Over nearly 27 years of conflict, the media in Northern Ireland seems, on the whole, to have acted with integrity. Journalists and photographers have often displayed great courage in the face of personal danger.

The media have been accused of concentrating on atrocities rather than on analysis and background; this criticism seems to me to apply more to some British and foreign media than to Irish-based media, whether North or South. Some have occasionally let themselves be manipulated by paramilitary organisations for their own propaganda purposes, such as pre-arranged print- and photo-reportage of training exercises, illegal road blocks, etc.

Sometimes, the media have also tended to give exaggerated emphasis to polarisation of views, to the comparative neglect of moderate voices, although moderates are in the majority in both communities.

It is often spokespersons for the extremist elements or parties, or from the more extreme representatives of the mainstream parties, who are called upon to comment on events or on statements or to participate in panel discussions. However, the no-saying decibels of the one side and the clapped-out cliches of the other, tend to evoke a tired derision rather than to carry conviction. Nevertheless, in a society desperately in need of moderate leadership, less media emphasis on polemical and adversarial styles of debate would be helpful. In a community of two divided political communities, the media are the best opportunity for each to listen to and try to understand the other. Disputatious and controversial spokespersons who try to shout down rather than listen to one another, are positively unhelpful. Many people feel the media give such people too much exposure and serve only to increase polarisation rather than promote mutual misunderstanding.

The perception of the BBC and UTV in both nationalist and unionist areas has often been negative. Coming from an avowedly pro-establishment, and therefore pro-British and pro-unionist background in the pre-troubles period, both organisations had much leeway to make up, particularly so far as the nationalist and Catholic community was concerned. Both BBC and UTV were considered by the unionist and loyalist community in the past as being "their" broadcasting organisations, so efforts to reflect the two political and religious traditions more equally were doomed to be judged by some to be biased in favour of nationalists.

The dilemma facing all media in the North is that what is perceived as impartiality on one side is judged partisan on the other; indeed, objective and fair reporting is likely to be judged partisan by elements in both communities. In Northern Ireland perceptions have more impact than reality; indeed, for many people, perceptions replace reality. For broadcasting organisations to be perceived on both sides as truly non-partisan sources of news and comment requires a task for which Sisyphus himself might understandably have been unwilling to make a career change!

The print media have equally come out of a politically partisan past. The unionist Newsletter accomplished the extraordinary feat of finding different words over nearly 12 months in what seemed like every second editorial to attack that "infamous diktat", the Anglo-Irish agreement! All the more remarkable and praiseworthy, therefore, are the steps which this newspaper has taken towards more objective and less partisan reporting and comment. History was made, in Northern Ireland terms, when the Newsletter recently called for a new investigation of the events of Bloody Sunday in Derry, and again when the Newsletter and the nationalist Irish News issued a joint editorial, calling for compromise in order to avert the disaster of another Drumcree this year.

The Belfast Telegraph, following and further developing the enlightened policy of a truly great editor, John Sayers, has succeeded in achieving a balanced cross-community readership and a balance of reporting and comment and features which, in Northern Ireland terms, is admirable.

The Irish News has undergone a significant transformation in recent years. While retaining its nationalist ethos, this newspaper has genuinely sought to reflect unionist views fairly, to have a balanced spread of contributors to feature columns, and to offer fair and balanced political analysis. A real service to peace and reconciliation in this troubled community is provided by newspapers which purposefully set out to help one community to understand the other and overcome inherited preconceptions and misconceptions about the other.

Among national newspapers and radio and television organisations in the Republic, reportage and comment about Northern Ireland has, on the whole, striven to be fair and balanced. It is perhaps natural that they tend to lean toward the nationalist viewpoint, while trying to be fair to the unionist outlook. It would undoubtedly contribute still further to greater mutual understanding if these media outlets gave more space and voice to unionist spokespersons, reflecting the various trends within unionism, and avoiding the imbalance which can be projected by people of more extreme views.

I am concerned about a perceptible trend in certain newspapers, where some columnists have for a considerable time directed their undoubted talent into condemnation, or at least dismissal, of the Northern peace process and, most regrettably, into sustained criticism of its chief architect, John Hume. Their zeal in condemning the IRA is commendable. But surely those people within the republican movement who seem to be trying to bring the movement away from physical force, and into peaceful democratic politics, deserve encouragement, not rejection. Surely John Hume, who more than anyone else in Ireland, has laboured for peace, to the neglect of his health and at real personal and political risk, deserves credit and support, not condemnation.

A welcome development in media of unionist background is the tendency to report events and opinions in the Republic more positively and to analyse Irish Government policies in respect of Northern Ireland more objectively than was the case. A few unionist spokespersons seem less inclined nowadays to treat the Republic as a "hostile foreign state", or a "Roman Catholic Church-run" or "priest-ridden" society or as a backward "banana republic".

In the deeply divided society that is Northern Ireland, Irish media have, in general, had a positive effect. They have covered conflict at its most brutal with courage. They have reported words and acts of forgiveness and efforts for reconciliation and peace fully and often memorably. They have reported political developments with increasing objectivity. They have tried in varying degrees to erect bridges of communication across the divides. They are tentatively helping us to imagine a different and transformed kind of Northern Ireland, a different kind of island of Ireland, than we have known and suffered for so long; and imagining difference and transformation can be an important step towards bringing about transforming change.

This article was part of an address given by Cardinal Daly to the Church and Media conference at All Hallows College, Dublin, in June. Papers from the conference will be published in book form, by Veritas, next Novem- ber. Titled "Twin Pulpits," it will be edited by Fathers Colm Kilcoyne and Eamon Conway.