The abuse of television
Sir: I'm surprised that George Gale (2 May) should show concern over the political affiliations of TV political interviewers. While the majority of this small band are politically committed (not all to the left), their views are well known to the politicians they in- terview.
I would challenge the suggestion that they interviewers find it impossible to keep the flavour of their political opinions out of pro- grammes. Only recently we had on This Week, Paul Foot (from the left) giving the Pm a tough going-over and Charles Douglas- Home (from the right) pulling no punches with Ted Heath.
Over the past few years, I've undertaken thirty or, so Tv interviews with politicians including the PM and other party leaders. It was known that I had previously stood as a Liberal candidate and later joined the Labour party, yet at no time was it ever sug- gested that my interviews showed any political bias.
If Mr Gale's premise is correct, then why do these politicians continue to be in- terviewed by people who are politically in opposite camps? The answer might lie in the fact that the really important people in Tv are the programmers and producers. Political interviewers are of little importance and of less influence (a fact which probably explains why most of them have other main jobs and interests outside Tv).
The great confrontations are really non- events. The politicians are only willing to face the TV interviewers when it suits them (quite rightly) and always insist that the area for discussion is agreed in advance. When the confrontation takes place, it normally takes the format of three interviewers facing one politician for about thirty minutes, thus making it almost impossible for the in- terviewing team to put the interviewee under any real pressure. It is true that James Mossman on a Panorama programme and Paul Foot recently on This Week did have the PM in difficulty, but before they could press home their attack, a new topic was in- troduced and the PM escaped virtually unscathed.
All this leads one irresistibly to the con- clusion that Tv interviewers are a group of political eunuchs lingering at the periphery of power.
Previous page
