The Case of Sir. Tony O' Reilly

national | anti-capitalism | opinion/analysis Sunday May 02, 2004 13:30 by Jamie Murphy

The compromisation of journalism

Having built up to a very dominant position in Irish newspaper publishing we see how O’Reilly has been using this powerful agency to his benefit, and to the detriment of Irish journalism as a profession and as an art form.

Compromising the art of journalism in the print media -
The case of Sir A.J.F. O’Reilly and Independent Newspapers (Ireland).

Like historians, journalists are trained to write objectively so that the truth about any particular situation is given precedence over opinion. However, it is almost impossible for a historian to avoid being influenced by her own culture, deep values and ideas. As such the historian may unconsciously omit some facts or figures, or slant a comment with a value judgement without knowing it. Likewise, the journalist is a human being who relates information through a mind which has learned to perform in a certain culture, sub-culture or institutional context. Consequently we cannot expect to read a newspaper which is fully objective in its analysis of every given situation.
What we can expect, however, is that each individual journalist, and especially the editor (chief journalist), makes a genuine effort to shed personal baggage (e.g. attitudes) while writing copy for the next edition. Broadly speaking, journalists who break this professional ethic are doing the public a disservice. Much more serious misconduct by the journalist involves mindful conspiracy to avoid objective writing on certain issues. Finally, imagine a newspaper editor who colours a whole newspaper edition or series of editions in a biased way on the instructions of his paymaster, the owner of the newspaper.
How could this be done? Editorials could be written in a way which reflects the owner’s opinions or protects the owner’s other business interests. Photographs of the owner, his family members, his guests, his other logos / labels / interests and the like could be strategically placed throughout the newspaper on a regular basis, thus promoting the owner and his businesses. Journalists could be chosen for their willingness to succumb to editorial opinion when writing articles, again keeping the owner’s interests voiced, defended or positively promoted.
This essay examines recent editions of the Irish Independent and Sunday Independent newspapers and their direct connection to the business empire of Sir A.J.F. O’Reilly, the effective owner of these papers. It shows O’Reilly’s build-up to controlling many newspapers world wide, and his deep penetration of the Irish newspaper market. The manner in which he took control of the titles of failing newspapers in Ireland is examined. The essay briefly examines how O’Reilly, having secured pole position in ownership of Irish daily, evening and Sunday newspapers, allegedly threatened a sovereign government that he would use the power of these newspapers to their electoral disadvantage if decisions were not made in favour of his other business interests. It also briefly examines O’Reilly’s alleged press campaign against the Irish telecoms regulator because she was not making decisions which favoured one of his own companies. It shows how he positively promotes the business sector over the public service, while he particularly despises workers’ unions. It further shows how O’Reilly uses these newspapers to promote himself and his family.

O’Reilly builds a powerful newspaper empire.

Sir Anthony Joseph Francis O’Reilly was born in 1936, educated at Belvedere College, University College Dublin and University of Bradford (Ph.D.), and played rugby with the British Lions and Republic of Ireland. He became chief executive officer of An Bord Bainne in 1962 and the Irish Sugar Company in 1966. He became managing director of a H.J. Heinz & Co. subsidiary in England in 1969 and, through a meteoric rise in the company over the next ten years, he became the chief executive officer in 1979 and the chairman in 1987, retaining a 2% stake when he finally left in 1998. While at the helm of this multi-billion dollar company O’Reilly bought into Independent Newspapers in Ireland and encouraged its growth across the world as IN&M (Independent News & Media) bought into Australia (1987), South Africa (1994) and New Zealand (1995), acquiring 38 newspaper titles, over 70 radio stations, cable and telecoms interests at a cost of €1.3 billion. IN&M also took control of The Independent in Britain. In 2002 IN&M had turnover of €1.3 billion and profits of €223.2 million1. Apart from his current 29% stake in IN&M, O’Reilly is deeply involved with Fitzwilton, Waterford Wedgewood and Valentia / Eircom. He is married to one of the world’s richest women, Chryss Goulandris.
Prior to its demise in 1995 the main competitor of the Irish Independent group was the Irish Press group (Irish Press, Evening Press and Sunday Press). IN&M gave loans to the Irish Press group before it collapsed, thereby having a hold on its titles and blocking any competitors from acquiring them. This left IN&M publishing the daily Irish Independent, Evening Herald (the only national evening paper) and Sunday Independent, along with having a controlling interest in the Sunday World. Currently IN&M has a 29.9% interest in the Sunday Tribune and, according to Pat Leahy, effectively controls it through loans and other supports2. Because this paper has a current €30 million debt, and is likely to go bankrupt, IN&M has moved to take control of its title. This is a repeat of what happened with the Irish Press group. Should Irish competition law allow this to happen?

O’Reilly abuses pole position to allegedly threaten a sovereign government.

“In all around 78% of Irish newspapers sold in Ireland in 1998 came from companies that are fully / partly owned by IN&M”3. In 2003 IN&M turnover in Ireland was €639 million and profit margins were 19.9%4. With a total population of four million in Ireland ABC tells us that IN&M’s morning Irish Independent has 1,017,198 readers, the Evening Herald has 624,822 readers, the Sunday Independent has 305,182 readers and the Sunday World has 216,203 readers, representing a total weekly readership of about 2.2 million (though some people would buy a number of these papers)5. IN&M has had pole position in terms of newspaper readership in Ireland for a number of years now.
It appears that O’Reilly has abused the prime position of IN&M. Colm Keena has reported recently that “the former taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, has spoken …in detail about pressure from Sir Anthony O’Reilly and Independent News & Media (IN&M) during the 1994-1997 Rainbow Coalition period in office”6. Keena reports that Mr. Sean Donlon (former senior government adviser) told the current Moriarty Tribunal that he left a September, 1996 meeting with senior executives of IN&M ‘in no doubt about Independent Newspapers’ hostility to the government parties if outstanding issues were not resolved to their satisfaction’7. One government minister recalled how Mr. Donlon said at the time that the government would ‘lose the Independent group as friends if their demands were not met’8. If these recollections are true we see the way in which a newspaper owner feels he can directly influence and compromise editorial and journalistic work in his papers.
The meeting mentioned here had a short history insofar as O’Reilly had a previous meeting with Mr. Bruton in his (O’Reilly) residence in Glandore, Co. Cork in late June, 1996. Here O’Reilly outlined a series of difficulties he had with implementation of government policies which had direct negative bearing on a number of O’Reilly’s Irish businesses. These businesses included Princes Holdings (licensed MMDS tv distribution operation), H.J.Heinz & Co. (food company), Gilmoy (mining company) and Irish Cellular Telephones (a consortium put together to bid for Ireland’s second GSM licence). O’Reilly had not received the assurances he sought from Mr. Bruton at this house meeting. His executives pursued the matter very intensely at the next meeting with Mr. Donlon. When the right assurances were not yet given to the IN&M executives O’Reilly wrote a letter (on Heinz headed notepaper) two days afterwards to Mr. Bruton, outlining his disappointment at the course of action taken by the government in regard to private business v9. Most worrying of all is what happened next.
Mr. Bruton told the Tribunal that subsequently the newspaper ‘did take a negative view, both towards the government and towards me personally’10. Unfortunately for O’Reilly his group had not been granted the lucrative GSM licence, and neither had the government strongly implemented procedures which would help turn around the ailing fortunes of O’Reilly’s MMDS tv distribution business. This called for a really serious reprisal, which was launched when the Irish Independent published a front-page editorial on June 6th, 1997 (election day) urging people not to vote for (the incumbent) government11. O’Reilly had achieved a direct, powerful hit at the government parties which refused to do his bidding, thereby bringing the art of journalism in Ireland to a new low. O’Reilly had built up a very powerful weapon in his newspaper empire, and he was prepared to use it to the full.
O’Reilly stages press campaign against the Irish telecoms' regulator
O’Reilly is a substantial shareholder in Eircom, through his Valentia consortium, which bought the company and de-listed it from the stock exchange in 2001. In early January 2003, Ms. Etain Doyle, the telecoms’ regulator (through ComReg) directed Eircom, which had been operating a monopoly situation, to make a wholesale, flat-rate, internet service available to its competitors by July, 200312. O’Reilly perceived this order from Ms. Doyle in very negative terms. Gavin Daly tells us that ‘the move was documented in the lead article in the business section of O’Reilly’s Irish Independent under the headline “Eircom gets ultimatum over flat rate net access”. He tells us that, on the other hand, the Irish Times welcomed the move under the headline “Telecoms’ hail flat-rate move”. Daly was convinced that Independent Newspapers were involved in a ‘worsening spat with the telecoms' regulator, Etain Doyle, over its coverage of the work of Doyle’s office’. He quotes industry sources as saying that there was a perception that O’Reilly was using Independent Newspapers to defend the interests of Eircom, which his Valentia consortium owns13.
Furthermore Daly believes that O’Reilly’s media outlets gave “unwarranted prominence” to telecoms stories and surveys from ComReg. In contrast, the treatment of Eircom-related stories has softened, particularly in the Sunday Independent “which was previously a strong critic of the telco”. This latter observation is borne out by reference to Richard Curran’s articles on February 26th, 27th and March 1st, 2004, which were headed positively as ‘Eircom announce March float’, ‘Valentia to value Eircom at €3.5bn - €3.8bn’ and ‘Buoyant tone as revamped Eircom embarks on second float’, respectively14.
Meanwhile, Eircom is currently returning to the Dublin and London stock exchanges, valued in the €1.1 - €1.25 billion range. O’Reilly’s 5.1% stake in the company will see him make a profit of about €42 million on his original investment of the same amount three years ago. Should Irish law allow an individual to abuse newspaper journalism in the pursuit and protection of wealth, to the detriment of objective truth in their news coverage?

O’Reilly positively promotes the business sector over the public service

Shane Ross is a well-known journalist and business editor for the Irish Independent group. He relentlessly supported a press campaign which discredited the teaching profession in Ireland over the past few years, particularly over teachers’ refusal to continue to do voluntary supervision and substitution in schools. The Irish Independent and Sunday Independent have played no small part in reducing the status of teachers in Ireland. Similarly, O’Reilly plays his part on behalf of big business in promoting anti-public service feelings. Under the front page headline on February 17th ‘Public jobs soar despite pledge to slash 5,000’ the government was encouraged to reduce public service jobs if at all possible.
In the same article O’Reilly’s negative opinion of trade unions in Ireland surfaced also: ‘Under Bertie Ahearne’s leadership of Fianna Fail, the trades unions have been taken to the very heart of government. They matter more than the political opposition, and are treated with more respect than the Dail’15. One reason why O’Reilly might like this comment can be seen in a Sunday Business Post article on February 29th, 2004, ‘ESOT was decisive in 2001 Eircom deal’, showing where workers secured 29.9% of Eircom shares and 25% of its voting rights under Mr. Charles McCreevy (Fianna Fail Minister for Finance). No doubt the fact that the workers’ group, ESOT, is the largest single group of shareholders in O’Reilly’s Eircom business since his Valentia consortium took it over in 2001 irks him somewhat. However, using his newspapers to clearly outline his own opinions is proving detrimental to Irish journalism.

O’Reilly uses Independent Newspapers to promote himself and his family.

Photographs and articles concerning various personal, family and business interests of O’Reilly regularly appear on pages of the Irish Independent and the Sunday Independent newspapers. All such appearances are positive, ‘well done!’, flattering and amount to the free use of these newspapers for public relations exercises of a flamboyant nature.


Conclusion
In summary, we have seen above that the Irish Independent and Sunday Independent newspapers have had a direct connection with the business interests of Sir A.J.F. O’Reilly in recent years. Currently ‘O’Reilly is the largest private holder of stock on the Irish market…His stake in the media company (IN&M) is worth €415 million’16. We have seen him build up a business and media empire, especially following his appointment as chief executive officer of H. J. Heinz & Co. in 1979, a position he held for 19 years. He helped IN&M to penetrate many niches of the world’s newspaper and media markets. Nowhere is this more obvious than in Ireland where IN&M now controls The Irish Independent, The Evening Herald (the only national evening edition in the country), The Sunday Independent, The Sunday World and (it appears) The Sunday Tribune as well. We noted the modus operandi of O’Reilly’s IN&M’s 29.9% stake in controlling the Sunday Tribune through loans and other interests. IN&M had earlier managed to take control of all Irish Press titles in a similar fashion. Having built up to a very dominant position in Irish newspaper publishing we have seen how O’Reilly has been using this powerful agency to his benefit, and to the detriment of Irish journalism as a profession and as an art form.
Firstly we saw how O’Reilly, having failed to directly influence the Irish Taoiseach (prime minister of government) on business policy at his residence in June, 1996 and having failed indirectly to influence him on the same matters through the Taoiseach’s senior adviser in September the same year, he then issued threats to the sovereign government of the day that he would somehow use his powerful media machine in Ireland to harm the government or the government political parties. In a great compromise of Irish journalism, O’Reilly had his way on June 6th, 1997 (one year after his ‘unsuccessful’ meeting with the Taoiseach) when the editor of the Irish Independent issued a front-page call on the public not to vote for the incumbent Rainbow Coalition) government parties. This was a sorry day for the independence of journalism in Ireland! It showed that owners of newspapers could drastically manipulate editorial content.
Secondly we saw how O’Reilly’s interest in the Valentia consortium (which owns Telecom) was supported through IN&M newspapers in Ireland. O’Reilly was able to wage a nasty war against the telecoms’ regulator when she demanded him to take specific action to reduce Telecom’s monopoly position on aspects of that business. Likewise he used the same newspapers to take a ‘softly, softly’ approach to Telecom business matters after the Valentia takeover, something which was anathema to them when Telecom was under its previous ownership. Again we can trace a reduction in professionalism here for Irish journalism.
Thirdly we saw that O’Reilly’s Independent newspapers have taken sides against public service workers in general, and teachers and workers’ unions in particular, in recent years. He has allowed journalists like Shane Ross to help denude the status of the Irish teaching profession. He has repeatedly called for a reduction in the number of public servants. He has berated the government parties for their positive interest in worker’s unions and workers’ stake in private business (shareholding, profit-sharing initiatives and membership of boards). This taking of sides on issues so central to modern Irish life is surely a far cry from professional journalism at its best.
Finally we saw how O’Reilly seeks personal and family affirmation (and cheap PR) from the constant use of Independent newspapers to publish pleasing photographs and articles on his/their affairs, whether business or otherwise. Should ownership of a set of newspapers confer these rights on anyone?