Are rowdy TV discussions intentional?

We have read many comments in the press about rowdy, unethical and degrading so-called 'discussions', which make certain TV programmes a complete waste of time.

Xarabank of November 6 comes to mind. The panel was supposed to put questions to Mgr Anton Gouder about the proposed directives for celebrating feasts, as well as air their views, in a civilised manner. Nobody expected it to be such an undignified and insulting programme.

The courage, determination and the gentle manner of Mgr Gouder was most noticeable, especially when compared with the ferocity and rage of the opposing parties. Nor did the monsignor's edifying decorum help them realise their poor and miserable behaviour and change their attitude. Respect seems to have become an obsolete word to many of us, unfortunately.

Under such circumstances, one cannot help but think that the presenter has lost control. I am sure that today one has the technological means to control who is heard and who is not. When one is asked a question, or to comment, one should have the right to do so without interruption. And if the other parties are not respectful enough or so uncontrollable, then the audio man can turn off the microphones of those interrupting or who are not supposed to be heard.

Unfortunately, this is a most common situation on local channels - disrespect, insults, hatred and more are the order of the day. Maybe this is the kind of programme many people want, which leaves one wondering about the mentality that unfortunately prevails.