JA
BBC chief attacks 'why is the b****** lying to me?' interviews
By Adam Sherwin, The Times Media Reporter
THE “why is the ******* lying to me?” school of political interviewing, as practised by Jeremy Paxman and John Humphrys, has outlived its usefulness at the BBC, Michael Grade has said.
Delivering an address on the standing of BBC News after the Hutton report, the Chairman said that the corporation was too defensive over mistakes, too cynical of politicians and confused about the balance between populism and serious news values.
*
The search for truth was a vital BBC News mission, but the rough-house approach to political interviewing, as practised on the Today programme and Newsnight, was not the most effective route.
Mr Grade said: “It means not slipping into the knee-jerk cynicism that dismisses every statement from every politician as, by definition, a lie. Scepticism is a necessary and vital part of the journalist’s toolkit, but when scepticism becomes cynicism it can close off thought and block the search for truth.”
Although Mr Grade did not identify individuals, his comments were widely seen as a riposte to Paxman’s maxim when pitted against a politician: “Why is this lying ******* lying to me?” Mr Paxman declined to comment last night.
Mr Grade delivered the inaugural Hugh Cudlipp Lecture in honour of the renowned Daily Mirror Editor. He acknowledged that the BBC has damaged its reputation as a globally respected news organisation by “dumbing down” bulletins to chase ratings.
“Serious news values are coming under increasing strain,” he said. “The BBC may, indeed, have unwittingly contributed to this by the emphasis on audience accessibility in news in recent years.”
He identified a tension between the “traditional, serious BBC news agenda” and a “perceived pressure on editors to win audiences — with the result that a certain confusion may have taken root about which was the right road to follow”.
Mr Grade recommended Cudlipp’s own maxims as a guide to editors. BBC journalists should focus on “stimulating thought and explaining complicated subjects in language all can understand”.
The BBC had to be more open and admit mistakes. He criticised the corporation for defending Barbara Plett, the Radio 4 correspondent who admitted crying when a frail Yassir Arafat was airlifted from the West Bank. He said: “Its first response was the old one — a public statement that defended the output come what may. That was wrong; it reflected the instincts of the old culture.”
Helen Boaden, the new director of news, was right to apologise on air for a misjudgement.
Another recent error occurred when BBC World journalists were hoaxed by a person claiming to be a spokesman for Dow Chemical, the American company that owns the Union Carbide chemical plant that was the source of a gas leak that caused the deaths of more than 18,000 people in Bhopal, India, “apparently without asking some basic questions”. The “speedy, frank, open” acknowledgement of the mistake was the right response.
Mr Grade, who began his career on Cudlipp’s Daily Mirror in 1960, addressed criticisms that BBC News frequently demonstrated an inherent bias towards “liberal”, pro-European or anti-Israeli views. This was not acceptable and journalists must “neutralise individual bias through a self-critical and dispassionately professional approach”.
Although BBC News is to make 15 per cent cuts, Mr Grade said that the corporation must maintain a full network of foreign bureaux.
He proposed a news agenda “driven by significance, not sensation; by scepticism, not cynicism. The competition is heating up in broadcast news, too. Should the BBC respond by changing its standards or softening its news agenda? Not while I’m Chairman.”
Source Article, timesonline.co.uk
Comments....
By Adam Sherwin, The Times Media Reporter
THE “why is the ******* lying to me?” school of political interviewing, as practised by Jeremy Paxman and John Humphrys, has outlived its usefulness at the BBC, Michael Grade has said.
Delivering an address on the standing of BBC News after the Hutton report, the Chairman said that the corporation was too defensive over mistakes, too cynical of politicians and confused about the balance between populism and serious news values.
*
The search for truth was a vital BBC News mission, but the rough-house approach to political interviewing, as practised on the Today programme and Newsnight, was not the most effective route.
Mr Grade said: “It means not slipping into the knee-jerk cynicism that dismisses every statement from every politician as, by definition, a lie. Scepticism is a necessary and vital part of the journalist’s toolkit, but when scepticism becomes cynicism it can close off thought and block the search for truth.”
Although Mr Grade did not identify individuals, his comments were widely seen as a riposte to Paxman’s maxim when pitted against a politician: “Why is this lying ******* lying to me?” Mr Paxman declined to comment last night.
Mr Grade delivered the inaugural Hugh Cudlipp Lecture in honour of the renowned Daily Mirror Editor. He acknowledged that the BBC has damaged its reputation as a globally respected news organisation by “dumbing down” bulletins to chase ratings.
“Serious news values are coming under increasing strain,” he said. “The BBC may, indeed, have unwittingly contributed to this by the emphasis on audience accessibility in news in recent years.”
He identified a tension between the “traditional, serious BBC news agenda” and a “perceived pressure on editors to win audiences — with the result that a certain confusion may have taken root about which was the right road to follow”.
Mr Grade recommended Cudlipp’s own maxims as a guide to editors. BBC journalists should focus on “stimulating thought and explaining complicated subjects in language all can understand”.
The BBC had to be more open and admit mistakes. He criticised the corporation for defending Barbara Plett, the Radio 4 correspondent who admitted crying when a frail Yassir Arafat was airlifted from the West Bank. He said: “Its first response was the old one — a public statement that defended the output come what may. That was wrong; it reflected the instincts of the old culture.”
Helen Boaden, the new director of news, was right to apologise on air for a misjudgement.
Another recent error occurred when BBC World journalists were hoaxed by a person claiming to be a spokesman for Dow Chemical, the American company that owns the Union Carbide chemical plant that was the source of a gas leak that caused the deaths of more than 18,000 people in Bhopal, India, “apparently without asking some basic questions”. The “speedy, frank, open” acknowledgement of the mistake was the right response.
Mr Grade, who began his career on Cudlipp’s Daily Mirror in 1960, addressed criticisms that BBC News frequently demonstrated an inherent bias towards “liberal”, pro-European or anti-Israeli views. This was not acceptable and journalists must “neutralise individual bias through a self-critical and dispassionately professional approach”.
Although BBC News is to make 15 per cent cuts, Mr Grade said that the corporation must maintain a full network of foreign bureaux.
He proposed a news agenda “driven by significance, not sensation; by scepticism, not cynicism. The competition is heating up in broadcast news, too. Should the BBC respond by changing its standards or softening its news agenda? Not while I’m Chairman.”
Source Article, timesonline.co.uk
Comments....