Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Updated 1.49pm
THE SOLICITOR ACTING for John Waters has issued a statement to dispute RTÉ’s version of events following an interview with Rory O’Neill on the Saturday Night Show.
He also revealed that he believed the settlement figure of €40,000 was “too low” and that his client was the first to propose a charitable donation as part-settlement.
O’Neill, who performs as drag artist Panti, mentioned the newspaper columnist in a discussion on what it is like being gay in Ireland on the 11 January programme.
Waters’s solicitor, Kevin Brophy, said he was instructed by his client to write to the broadcaster on the same day “seeking an apology and a retraction and the removal of certain defamatory comments from the internet broadcast”.
“My instructions were very clear at that time. John Waters and the Iona Institute clients wanted an apology and a retraction and nothing else,” he wrote today (emphasis his).
This is not a case of John Waters trying to silence the gay lobby or prevent freedom of speech. He was defamed. He continues to be defamed. If RTÉ had acted appropriately and sensibly on day one, this current storm would never have arisen.
In a memo to staff, RTÉ’s head of television, Glen Killane, revealed that “every option available to it, including right of reply and an offer to make a donation to a neutral charity”was explored.
Killane, went on to say that management took a particular course of action partly because of “the decision by the complainants not to accept RTE’s proposed remedies”.
According to Brophy, “this is a grossly misleading version of what actually happened” but RTÉ is standing by what it said.
In a statement this afternoon, a spokesperson said:
RTÉ have provided a fair and accurate account of the negotiations and their conclusions. The apology proposed by Mr Waters was unacceptable to RTÉ. It is untrue to claim that RTÉ did not take all matters relating to this complaint seriously from the outset.
“Due consideration was given to the full range of RTÉ’s responsibilities as a public service broadcaster, in tandem with careful consideration of the legal advice.”
Waters’ legal team claim that RTÉ proposed a right of reply, something it likens to asking him (and other complainants) to “prove they are not homophobic”.
Its statement continues:
“John Waters also made several attempts to deal with the matter himself, including having a lengthy telephone conversation with the producer of the Saturday Night Show.
In the course of this conversation, he discovered that far from showing a willingness to vindicate his reputation, RTÉ had spent the previous two days conducting an internet trawl in a fruitless attempt to belatedly substantiate the allegation made by Mr O’Neill. They failed in these endeavours.
“John Waters then proposed the precise wording of an apology and further proposed that a donation of €15,000 be made to the St. Vincent De Paul to mark the seriousness of the defamatory comments. This proposal did not come from RTE, it came from John Waters. RTÉ were not happy to broadcast the apology we had drafted and instead said they intended to go ahead with a totally unsatisfactory two sentence statement. Over the course of the following seven days, an unsatisfactory wording was eventually agreed and was broadcast.”
Brophy said that RTÉ wanted to decrease the amount of the proposed donation to €5,000. After this, advice was given to the client to issue proceedings against the broadcaster because it was not “taking the matter seriously”.
The solicitor also noted that the negotiations were taking place at a time when “outrageous” abuse and commentary was being leveled at his client.
“Eventually RTE offered €40,000 and this was accepted. I did not recommend the figure as I felt it was too low,” continued Brophy. “The bottom line here is that if RTÉ had accepted John Water’s original proposal, this case would have settled at a fraction of the final cost to RTÉ.”
“I have acted for John Waters for many years. In previous defamation actions he has requested that settlements be passed to charity. John Waters agreed to this final settlement and apology in the hope of putting an end to the matter and in deference to the members of the Iona Institute, who had also been defamed.”
Here is the statement, in full:
RTE said in their recent statement “I want to reassure you that RTE explored every option available to it, including right of reply. Legal advice was sought and all avenues were explored, including an offer to make a donation to a neutral charity”. They further went on to say that they took a particular course of action partly because of “the decision by the complainants not to accept RTE’s proposed remedies”.This is a grossly misleading version of what actually happened.
This is what actually happened.
I was instructed by John Waters on January 11th to write to RTE seeking an apology and a retraction and the removal of certain defamatory comments from the internet broadcast of the Saturday Night Show. My instructions were very clear at that time. John Waters and the Iona Institute clients wanted an apology and a retraction and nothing else.
RTE proposed a right of reply which was like asking my clients to prove they are not homophobic. John Waters also made several attempts to deal with the matter himself, including having a lengthy telephone conversation with the producer of the Saturday Night Show. In the course of this conversation, he discovered that far from showing a willingness to vindicate his reputation, RTE had spent the previous two days conducting an internet trawl in a fruitless attempt to belatedly substantiate the allegation made by Mr O’Neill. They failed in these endeavours.
John Waters then proposed the precise wording of an apology and further proposed that a donation of €15,000 be made to the St. Vincent De Paul to mark the seriousness of the defamatory comments. This proposal did not come from RTE, it came from John Waters. RTE were not happy to broadcast the apology we had drafted and instead said they intended to go ahead with a totally unsatisfactory two sentence statement. Over the course of the following 7 days, an unsatisfactory wording was eventually agreed and was broadcast.
RTE’s response to the proposed donation to the St. Vincent De Paul was that they felt the figure should be €5,000. My very strong advice was for John Waters to issue proceedings against RTE as I did not believe they were taking the matter seriously.
It should also be noted that these negotiations were ongoing at a time when John Waters was being subjected to the most outrageous level of online abuse and adverse commentary.
Eventually RTE offered €40,000 and this was accepted. I did not recommend the figure as I felt it was too low. The bottom line here is that if RTE had accepted John Water’s original proposal, this case would have settled at a fraction of the final cost to RTE.
I have acted for John Waters for many years. In previous defamation actions he has requested that settlements be passed to charity. John Waters agreed to this final settlement and apology in the hope of putting an end to the matter and in deference to the members of the Iona Institute, who had also been defamed. This is not a case of John Waters trying to silence the gay lobby or prevent freedom of speech. He was defamed. He continues to be defamed. If RTE had acted appropriately and sensibly on day one, this current storm would never have arisen.
First published 11am
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I hope this is stopped with whatever government comes in, can’t believe that we spend 3 billion and don’t even Owen it, this is not right
@Mick Hannigan: Insanity we won’t own the network but it won’t be stopped. It is all about transfering public money into private hands. Neo-liberalism 101.
@Mick Hannigan: €1 million to ‘ legally’ give away €3 Billion… welcome to FFG world!!!!
@M Bowe: another million on top of the €7 million spent to date on legal fees fighting the €13 billion Apple fine.
@Mick Hannigan: They should just wait another year or 2 for musks starlink. Satelite broadband low latency and most likley cheaper than all other providers. I dont understand how they can charge up to 75 per month here and u get 2 times speed on continent for less than half the cost.
All those projects are going to end up very bad i.e. with the usual tribunal attached to the end of it.
Most expensive broadband in the world.
Most expensive hospital in the world.
Either Blues are dopes or simply corrupted beyond recognition….
@Willy Mc Entire:
I think the FUBAR acronyn describes it perfectly.
€980k isn’t an exorbitant sum in legal fees over two years given the size of the underlying contract; however, expect the final figure for legal fees to end up being many multiples of that figure
So what happens when Elon Musk’s starlink is operational, would we even need a rural wired broadband?!?
Look like this problem is soon to solve itself and we will have wasted €3,000,000,000 of taxpayers money
@Tony Gordon: never mind starlink, closer to the ground youve got FWA and 5G in place by the end of this year – all done by private companies on a commercial basis.
@Tony Gordon: Was just going to say the same thing. New technologies will render it redundant by the time it gets done. A complete misappropriation of taxpayers money.
@Tony Gordon: A giant vanity project by Musk which will lose investors a fortune. Even 5G has already surpassed anything Starlink can offer, so will only be an attractive offering in areas where 4/5G is not an option, and areas where 4/5G are not currently available tend to be either low population density areas or poor areas. Even if Starlink is to break even it’s offering will be expensive.
@Tommy Roche: expensive maybe….3bn euro buys a lot of data
Government – can you please quote us for two years of legal fees
Legal firm – yes no problem it will be 979,999.99
I always love knowing somebody’s budget before i bid a job!
Wait wait…. *grabs popcorn*….. and Go!
No need for it now, Imagine doing a fine job.
Just get it done please.
@sean de paore: no, let’s not.
Elon musk will have broadband globally once project star link is up and running . Clowns.
There is more than 1 virus destroying this economy, & outrageous legal costs is up there.
Surely our AG has his own team of leagle beagles, so why this expense on top?
Just read the motor insurance claims analysis, & 33% of settlements went to lawyers. That indicates that there is huge scope to cut insurance premium costs, if the state sets up a 3rd party only insurance, on regulated compensation terms, & let the foreign outfits offer better policies on a competitive basis.
Same for voluntary non profesdional sports & social organisations to halt the steady destruction of these by liability insurance cost.
@Ollie Conroy: fwa is garbage, I’m on so called 5g and have 2mb right now and every evening and weekend.
Have you any idea of the density and backhaul needed for 5g.. and the continual replacements that will be needed to “fix” Xg every 5 years or so. We’ve flogged the fwa horse enough already.
have your say