Report author threatens to sue BAI over RTE report
An author of the internal report into RTE’s controversial Frontline presidential debate is threatening to sue the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) over the fall-out.
Rob Morrison, the independent member of the review team, said his integrity and reputation has been called into question by the BAI.
The BAI claimed there were more significant editorial failings than was admitted in his final report, co-authored with senior RTE executive Steve Carson.
“They have called into question my integrity,” he said.
“I feel my reputation and integrity have been damaged by this accusation.”
Solicitors for Mr Morrison, former head of news and current affairs at UTV, issued a letter of action against the BAI shortly after lunchtime today.
The watchdog will have seven days to respond, after which legal proceedings are expected to be launched.
The BAI yesterday called on RTE to release a 27-page working document which was used to inform the final eight-page report into the contentious broadcast in October 2011, which dealt a hammer blow to presidential frontrunner Sean Gallagher's chances of victory in the election.
A tweet from someone falsely claiming to represent rival candidate Martin McGuinness, which was not sent by his campaign team, claimed that a man who allegedly gave Mr Gallagher a cheque for a Fianna Fail fundraiser would be presented at a Sinn Fein press conference the following day.
Mr Morrison said claims by the BAI that the working document would disclose further editorial failings suggests he was involved in a cover-up.
“That is what the clear implication is,” he said.
Mr Morrison said the final report was a very faithful summary of the working document, which he said could not be published to protect the anonymity of people interviewed, such as audience members.
While the larger document would provide “more detail, more colour, granularity”, he insisted it was completely untrue to suggest it would reveal any other significant failings by the State broadcaster.
The BAI's compliance committee claimed that the working document features additional information and comments which indicate the editorial failings were more significant than has been identified by RTE.
“For this reason, it is the committee’s opinion that the publication of the working document would provide greater understanding of these failings, would support the principle of transparency and would be in the public interest,” the BAI added.
RTE said yesterday that it was satisfied the report published on Sunday was an accurate representation of the editorial failings as identified in the working document.
It also agreed to publish the working document once those who participated on a confidential basis agree.
Elsewhere, Communications Minister Pat Rabbitte said he was puzzled by what he called a “squabble” between the BAI and Mr Morrison, and suspected there may have been “a confusion of language”.
“I find it very difficult to understand what the issue is if the independent panel member asserts, unequivocally, that nothing has been concealed and nothing has been excised and to suggest otherwise is entirely wrong. So I’m not sure there is a great at issue here,” he added.
Mr Morrison said the BAI accepted in a briefing note that RTE handed over all the necessary material, including the working document, and also accepted they were not criticising the authors of the report.
However, he said the watchdog’s published statement was “absolutely explosive”.
He added: “It absolutely suggests the review team changed something or withheld something.”
THE BAI confirmed it had received the legal letter but that it would not be commenting further.
The editorial review commissioned by RTE in the wake of the BAI investigation did not specifically examine the tweet issue as it was subject to a separate investigation by the state broadcaster.
Instead the review team looked at the overall editorial processes of the Frontline programme.
RTE said there had been a series of failings in the production and broadcast of the Frontline presidential debate, but the probe concluded that the mistakes were not made as a result of bias or partiality.
RTE said it accepted the review findings and expressed regret at the errors flagged up.
The internal review team criticised the production team for the failure to confront eventual presidential winner Michael D Higgins with a direct and challenging question from an audience member.
They also criticised the way producers had rewritten audience members’ questions and printed the amended versions on cue cards for them to read, and identified errors with the way the audience was selected.
