Monday, 2 December 2019

Audacity


Guido Fawkes supplies a missing measure for the Andrew Marr-Boris Johnson interview - 43% of the words spoken during 'the interview' were by Andrew Marr himself:

The BBC is finding it tricky to pin down Boris for an Andrew Neil interview, so when the PM agreed to go on Andrew Marr, the veteran broadcaster had to try out his best Paxman impression to make sure the interview rivalled Corbyn’s disastrous Neil grilling. Unfortunately, it just ended in a lot of shouting and the public none the wiser…
Guido’s now had time to crunch the numbers and worked out that of the 6,068 words spoken in the interview, only 3,465 were from Boris; meaning 43% of the 30-minute interview was taken up by Marr’s incomprehensible ranting – including one moment where he felt it necessary to remind viewers a staggering 8 times in just over a minute that the Tories have been in power for 10 years. (Factcheck – the Tories have been in office for 9 years). He even had the audacity to accuse Boris of wasting time chuntering…

7 comments:

  1. Many people will have watched Marr in order to hear what Boris Johnson had to say - whether they are supporters or not. Most will have been disappointed by what they heard (or weren't allowed to hear by Marr), and will hold the BBC to account for denying them the chance to make up their own minds about BJ and the Conservative Party manifesto in the forthcoming election.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There's one person who can beat even that record, at least when she interviews Conservatives. I am referring to Emma Barnett.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It seems that Andrew Marr is not interested in hearing any answers at all really... he just wants to air his left wing own opinions. He doesn't allow people he despises any chance to answer questions in their own way, but just wants yes or no so he can grandstand his own superior views.

    His "Conservatives have been in charge for 10 years" wasn't used on Corbyn with Labour were in charge for 13 years and didn't change things. Corbyn was in Parliament for all those 13 years, while Johnson was out of Parliament from 2008 to 2015.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The BBC have really got their teeth into this “ten years” thing. Jo Coburn repeated it several times today. One would hope that journalists would rebuke politicians for using slogans in place of properly thought out arguments, rather than resorting to the same tactic themselves. But it does at least demonstrate to what extent BBC journalists are actually journalists.

      Delete
    2. Emma Barnett was using it the other day - except for her it was a "decade"...sounds even longer than 10 years, was her thinking I'm guessing...

      Delete
  4. Could anybody have learned anything at all from Marr’s interview - if the term interview is even applicable? This is what the public pay Marr nearly £400,000 a year for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's just another useless job-blocker. There must be more talented interviewers somewhere in the country who would be happy to work for £40,000 (if they write books off the back of their TV exposure, as does Marr, they can easily triple that).

      Delete