and thats seperate to the tone argument, so which is it?
wrong ediotiral tone , or possible offense to the family, even if they decided the tone was off, they used the words of the ff’ers in their apology the next day.

ps mp your site takes ages to load in firefox and only slightly less aslong in ie

A political office in a democracy cannot be offended. It especially cannot be offended by a piece of art that even RTE admits is not offensive, or by a report about said artwork.

It’s possible that Brian Cowan as an individual may have been offended, but as a widely charicatured political figure, his grounds for righteous dudgeon seem scant.
But here’s the thing – RTE didn’t even wait to find out if he was offended (or so they say) – they caved on reflex. And then they have the balls to claim this was in the name of impartiality.

At least it says clearly that the paintings were legitimate cartoons. That RTE was right to report on them.

It presents a technical criticism of the broadcast, saying that it could have been better done. I imagine such technical criticism could be levied against innumerable broadcasts.

But when Peter Feeney goes on to say that Mr Cowen and his family may have found the broadcast offensive, and that this justified an apology from RTE, he is defending the indefensible, I’d say.

There is no evidence presented that Mr Cowen, or his family, was offended. They may or may not have been, depending on their sense of humour. If RTE had waited to see whether Mr Cowen complained, and then apologised after receiving such complaint, I think they would have been reasonable.

Instead they created the impression that they were afraid of the government. RTE reduced the citizens’ confidence that we live in a society with an independent and free media. RTE damaged the reputation of Ireland in the eyes of the wider world. People in other countries were given the impression that RTE is scared of offending the Taoiseach and his supporters.

I hold this as a serious charge against RTE’s current management. The team charged with leading RTE will have to do something very courageous to restore my confidence in their ability to guard and respect the freedom of the national broadcaster. On this occasion, they have let down the nation.

As for the matter of whether RTE were pressurised by government, I simply note that Peter Feeney does not say that RTE was not pressurised. He points out that RTE have already denied it. His form of words on this aspect is unconvincing.