The primary takeaway from the historical trajectory of the culture minister’s role, which spans the 31 years since Michael D Higgins was appointed the first full-fledged cabinet member to assume this responsibility in 1993, is its notably finite career duration. Amid the current episodes of the RTÉ drama and veiled critiques from unnamed government associates about Catherine Martin’s role, there’s a creeping sentiment, particularly common towards leading female politicians, that she’s not up to the task. Proof of this is shown in insinuations hinting that she’s capable only of less serious duties, such as gallery inaugurations and bursary launches but ill-equipped for a full-blown political disaster.
Regardless of their validity, these views provide insight into how the political hierarchy values the culture minister position. In most cases, their culture tenure has marked the final chapter of a minister’s career. For Higgins, Síle de Valera, Jimmy Deenihan, and Martin’s predecessor, Josepha Madigan (who was bumped down to a junior minister post the previous election), it marked their first and final experience in the cabinet. For John O’Donoghue, Séamus Brennan, and Martin Cullen, it effectively served as a step back prior to retirement. Only underrated Heather Humphreys has managed to construct a successful, enduring career post-arts ministry.
Interestingly, over these three decades, the portfolio has seldom incorporated the media sector. While Higgins’s brief did encompass broadcasting, proven by his accomplishments including the establishment of what is currently TG4 and the revocation of the Section 31 broadcasting prohibition, media was subsequently reassigned to the Department of Communications where it remained until 2020.
In the scope of culture, isn’t the media a significant part? Many would agree, but for consecutive Irish administrations from 1997-2020, the response to this question was in the negative – a viewpoint inconsistent with international norms which almost universally acknowledge media as a product of culture. This Irish particularity demonstrates a restrictive conservatism, an absence of vision and hidden disdain for culture which constitute the fundamental tapestry of Ireland’s political past, with little exception. Broadly speaking, their understanding of broadcasting (using the archaic, pre-digital terminology) attached more significance to transmitters and cables than the actual content being broadcasted. It veered more towards the side of control rather than fostering creativity.
This long-standing mindset has inflicted significant harm. Higgins was committed to propagating the concept of a mutually connected audiovisual sector, encompassing expertise, facilities and inventiveness from both film and television industries in terms of public-service and independent creations. The compartmentalisation of film and television into distinct government sectors, resulting in the former Irish Film Board (currently known as Screen Ireland) being accountable to the department of arts and broadcasting falling under the communication department, severely hampered this vision. It might be a crucial factor in the failure of RTÉ to spearhead the creation of a national film industry, unlike other European public-service broadcasters who consider it within their jurisdiction, thereby contributing towards the present calamity. It would be intriguing to hear from those who condemn Martin, defend the prolonged inefficiency of former communication ministers, whose failure to address the public-media crisis over the past decade has indirectly led to the prevailing chaos.
The remit for the minister of arts has evolved over time, varying from one administration to another; at times inclusive of sports and tourism, often integrating the Gaeltacht (Irish-speaking regions) and on rare occasions, involving regional matters. As the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, Catherine Martin commands a much more extensive portfolio compared to her forerunners.
Regardless of how the remainder of the Government’s tenure proceeds and how the performance of the current minister is finally assessed, it would be shortsighted to conclude from the existing crisis that the media should be transferred to a different department. Over the past thirty years since Higgins assumed office, the meaning of the term ‘media’ has radically transformed along with most of our assumptions about its current state and future.
This transformation has had deep-seated impacts on every facet of our existence, notably in the realm of politics. Old notions regarding gatekeeping and control have been deemed obsolete. Crucial concerns about freedom of expression, misinformation, and privacy have been brought up but are still waiting for solutions. What part, if any, does the public-serving media currently play in preserving the uniquely Irish cultural identity amongst a flood of globally shared content? What does the future hold for the regulation of colossal tech firms? What path will AI advancements follow in the coming years? Can traditional media withstand these changes? Is it necessary for it to do so?
A rational world would prioritize these and related queries on any decent government’s to-do list, and the minister in charge would hold substantial influence in the cabinet. It’s high time this became a reality.