The new Broadcasting Bill does not correct the absurdities of current restraints on religion, writes Breda O'Brien
EVEN BARACK Obama's people are scared of the hijab. His campaign had to apologise to two Muslim women. Others in their group were invited to sit behind the presidential candidate at a rally, but the women were excluded because they were wearing the Islamic headscarf.
The smart thing to do would have been to let the conspiracy theorists who believe Obama is a closet Muslim froth at the mouth at the sight of hijabs onstage. Obama could then have made a statesmanslike speech about being the presidential candidate who would bring America together. Instead, his handlers gave his opponents a glorious opportunity to mock his hypocrisy.
The hijab continues to exercise Irish people. It is striking that so many of the recent letters to this newspaper about the wearing of the hijab in schools absolutely refused to accept that it might be a freely chosen religious symbol. Many writers could not imagine it as anything other than a symbol of male oppression.
I have spoken to a number of women who wear the hijab, some young, some not so young, some Irish and some foreign-born. They see it as ironic that their choice is portrayed as submission to male domination. They believe it betrays a sexist attitude towards Muslim women's ability to make decisions about how they wish to practise their faith. The interface between politics and religion is always challenging. The Broadcasting Bill before the Oireachtas provides an interesting example. The Bill is broad-ranging, and in many cases innovative. For example, it will bring into being a single regulator for public and commercial broadcasting. It also proposes audience councils that will represent the views of the public.
There will be a "right to reply" that will allow individuals to respond to inaccurate information broadcast about them. Junk food advertising will effectively be banned at peak viewing times for children, a cause dear to my heart. For the first time, members of the opposition who are part of the Oireachtas committee on broadcasting will have an input into appointing some members of the boards of the new Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, and of RTÉ and TG4.
Given that the Bill has so many valuable aspects, it is disappointing that it continues the ban on aspects of religious advertising. The 1988 Radio and Television Act directs that "no advertisement shall be broadcast which is directed towards any religious or political end or which has any relation to an industrial dispute". A frankly ridiculous ban on an advertisement for the Irish Catholic in 1999 caused widespread debate and upset.
As a result, the Broadcasting Act of 2001 allows for the advertising of religious newspapers, magazines and periodicals. However, such advertisements must not "address the merits or otherwise of adhering to any religious faith or belief, or of becoming a member of any religion or religious organisation". The framework and most of the language from the 1988 and 2001 Acts is retained in Section 41 of the new Bill.
Let's look at how the legislation has played out in practice. In 2002, the Power to Change campaign, an inter-church group, had their advertising campaign about Christianity's ability to change lives banned by RTÉ. UTV broadcast it with no perceptible damage to public order. In 2006, Sr Stanislaus Kennedy had her advertisement for her book, Stillness through my Prayers, rejected twice by RTÉ. The broadcaster eventually capitulated on the grounds that a religious book was covered by the 2001 Act. In fact, it is not.
RTÉ has softened sufficiently to allow Veritas to advertise recently the sale of religious objects for children making their First Holy Communion even though the advertisements contained the deeply subversive suggestion that people should remember the true meaning of the event. Even that softening will be retracted if this provision of the Bill is not amended.
In an interesting twist, Trócaire had part of an advertisement banned, but not for religious reasons. The advertisement had to be re-scripted because Trócaire had a petition on its website urging the public to put pressure on the Government to implement a UN resolution to improve the lot of women. This was construed as a "political end". The National Consumer Agency fell foul of the same provision when an advertisement by it urging people to make submissions regarding the Groceries Order could not be broadcast. This interpretation of a "political end" is so narrow as to be dangerous.
One sensible suggestion is that the proposed Broadcasting Bill should be amended so that political refers to "political parties, groups, and elections". The ability to lobby and put pressure on government is vital for the health of civil society.
Those in favour of retaining the ban on religious advertising often express fears that it will lead to cults targeting vulnerable people. Minister Eamon Ryan said in a Seanad debate that since religion concerned "metaphysical issues" it would be very difficult to regulate. He said that a "wealthy church from outside the country could decide . . . to canvass here in a way with which we would not be comfortable and we would not be able to restrict it." However, Senator Ronan Mullen pointed out the irony that tarot card readers and astrologers can advertise the merits of their services but a religious organisation cannot. He likened the ban on religious advertising to the GAA being allowed to advertise a match in Croke Park, but barred from saying that those attending will have a great time. To my mind, the chance that cults may advertise does not justify the ban.
Just like the hijab, a ban on aspects of religious advertising does more harm than good. For example, the current and proposed legislation prevents advertising for religious vocations. Yet advertisements that promote the cult of selfish individualism are in our faces every time we turn on the radio and TV. The Bill bans advertisements for junk food, and incitement to crime, and rightly so. Do we really want to put the merits of religion into the same category?