Page 108 - An Introduction to Political Communication Third Edition

THE MEDIA AS POLITICAL ACTORS

such as Nicholas Witchell and Trevor McDonald, once rightly
perceived as rather meek when confronted by a senior politician,
now routinely engage in quite aggressive questioning. Interviewing
styles which used to be reserved for left-wing anti-heroes like Arthur
Scargill and Ken Livingstone are now directed towards government
ministers, senior opposition figures and other respected members of
the political establishment.
That peak-time presenters with mass audiences should pursue
such a confrontational relationship with political actors is not to be
confused with ‘subjective bias’ (although many politicians who are
victims of the style may prefer to think otherwise). Rather, it is an
extension and development of the media’s ‘watchdog’ role. One
might also view it as a conscious effort more effectively to represent
‘the people’ who watch these bulletins in their millions, against the
political elite.
The less-popular broadcast news slots (Radio 4’s Today, BBC2’s
Newsnight, Channel 4 News) have also developed the art of
confrontation, partly because it makes for good viewing and
listening but also in recognition of the fact that not to confront a
politician, not to play the role of ‘devil’s advocate’, is now perceived
as deferential and old-fashioned. The late Brian Redhead on Radio
4, Jon Snow and Zeinab Bidawi on Channel 4 and most famously
of all in this respect, BBC2 Newsnight presenter Jeremy Paxman,
have all adopted this approach to the politicians who agree to
enter their studios. Jeremy Paxman’s style itself became satirised,
alongside the political caricatures, in Spitting Image. Paxman’s
approach is one of permanent, knowing scepticism towards all that
a politician says, an attitude which is communicated both to the
audience and the interviewee in a variety of facial and linguistic
gestures. While he and the other presenters who adopt a similar
approach are unable to say out loud what they think of the
responses received to their questions, audiences are hardly likely to
miss the sarcasm and contempt which frequently emerges from
the phrasing of a question or the tone of a voice. We may view
these presenters, returning to Nimmo and Combs’s categorisation,
as ‘bardic’ pundits, not only in their advocacy of the popular against
the elite, but in the dry humour which often accompanies the
interview.
In broadcast news programmes the political interview is one
element in a mix of reportage, commentary and analyses. Some
journalists, however, have elevated it to the status of a programme
genre in itself. Robin Day’s election interviews with party leaders,

87