The show was presented by the lovely (so I thought) Emma Barnett. She was an absolute rottweiller and savaged everyone. Uncomfortable but also delightful.
Rottweilers are lovely, intelligent, loyal dogs, bred to herd cattle by leaning against them. I think you are thinking of terriers, who were bred to kill?
Cameronite or not, Rottweiler or terrier, she made mincemeat of a prominent member of the Shadow Cabinet, albeit a member who leaves himself wide open.
I haven't seen it, but I have to say I'm getting tired of the Rottweiler approach to political broadcasting. I want to understand the issues, not witness someone getting crucified. What we don't seem to have (anymore?) is a more thoughtful approach where people are given time to explain their policies, what benefits they would bring, what needs to happen for them to work, what the risks are and (crucially) what evidence do they have to back them up. I'm happy for reporters to go in hard when politicians are clearly bullshitting or filibustering, but give them the chance to speak first. I can't count the amount of times recently that I've heard meeja types interrupting when their interviewee has had less than 30 seconds to speak. It's boring and we learn nothing. Sadly, another symptom of the big digital hurry that everyone seems to be in.
I haven't seen it, but I have to say I'm getting tired of the Rottweiler approach to political broadcasting. I want to understand the issues, not witness someone getting crucified. What we don't seem to have (anymore?) is a more thoughtful approach where people are given time to explain their policies, what benefits they would bring, what needs to happen for them to work, what the risks are and (crucially) what evidence do they have to back them up. I'm happy for reporters to go in hard when politicians are clearly bullshitting or filibustering, but give them the chance to speak first. I can't count the amount of times recently that I've heard meeja types interrupting when their interviewee has had less than 30 seconds to speak. It's boring and we learn nothing. Sadly, another symptom of the big digital hurry that everyone seems to be in.
First time in a while I have missed the show, although I have been getting pissed off with it, especially the paper review. In fact I'm in an ongoing complaint process with the BBC about the treatment of Carole Cadwalladr a few weeks back when her Cambridge Analytica work first hit the media big league. I think the Marr Show is part of a wider problem which encompasses the Today programme on Radio 4 - read a Twitter stream where a lot of intelligent people said they have given up (switched to R3/R6, or the World Service) and felt a lot better for it. John Humphreys is the worst, Nick Robinson not far behind - he is so clumsy at ending an interview when he's out of time. They regularly pull the stunt of saying to a Minister "while I've got you on, can I ask you about..."(something completely different to the apparent topic). Part of what @Stig is talking about, I think (and I agree with him).
Eddie Mair is much better than all of them, a "quiet assassin" type, but they haven't invited him to do the Marr Show agains since he asked of Boris Johnson "You're a nasty bit of work, aren't you?"...which may sounda bit of a dubious question, as opposed to a statement of nailed on fact, but it was in the context of his answers to the story that he ordered a journalist to be beaten up.
I do think that the problem lies behind the scenes rather than with the presenters themselves. I mean the producers and especially the editors. The Today programme has really gone very "conservative" since Sarah Sands became editor, while the producer who initially defended the Cadwalladr set up turns out to have form. Neither the World at One nor PM seem to have these emerging agendas, different teams at work...
Emma is a member of the Womens Equality Party which explains one of her newspaper reviewers.
I think she is ambitious and maybe sees herself as a future Paxman. Emma certainly wants to touch nerves and created controversial moments but the danger of that is that serious issues are not covered extensively enough. My advice to her is to consider how to pace yourself and only go for the jugular when a real blow can be landed. Incidentally the Tory, Matthew Hancock is probably not one of the very many evil Prince of Darkness Tories, nor Barry the worst of Labour. Emma up against Rees Mogg or Boris 'picaninny' Johnson would have been better. Emma exposed Corbyn in his lack of costings for a childcare initiative in a Woman's Hour interview last year. Because she is an 'ambivalent' Jewish person she was nevertheless bombarded by anti semitic abuse, which within hours of the interview Corbyn condemned, pointing out that Emma Barnett had been doing her job properly. Emma Barnett has had personal demons to face in her family life and she carries that well, one to watch as she is only 33 I believe. Best Wishes to Andrew Marr with his health challenges.
I haven't seen it, but I have to say I'm getting tired of the Rottweiler approach to political broadcasting. I want to understand the issues, not witness someone getting crucified. What we don't seem to have (anymore?) is a more thoughtful approach where people are given time to explain their policies, what benefits they would bring, what needs to happen for them to work, what the risks are and (crucially) what evidence do they have to back them up. I'm happy for reporters to go in hard when politicians are clearly bullshitting or filibustering, but give them the chance to speak first. I can't count the amount of times recently that I've heard meeja types interrupting when their interviewee has had less than 30 seconds to speak. It's boring and we learn nothing. Sadly, another symptom of the big digital hurry that everyone seems to be in.
Absolutely, every single interview has to go "viral" or its a failure. Maybe politicians would actually say something rather than constantly evading questions if they thought the person talking to them wasn't trying to assassinate their career for the sake of their own.
Yes @PragueAddick Radio 4, and Today in particular, are in my opinion failing badly in respect of this. For a station that broadcasts about 20 hours per day of its own material, there's not nearly enough thoughtful current affairs programming. When it's on, The Moral Maze is absolutely peerless. Other programmes like Thinking Allowed and More or Less can also be highly enlightening, but they focus on broader topics not always current stuff let alone politics. Today is a big let down and I agree Humphrys is the worst, it's as if he's finally trying to make a name for himself as something more than a newsreader/quiz host before he retires. I could probably put up with Today, if there was a place elsewhere for longer more considered interviews. Perhaps it's finally time to clear out the deadwood like The Archers to make it into an intelligent 21st century station. That would free up some space. Or alternatively, they could hand Thought For The Day over to the real world and use it to give politicians and political commentators five minutes of planned/uninterrupted airspace.
I haven't seen it, but I have to say I'm getting tired of the Rottweiler approach to political broadcasting. I want to understand the issues, not witness someone getting crucified. What we don't seem to have (anymore?) is a more thoughtful approach where people are given time to explain their policies, what benefits they would bring, what needs to happen for them to work, what the risks are and (crucially) what evidence do they have to back them up. I'm happy for reporters to go in hard when politicians are clearly bullshitting or filibustering, but give them the chance to speak first. I can't count the amount of times recently that I've heard meeja types interrupting when their interviewee has had less than 30 seconds to speak. It's boring and we learn nothing. Sadly, another symptom of the big digital hurry that everyone seems to be in.
Absolutely, every single interview has to go "viral" or its a failure. Maybe politicians would actually say something rather than constantly evading questions if they thought the person talking to them wasn't trying to assassinate their career for the sake of their own.
I disagree slightly. Yes, there's an element of trying to get that soundbite that's going to lead to what could be a bland, technical interview getting wider coverage.
But equally ALL politicians these days, and people at the top of business, the civil service, the NHS, etc. etc. are media trained. I've done media awareness training myself and it's all about controlling the message that's going out. This must drive interviewers crackers and it's not surprising they resort to hard questioning or badgering their interviewee to illicit a meaningful answer.
Yes @PragueAddick Radio 4, and Today in particular, are in my opinion failing badly in respect of this. For a station that broadcasts about 20 hours per day of its own material, there's not nearly enough thoughtful current affairs programming. When it's on, The Moral Maze is absolutely peerless. Other programmes like Thinking Allowed and More or Less can also be highly enlightening, but they focus on broader topics not always current stuff let alone politics. Today is a big let down and I agree Humphrys is the worst, it's as if he's finally trying to make a name for himself as something more than a newsreader/quiz host before he retires. I could probably put up with Today, if there was a place elsewhere for longer more considered interviews. Perhaps it's finally time to clear out the deadwood like The Archers to make it into an intelligent 21st century station. That would free up some space. Or alternatively, they could hand Thought For The Day over to the real world and use it to give politicians and political commentators five minutes of planned/uninterrupted airspace.
The Archers Deadwood?
The Archers is to radio as The Red, Red, Robin is to Charlton. Sacred.
I agree otherwise with your thesis regarding the woeful standard of political analysis. However the solution to improving those poor political programmes is not to remove traditional non current affairs programmes.
There is no evidence I can discern that suggests the BBC is anti Tory as an institution. It maybe that people in the media are left leaning as individuals, but how is that personal balance to be redressed?
Yes @PragueAddick Radio 4, and Today in particular, are in my opinion failing badly in respect of this. For a station that broadcasts about 20 hours per day of its own material, there's not nearly enough thoughtful current affairs programming. When it's on, The Moral Maze is absolutely peerless. Other programmes like Thinking Allowed and More or Less can also be highly enlightening, but they focus on broader topics not always current stuff let alone politics. Today is a big let down and I agree Humphrys is the worst, it's as if he's finally trying to make a name for himself as something more than a newsreader/quiz host before he retires. I could probably put up with Today, if there was a place elsewhere for longer more considered interviews. Perhaps it's finally time to clear out the deadwood like The Archers to make it into an intelligent 21st century station. That would free up some space. Or alternatively, they could hand Thought For The Day over to the real world and use it to give politicians and political commentators five minutes of planned/uninterrupted airspace.
There may not be enough thoughtful current affairs interviews, but then there aren't enough thoughtful politicians either
These days they're media trained to just repeat a few soundbites, and attack the other parties. The last thing they want is an open discussion, with an exchange of views and admissions that they don't have the answers.
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
Agree. But she is considered to be personally right of centre, which is why I listed her. That it is not so obvious to people outside the Momentum bubble, supports your point.
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
Agree. But she is considered to be personally right of centre, which is why I listed her. That it is not so obvious to people outside the Momentum bubble, supports your point.
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
By who though? I'm sure many right wing activists would say she's personally left of centre.
Just picking at an example of her being criticised in the Mail in a long article about BBC bias against the Conservatives.
Tory manifesto launch, News Channel, May 18
While other reporters wait inside an old mill for the Prime Minister, BBC Assistant Political Editor Norman Smith is in the yard outdoors, where the chants of a small band of protesters from the Unite union are clearly audible.
It gives the misleading impression there is a massive protest against the manifesto.
When the launch begins BBC Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg doesn’t so much ask a question as launch into a rant about cuts to free school meals, elderly care and so on, which she then rounds off by asking: ‘Wouldn’t some voters be entitled to say that adds up to a pretty bleak picture?’
As the Cabinet file out of the room Kuenssberg is heard haranguing them with the same question: ‘Didn’t the manifesto paint a bleak picture?’
By contrast she seemed to use more neutral language about the Labour manifesto, calling it ‘something really different’.
She added: ‘The manifesto spells out a vision, for good or ill, of more spending, more tax and more borrowing. And in a big way.’
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
Agree. But she is considered to be personally right of centre, which is why I listed her. That it is not so obvious to people outside the Momentum bubble, supports your point.
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
You obviously don't get much BBC TV where you live. Nick Robinson was so far up Ed Milibands backside during the 2015 General Election it was nauseating. He may have worked for the Conservatives but if you want to become a serious political journalist then you need that sort of experience. Welcome to Emma Barnett everyone, us intellectual radio listeners have been enjoying here work on 5Live for some time.
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Owen Jones makes a good point about Andrew Neil, how right wing he is, the likelihood that anybody as stridently left wing (as Andrew Neil is right wing) would get such an influential role and (in that very unlikely event) how the right wing would respond if that happened.
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
Agree. But she is considered to be personally right of centre, which is why I listed her. That it is not so obvious to people outside the Momentum bubble, supports your point.
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
You obviously don't get much BBC TV where you live. Nick Robinson was so far up Ed Milibands backside during the 2015 General Election it was nauseating. He may have worked for the Conservatives but if you want to become a serious political journalist then you need that sort of experience. Welcome to Emma Barnett everyone, us intellectual radio listeners have been enjoying here work on 5Live for some time.
Dear Guvnor, thanks to my massive satellite dish and Freesat box I have exactly the same access to all BBC channels as you.
You make a reasonable point about Nick Robinson, but the issues people have with him date mainly from after he gave up the role Keunnsberg now has, to become a Today programme anchor.
There are times when I think Laura Keunssberg is brilliant, but, from my perspective, there are too many times when she doesn't appear know enough of the detail to highlight when a response is disingenuous.
The thing that made Emma Barnett seem impressive on Sunday was that, unlike her interviewees, she was well-prepared for getting to the questions she wanted to have addressed (I have my doubts that Barry Gardiner would ever be prepared, because he never seems capable of thinking on his feet).
Being prepared for the interview is also something that Andrew Neil is, more often than not, and I have to respect him for that. I may not like his politics, but I like his style.
There is no evidence I can discern that suggests the BBC is anti Tory as an institution. It maybe that people in the media are left leaning as individuals, but how is that personal balance to be redressed?
The problem is if you are on the left you think they are anti-Labour and if you are on the right anti- Tory. They simply try to hammer everybody. I do agree that there should be a better balance between trying to catch politicians out and finding out more from them. What you have ultimately, is politicians being less open so nobody wins!
He's pretty much the only BBC presenter who doesn't buy into the anti-tory bias.
The number of LOLs show how misguided your remarks are. To name but a few who are far more active on a daily basis than Brillobonce, albeit not on TV so much....Brillobonce thinks radio is beneath him nowadays.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
Laura Kuenssberg may be disliked by Jeremy Corbyn's supporters, but to me that says more about them than it does about her, as nothing she's said suggests anything other than a decent journalist doing her job.
Agree. But she is considered to be personally right of centre, which is why I listed her. That it is not so obvious to people outside the Momentum bubble, supports your point.
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
You obviously don't get much BBC TV where you live. Nick Robinson was so far up Ed Milibands backside during the 2015 General Election it was nauseating. He may have worked for the Conservatives but if you want to become a serious political journalist then you need that sort of experience. Welcome to Emma Barnett everyone, us intellectual radio listeners have been enjoying here work on 5Live for some time.
Dear Guvnor, thanks to my massive satellite dish and Freesat box I have exactly the same access to all BBC channels as you.
You make a reasonable point about Nick Robinson, but the issues people have with him date mainly from after he gave up the role Keunnsberg now has, to become a Today programme anchor.
Not sure about working for them but IIRC Nick Robinson was chair of the Young Conservatives for a bit. That may say more about his political affiliation than him being a young journo looking to fill up his contacts book.
Comments
She then laid into the massively incompetent Barry Gardiner like there was no tomorrow.
Then, to prove her lack of bias, she destroyed the Tory culture minister, he was quite visibly distressed.
If you're into politics tv and haven't seen it, catch up on iplayer. As CE says above, delightful.
Eddie Mair is much better than all of them, a "quiet assassin" type, but they haven't invited him to do the Marr Show agains since he asked of Boris Johnson "You're a nasty bit of work, aren't you?"...which may sounda bit of a dubious question, as opposed to a statement of nailed on fact, but it was in the context of his answers to the story that he ordered a journalist to be beaten up.
I do think that the problem lies behind the scenes rather than with the presenters themselves. I mean the producers and especially the editors. The Today programme has really gone very "conservative" since Sarah Sands became editor, while the producer who initially defended the Cadwalladr set up turns out to have form. Neither the World at One nor PM seem to have these emerging agendas, different teams at work...
I think she is ambitious and maybe sees herself as a future Paxman. Emma certainly wants to touch nerves and created controversial moments but the danger of that is that serious issues are not covered extensively enough. My advice to her is to consider how to pace yourself and only go for the jugular when a real blow can be landed.
Incidentally the Tory, Matthew Hancock is probably not one of the very many evil Prince of Darkness Tories, nor Barry the worst of Labour. Emma up against Rees Mogg or Boris 'picaninny' Johnson would have been better.
Emma exposed Corbyn in his lack of costings for a childcare initiative in a Woman's Hour interview last year. Because she is an 'ambivalent' Jewish person she was nevertheless bombarded by anti semitic abuse, which within hours of the interview Corbyn condemned, pointing out that Emma Barnett had been doing her job properly.
Emma Barnett has had personal demons to face in her family life and she carries that well, one to watch as she is only 33 I believe.
Best Wishes to Andrew Marr with his health challenges.
But equally ALL politicians these days, and people at the top of business, the civil service, the NHS, etc. etc. are media trained. I've done media awareness training myself and it's all about controlling the message that's going out. This must drive interviewers crackers and it's not surprising they resort to hard questioning or badgering their interviewee to illicit a meaningful answer.
The Archers is to radio as The Red, Red, Robin is to Charlton. Sacred.
I agree otherwise with your thesis regarding the woeful standard of political analysis. However the solution to improving those poor political programmes is not to remove traditional non current affairs programmes.
It maybe that people in the media are left leaning as individuals, but how is that personal balance to be redressed?
These days they're media trained to just repeat a few soundbites, and attack the other parties. The last thing they want is an open discussion, with an exchange of views and admissions that they don't have the answers.
John Humphreys; Daily Mail columnist and obvious Brexiteer
Nick Robinson; previously worked for the Tories
Laura Keunnsberg; for some reason not flavour of the month at Labour conferences
This article in the Independent, nails the issue, including @seth plum 's point above, written as it is by one of those tiresome experts...
It also seems to me that she has worked hard to cut out the LookAtMe element of her work which was evident when she first took over from Nick Robinson. Now if only she could persuade Andrew Neil to do the same, but since he's been screaming LookAtMe since the 1980s, I doubt he can tone it down now. His Tweets frequently display a lamentable lack of analytical thinking too. Suggests to me he'd be lost without his production and research team.
Just picking at an example of her being criticised in the Mail in a long article about BBC bias against the Conservatives. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4564762/Impartial-BBC-s-relentless-attack-Tories.html
Welcome to Emma Barnett everyone, us intellectual radio listeners have been enjoying here work on 5Live for some time.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/11/bbc-andrew-neil-media-politics
You make a reasonable point about Nick Robinson, but the issues people have with him date mainly from after he gave up the role Keunnsberg now has, to become a Today programme anchor.
The thing that made Emma Barnett seem impressive on Sunday was that, unlike her interviewees, she was well-prepared for getting to the questions she wanted to have addressed (I have my doubts that Barry Gardiner would ever be prepared, because he never seems capable of thinking on his feet).
Being prepared for the interview is also something that Andrew Neil is, more often than not, and I have to respect him for that. I may not like his politics, but I like his style.
On the Internet.