“This concludes the AGM of NOT Independent News & Media” James Osborne, former chairman of Independent News and Media (IN&M), who was voted out of office on 8th June 2012
The evidence of the insidious progress of businessman Denis O’Brien in influencing, coercing and suppressing Ireland’s media grows with every passing week. On Wednesday last, Vincent Browne claimed that journalist Sam Smyth has been ostracised at the Independent News and Media group, where he was a regular writer for the Independent, whose editor is Gerry O’Regan, and Sam’s last report was at the end of May 2012 – he’s been apparently sidelined since then, according to Vincent.
Sam Smyth was previously the subject of a cack-handed demand by Denis O’Brien’s associate Leslie Buckley to the former CEO of IN&M who wanted Sam removed from reporting on the Moriarty Tribunal, the tribunal which ultimately reached “adverse findings” in relation to Denis O’Brien in the award of a mobile phone license in 1995. The broadsheet.ie website has published former IN&M CEO Gavin O’Reilly’s record of the incident. Sam subsequently lost his job on Today FM, a radio station owned by Denis O’Brien’s Communicorp.
Today in the Sunday Independent, in what appears to be brave defiance by editor Anne Harris, there is an interview with former IN&M chairman, James Osborne, there are stark claims that Denis O’Brien sought to suppress an article which was – eventually (see below) – published on 15th April, 2012. The article – available here – detailed Anglo Irish Bank’s largest borrowers as at March 2009, of which Denis was one. The article said
“Denis O’Brien, the telecoms entrepreneur, is listed as owing Anglo Irish Bank €833.8m on foot of personal and corporate loans just after the bank was nationalised in 2009, making him its then sixth largest borrower. Mr O’Brien has over the past three years reduced his borrowings to under €500m using cash generated by his Caribbean and Pacific-based mobile phone empire.” The article continues but it is indeed innocuous stuff.
Today James Osborne is quoted as saying “As you know — as you wrote in your paper on April 7, which was a Saturday, at about one o’clock I got a call from Denis… then he said “they’ve been on to me, there’s an article in tomorrow’s paper and I want it withdrawn” — and I said “I’m sorry, not me. I’m an independent non-executive chairman and I’m not doing that, I’m not going to interfere in an editorial”, and we had an argument about it….I mean could you imagine if I had rung you [Anne Harris] up, at that stage I had only met you at your husband’s funeral, and said: “Hello, I’m your chairman,” — you must be thrilled to get this call on a Saturday afternoon — “There’s an article about Denis O’Brien which was about the 13 biggest borrowers in Anglo, I want it out.” Actually the article was innocuous, there was nothing in it.”
It seems that James got the call from Denis on 7th April, 2012 which was a Saturday and it seems the Anglo Top 13 borrowers story was to appear in the Sunday Independent the following day which was Sunday 8th April, 2012. In fact, the story didn’t appear until the following week, the 15th April, 2012, which is odd and might suggest questions as to whether the story due for publication on 8th was modified before its actual publication on 15th. Anne Harris did refer to this incident in an article on 17th June, 2012, but the full details couldn’t emerge until James Osborne could talk freely about the matter.
So now we have at least two credible claims of Denis O’Brien seeking to suppress reporting in Ireland’s biggest print media group, a group in which he now owns 30% of the shares and has substantial control over the board. It seems that the second attempt at editorial interference is denied by a representative of Denis O’Brien, in response to which James Osborne today says “and I know Denis’s representative — or whoever — has denied that the call took place, but if he denies that the call took place that is a straight forward lie”
The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland recently – bizarrely – concluded that “Mr. O’Brien’s interests in Independent News and Media (“IN&M”) are relevant to the Authority in the context of its statutory obligation to consider “the desirability of allowing any person, or group of persons, to have control of, or substantial interests in, an undue amount of communications media” in an area. In this regard, the Authority was obliged to consider the changes in Mr. O’Brien’s interests in IN&M to determine whether the changes amounted to “substantial interest” or “control” as those terms are defined in the Policy. At its meeting on 23rd July 2012 the Authority determined that Mr. O’Brien does not control IN&M. Rather he has a substantial interest in the Company, as that term is defined in the Policy. In this regard, the Authority was not obliged to review Mr. O’Brien’s interests in the context of an undue amount of communications media.”
The nine members of the Authority are Bob Collins (Chairperson), Larry Bass, Paula Downey, Professor Colum Kenny, Michelle Mc Shortall, Dr Maria Moloney, Michael Moriarty, Siobhán Ní Ghadhra and John Waters.
It is high time that the Authority was summoned before an Oireachtas committee – presumably the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications – to justify itself.
NAMA Wine Lake 
I don’t see what all the fuss is about. Newspapers are propaganda rags for whoever owns them and phone calls by owners to run/suppress stories are only to be expected. I’ve no doubt that every newspaper in the country receives (and complies) with such requests all the time. The chair of one our major national newspapers is a board member of Goldman Sachs Europe, for goodness sake!
The only difference here is that, because O’Brien is currently in a struggle for ownership, shrapnel like this story is being ejected at high speed from the building. In normal circumstances, these calls are made and acted upon, quietly and in the interests of the owner.
The only reason the broadcasting authority is going to be called up in front of the Oireachtas is to force them to speed up the transfer/securing of ownership once one or other of the parties involved obtains the political backing to do so.
The Harris “interview” with Osbourne appears to be very contrived….I think her own independence is questionable.
Since the photo call with Enda, O’Brien is free to flex his flabby muscles as much as he likes. It is now impossible for any move to be made to trim O’Brien’s ever-expanding media wings or advance the ‘adverse findings’ charge from Moriarty.
Any trouble for O’Brien now equates to trouble for An Taoiseach, Enda Kenny.
O’Brien has received the implicit backing of Kenny and, therefore, has immunity to do whatever he wishes. He could buy the Irish Times, RTE, and the whole Irish Internet-Facebook-Twitter machine, and still An Taoiseach–and by extension, any member of Government or the BAI–couldn’t question his intentions.
@Kieran, with respect to An Taoiseach, within 24 hours of the Moriarty Tribunal report being published on 22 March 2011, the Government had referred it to the Gardai, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Revenue Commissioners. Sadly 11 months on in February 2012, the Gardai were still examining the report, and as late as May 2012, it was the case according to justice minister Alan Shatter that the Gardai were just “consulting” with the DPP. If the Gardai and DPP and Revenue Commissioners are independent in this country, and I think most people believe they are, then you really can’t lay lack of action on the Moriarty report at the feet of Enda Kenny.
March 2011
“Within 24 hours of its publication the Moriarty report was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Garda Síochána, which are the bodies responsible for the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences. The report is being studied by the Garda Síochána at present. It has also been referred to the Revenue Commissioners. This clearly illustrates that the Government regards the contents of the report as extremely serious.”
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2011/03/30/00023.asp
February 2012
“I am also informed by the Garda authorities that their examination of the Report of the Moriarty Tribunal remains ongoing”
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/02/16/00136.asp
May 2012
“I am informed by the Garda authorities that following their examination of the report of the Moriarty Tribunal, they are consulting with the Director of Public Prosecutions as to whether aspects of it may be pursued from a criminal point of view”
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/05/01/00283.asp
It should also be noted that this Government has published what might become the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world.
https://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/nama-to-be-covered-by-tough-new-anti-corruption-legislation/
It’s also worth saying that Labour’s Pat Rabbitte is the relevant minister in charge of media.
And of course, it should be said that Denis O’Brien himself disputes the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal, and that a Tribunal is different to judicial proceedings, though as Judge Kearns said in the Lowry v Sam Smyth defamation case
“But of course tribunal hearings and findings may be reported upon by the media and tribunal findings may certainly provide a roadmap or trail for other bodies or persons with an interest in the subject matter of inquiry, be it the Oireachtas, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions or litigants who engage in private litigation. Shorn of this characteristic, the function of tribunals would be rendered totally nugatory and pointless. The critical consideration in the cases cited above is that tribunal findings do not of themselves constitute material of probative value in such proceedings. They may however point to sources of evidence which may then be accessed in that separate context. Thus to the extent that the learned Circuit Court judge had regard to the tribunal materials as evidence, hearsay or otherwise, upon which she could rely to reach her decision, she would, on the authorities, have been in error. However, to the extent that she had regard to the material in question as pointing to potential sources of evidence to which the defendant, quite apart from tribunal findings, could resort to formulate a defence to the plaintiff’s claims, she was in my view entirely correct.”
http://courts.ie/judgments.nsf/6681dee4565ecf2c80256e7e0052005b/3d59f356d701e90e802579bc00351d2d?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,lowry
And yet for all that, the Taoiseach has never once publicly accepted the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal.
O’Brien will be in control of INM in short order.
@OMF,
That is not right.
An Taoiseach said at the Magill Summer School in Glenties last month that he did accept the findings of the Moriarity Tribunal
“”I accept the Moriarty Report in its entirety”
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/no-sex-but-plenty-of-talk-about-getting-whipped-into-shape-3179012.html
However, it is a source of embarrassment to the democratic ambition of this State that he failed to make his position clear in the Dail over the past 16 months. Indeed, such was his stark failure to confirm that he did accept the findings, that the Opposition, particularly Micheal Martin was able to justifiably goad and tease Enda Kenny. It was a poor display but it has now seemingly been remedied, though alas, apart from newspaper reporting, we don’t appear to have a record of An Taoiseach’s acceptance of the findings, which we would have if he had made a statement in the Dail.
This exchange was in July 2012
The Taoiseach:The Supreme Court made its decision yesterday, and the matter will be returned to the High Court. As I said yesterday at the press conference, I would like to reflect on the written judgment of the Supreme Court, which will not be available for quite some time, to determine whether there are any implications for the State. This is a private matter which will now return to the High Court. Mr. Justice Moriarty made his findings very clear in regard to the issuance of the licence, and his findings stand.
Deputy Micheál Martin: Does the Taoiseach accept them?
The Taoiseach:As far as the legislation is concerned, I will revert to Deputy Martin with details.
Deputy Micheál Martin: Does the Taoiseach accept the findings?
The Taoiseach:The findings are very clear.
http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/07/18/00004.asp
@nwl
I’m not saying that Enda is standing in the way – I’m saying there is no political will to press O’Brien on Moriarty. If there was, then we wouldn’t still be waiting on the Gardai/DPP to issue any sort of definitive statement.
Enda being photographed with Denis O’Brien decreases what little political will was there already.
In all fairness, can you ever see O’Brien being officially denounced and the resultant mud splattering on An Taoiseach? What’s in it for Enda or FG if this happened? And there’s the problem – there’s a disincentive to pursue DOB.
Re Pat Rabbitte: Come on, seriously, where’s the legislation about media ownership? Not that it matters much now with the BAI’s recent pronouncement.
Personally, I think Sam Smyth has done this state some service several times in his journalistic career.
NWL did a great post on cognitive dissonance,could have included Smyth in that.Difficult to have too much sympathy for his current situation,he was McDowell’s poodle for years, smeared fellow journalist Frank Connolly.
Resulted in the loss of funding for Centre for Public Inquiry which was about to undertake..
“The final straw was the threat of legal action by Treasury Holdings in Dublin in connection with its third report which was under preparation. The government has already come under pressure to explain why the state-owned Dublin Port Company, chaired by former councillor Joe Burke, a political associate of Bertie Ahern, the taoiseach, did not go through a tender procedure before entering into a joint venture with private operators to develop a 32-acre (130,000 m2) site”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_Public_Inquiry
Not exactly fire and brimstone stuff from Joan…………more was expected.
“There has been considerable public and political unease about the fact that Mr. O’Brien has continued to pop up at various public events, most recently at the New York Stock Exchange. However, the Taoiseach was invited to attend that stock exchange event. The organisers of the event not the Office of the Taoiseach decided who was on the balcony for the bell ringing ceremony. It is perhaps time for the Government to reflect on how it should in future interact with people against whom adverse findings have been made by tribunals.”
http://www.joanburton.ie/speeches/joan-burton-speaks-on-the-mahon-tribunal
@OMF & @nwl
Re Enda Kenny accepting the Moriarty findings: I think it was in the Phoenix I read that it was no coincidence he accepted the findings after the BAI ruling; i.e. when he knew he didn’t have to do anything about Denis O’Brien’s control of INM.
[…] rigorously argued piece he's ever written It kinda blows Bruce Arnolds point out of the water. The newspaper article which Denis O "You think thats bad,theres one lunatic that posts on there 40-50 times a day..He's […]
So Mr. O’Brien disputes the adverse findings against him in the Moriarty Tribunal Report. I would say that is hardly rare in such circumstances and yet the denials are repeated every time Moriarty is mentioned. Isn’t Dinny getting a little bit of special treatment here compared to the average Joe who finds himself mentioned unfavorably?