpose of this statement is to highlight our dissatisfaction at the
publication of the document. It was wrong and it would have been wrong
of
us to ignore it.

[Lone Shark]

And the response from Ruth O'Brien of the Independent ....


Ruth O’Brien
opinion

Last month, during the Ken Casey suspension saga, I revealed an in-house
Offaly GAA statement that secretary Christy Todd sent to all clubs. That
email was an apology to, among others, the player and it also explained
the appeal process the Board were going to undertake to get the player
reinstated for the Leinster Under 21 Championship semi final against
Meath.
Before going to press I was asked by the County Board PRO not to publish
the document but I never once gave an assurance that I was not going to
run with the article.
At last week’s County Board meeting PRO Padraig Boland, on behalf of
the
Management Committee, issued a statement condemning my actions.
Firstly let me stress that the Offaly County Board are fully within
their
right to criticise the Offaly Independent and let me also stress that I
am
happy to work with Offaly GAA for the promotion of their games - after
all
that is a crucial part of any regional newspaper’s work.
However, as I am not a delegate to Offaly County Board meetings, I was
not
entitled to a right of reply at last Tuesday’s meeting but, in
publishing
the email, I was only doing my job for my employer - the Offaly
Independent.
The article, which appeared in the issue dated Saturday, March 17,
informed our readers exactly what was going to happen with Casey’s
appeal.
The County Board believed that my publishing of this would compromise
Casey’s case and would seem like a ‘cocky’ attitude from Offaly.
Firstly there are questions to be asked if the sporting public in Offaly
were not entitled to a full explanation of the Casey issue. Why should
it
all be under a cloud of secrecy? And why should, we the Offaly
Independent, as a standalone paper with no ties to the GAA, feel under
any
obligation to respect this imposed media blackout on the Secretary’s
email?
There isn’t a day that passes that newspapers around the country do
not
receive requests not to publish matters such as court reports that might
impact negatively on a family, organisations pleading that to publish
hard
hitting news stories will affect their business, to give but two
examples.
When the PRO asked that we not publish Christy Todd's memo, a decision
would be taken on the same merits as any other - is the story
sufficiently
newsworthy to merit publication, despite possible problems?
If a paper decides that each and every request not to publish articles
should be acceded to, it loses all sense of independence. If the paper
had
decided that the Christy Todd memo should not be published on the
relatively weak ground that there might be a chance it might impact on
the
suspension appeal, then we would become subservient to the GAA - nothing
more than cheerleaders. My job is not the same as the PRO of the county
board's - and it never should be.
The GAA has no right to assume its instructions to clubs have any
special
power on the media.
Why did the County Board feel it could only communicate secretly with
its
members - under strict instructions not to release the details?
Why is it okay that ‘other members of the press had the capacity to
illustrate to their readers that they knew the contents of the email
without betraying any trust or revealing any internal Offaly GAA
communication?’ but not okay to explicitly outline what we knew. Our
readers deserve more than hints and winks.
Is the issue more that the County Board's 'sacred' blanket ban on media
coverage of Christy Todd's explanation was broken - than that the
explanation itself was published
The email was published and there is no evidence that the purported
reason
for not publicising the email - that it might give the impression that
Offaly was arrogantly expecting the repeal of the suspension - ever came
to pass. So what is this storm in a tea cup all about? It is about the
fact that the GAA couldn't control the press as it wished.
In response to the comment about the organisation not being able to
communicate with its members without fear of it appearing in print for
the
world to see - the issue here is between the County Board and the clubs.
It's not my job to help build better internal communications within the
GAA. As a reporter, my job is to keep Offaly Independent readers
informed
of what I feel are the newsworthy items, in this case, the background to
the Ken Casey issue. Another example of shooting the messengers.

[the bare biffo]

And the response from Ruth O'Brien of the Independent ....


......... my job is to keep Offaly Independent readers informed
of what I feel are the newsworthy items, in this case, the background to
the Ken Casey issue. Another example of shooting the messengers.

Surely far more important to Ms O'Briens job is the sale of copy.
Sometimes the sanctimonious attitude of the press can only turn your stomach.

However on one thing I agree, the county board are not naieve enough to expect a newspaper not to print something like this. Their efforts should have been directed at the clubs to establish who handed over an internal memo to the media.

[The Magpie]

There are some very simple but effective rules in life. One is this: If you don't want somebody to find out something, don't tell anybody.

The information was leaked into the public domain by one of the clubs or a member of the County Board. Once it was leaked, it was fair game. If it was really that confidential, it shouldn't have been published at all.

I think this is very much a case of handbags between the PRO and the journalist in question - they're obviously not buddies. The argument presented by both sides is poor. I don't know what relevance the journalists 'solo-run' has to this matter? Perhaps somebody could inform me.

Anyway, I'm in full agreement with The Bare Biffo. If there's a leak, look for the source of the leak. What's that saying about Messengers and Blame...

[turk]

The journalist's dilemma here was being caught between 2 rules:

1 - don't bite the hand that feeds you

and

2 - never look a gifthorse in the mouth.

it is up to them to decide which was the correct rule to follow!

[Bord na Mona man]

The journalist's dilemma here was being caught between 2 rules:

1 - don't bite the hand that feeds you

and

2 - never look a gifthorse in the mouth.

it is up to them to decide which was the correct rule to follow!

What if you are feeding the horse and it bites you?