Sunday 12 May 2019


The previous post featured my transcript of part of Andrew Marr's interview with Nigel Farage, but the programme itself has now posted its own transcript of the full interview - a service they perform every week.

I know, in the scheme of things, that it's a minor point, but the AM transcripts all take the same form (naturally), so you'll see, say, the Damian Hinds interview this morning written up like this:

The Jonathan Ashworth interview is, similarly, written up like this:

The Nigel Farage transcript is different isn't just different to these, it's different to any I've read before (and I've read huge numbers of them). See if you can spot the difference:

Yes, 'AM' interviewed 'DH' and 'JA', but when it came to Nigel Farage 'AM' is interviewing 'F' rather than 'NF'.. 

As I say, I've never seen an interviewee simply reduced to the initial of the surname before in these transcripts. It's as if for them Damien Hinds and Jonathan Ashworth deserve to be thought of as 'Damien Hinds' and 'Jonathan Ashworth' but Nigel Farage is just 'Farage'.

If it's deliberate, then it's very passive-aggressive behaviour from the AM team member(s) who transcribed it.


  1. Were they concerned that the NF alternative might bring a former party to mind?

    Another thing I noticed... Marr starts off with a joke and an expression of gratitude with the other two but, with Farage, it's a hostile opening question, no pleasantries.

  2. Marr was clearly under orders to "get Farage," as a reprisal for his sparkling performance on QT. No doubt there will be more of this, but probably not from Marr -
    I don't think he'll be in a hurry to get another mauling!

    Incidentally, I don't think Farage has learned only from Trump - I think Peter Lilley' s clash with Evan Davis contributed something.

    1. Yes, there's been a bit of a fightback from the Brexiters, knowing that it's a case of do or die. I want to see some more aggressive responses - mentioning Marr's hard left past for instance. Say to him: "These questions aren't surprising coming from a man of the hard left who was once a Maoist, a supporter of a man who killed 20 million people."


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.