Member's statement: Public Media Ireland Report
Member's statement by Ms Aoife Finnegan on .
- MLA
- Ms Aoife Finnegan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 20 January 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Public Media Ireland Report
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5348161
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I acknowledge the publication of the 'Public Media Ireland: a new PSM Organisation for a New Country' report, which researchers from Ulster University and Dublin City University produced. The report examines the future of public service broadcasting in the context of constitutional change on the island. The report is a timely and important contribution to a growing conversation, not only about constitutional features but about how our shared public institutions may evolve to meet the needs of a modern, diverse and inclusive society. The report's launch reflected the level of political and public interest in those questions. The research highlights long-standing issues with which people across the island are all too familiar, such as access, fairness and equality in public service broadcasting. For many years, people in the South have been unable to access BBC content, while people in the North have faced barriers to accessing RTÉ programming. There have also been persistent concerns about geoblocking, particularly of major sporting events and moments of national and cultural significance. Those are not abstract problems. Instead, they affect how people engage with culture, sport, news and public life. They shape who feels included and who feels left out. One of the report's most striking findings is that a preference was expressed for the establishment of a new all-island public service broadcaster in the event of constitutional change, rather than simply extending or adapting existing systems, which were never designed to serve the whole island equally. That is a significant finding, and it speaks to the opportunity that change, if it comes, could present, not simply to rearrange what already exists but to design institutions that, at their core, reflect lived experiences, diversity of identity and the public interest in transparency and accountability. Although the report focuses on media, the issues that it raises resonate far beyond broadcasting. Similar questions arise in healthcare, education and public services more broadly about access, equality and public confidence. I also welcome the continued engagement between the report's authors and Senator Conor Murphy, including plans for further discussions of its findings in the Oireachtas next month. That engagement is important if the report's research is to inform public debate meaningfully.
The report should be seen as a starting point, not an end point, and as an invitation to wider discussion with workers, communities, media professionals and the public about what a shared media future would look like. Those conversations matter because public service broadcasting plays a vital role in democratic life and in how people across this island understand one another.
424 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.06 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.69).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.69 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.87 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:12 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.