OK, yesterday’s sunny post was an anomaly. Today, I want to beat up on Fintan O’Toole–his review of the book by former Irish Times editor Conor Brady, “Up With The Times”* was largely a snow job, focusing on the positive (breaking the Bishop Eamonn Casey story, for example) while glancing on the not-so-shining moments (when Brady was editor of The Sunday Tribune, he choose to shelve a story highlighting the extent of Charles Haughey’s financial shenanigans). However, what is glaringly absent from O’Toole’s review is any discussion of the events surrounding Brady’s departure from the paper, which, in my view, not only put the entire character of his service under a shadow but epitomize the direction of the paper during his tenure.Under Brady’s tenure, especially during the late 1990s, the paper, while espousing righteous liberal opinions in its editorial pages, became a shill for property and business interests. The Property section became particularly notorious, as supposed “journalists” kicked off what was basically a sales brochure with cloying descriptions of million-pound/euro properties in the kind of prose that would make an estate agent proud. Meanwhile, the business section grew fat on job adverts, and the surrounding pages served as fig leaf for an advertising section. Banal sidebars proliferated, in which executives were asked what time they ate breakfast and what their favourite television programs were. In a culture where coverage was led by press releases, scoops were rare (which was convenient for a light-weight publication beholden to corporate advertising).This cosy situation came to an end when the global economy caught a nasty cold in the wake of 9/11. Although the crash in the property market never really occurred, a hiatus in the boom was enough to cause the property section to shrivel. The business section, too, suffered from a slump in advertising. Meanwhile, the Times had made a lavish (and perhaps unwise) investment in new printing facilities (at a cost, I think, of about �40 million).Faced with economic challenges, The Irish Times–the soi-distant conscience of the nation–acted with the callousness of a U.S. multinational under fire from shareholders. About one-third of the staff were let go. Yet those at the top fell on gilded swords. Brady received an “extraordinary” severance deal: According to an article in The Sunday Business Post: “He will receive index-linked payments of �100,000 a year from the Irish Times until 2014. The payments, which will be worth �1.2 million, were agreed with Brady to stop him competing against his former employer.” A non-compete agreement might make some sense if an employee worked in a financial institution and might be in a position to poach clients. But for a media company? As if Brady being appointed as editor for any other newspaper in the land would make a significant difference to that newspaper, which requires vast investment rather than simply a new editor to change its profile. (Also note that that 100,000 a year excludes redundancy payments and a pension). Yet that was not the end of Brady’s “support” from the paper. In a blurring of personal and institutional ownership reminiscent of the very gombeen politicians berated by the Times, it was revealed that:”Brady’s golden handshake is one of a number of substantial benefits the journalist received from the Irish Times. In 1988 the newspaper bought him a home in Monkstown, Co Dublin, and sold it to him for �130,000 (�165,000) in early 1990.In 1999 he bought a mews building at the rear of his house from the company for �105,000 (�133,000).One Dublin estate agent said that the property, which is at DeVesci Terrace, could now be worth over �2 million.” According to the Sunday Business Post, Brady defended this by saying “A lot of companies will do this for people when they go into a very difficult job.” Charles J. couldn’t have put it better himself.The paper that Brady left is apparently demoralized at the gap between the pampered executive class and the averagely paid hacks and even worse remunerated freelancers (freelance rates at the Times are notoriously stingy–as if writing for the country’s paper of record is a privilege not a job). Brady’s successor continues the institutional hypocrisy that undermines the paper’s credability. According to this site, The Sunday Independent reported :”Managing director Maeve Donovan and editor Geraldine Kennedy receive a basic salary of �323,000. Adding bonuses, executive pension funding of about 20%, motor vehicles, travel allowences, top of the range health and permanent health insurances, Employer’s PRSI and Employers Liability insurance, the annual cost of each individual likely exceeds �500,000.”How can the paper talk about fat cats in the boardroom (which it does unashamedly) with a straight face? Or am I simply naive to expect more?*This review appeared on Saturday. Thanks to the Irish Times’ flailing attempts to cash in on their ‘net presence, access to this review is through paid subscription.