Public inquisitors on current affairs broadcasting programs are meant to represent the public interest and engage politicians, but they may instead prioritize their own brand and celebrity status. While intended to facilitate transparency, confrontational styles could provide entertainment over meaningful discussion. Further, public inquisitors may misrepresent complex issues and not genuinely reflect public views and values. There are questions around whether they ultimately serve the public or themselves.

1. CURRENT AFFAIRS BROADCASTING:
WHO SPEAKS FOR ‘US’?
Mac201
Robert.jewitt@sunderland.ac.uk
1

2. OVERVIEW
Intro: recap
Crisis of public communication
Celebrity and the public inquisitor
Personality journalism
Jeremy Paxman
2

3. ‘CHAT SHOW CHARLIE’
Charles Kennedy
1999 Liberal Democrat leadership elections
3

4. ‘CRISIS’
Charles Kennedy interview (2002)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2136338.stm
Tabloidisation
Dumbing down
Sound bite culture
4

5. THE ‘CRISIS OF PUBLIC
COMMUNICATION’
Blumler and Gurevitch (1995: 203)
The media provide an „impoverished‟ means of
serving up issues that matter to the public
Current ways of engaging the public with
important issues actually resulted in them
knowing less about the issue at stake
5

6. THE ‘CRISIS OF PUBLIC
COMMUNICATION’
Political elites accused of internalising a media-inspired
desire to be both entertaining and appealing the public
(See Postman, 1987; Franklin, 2004)
6

7. THE ‘CRISIS OF PUBLIC
COMMUNICATION’
Political elites accused of internalising a media-inspired
desire to be both entertaining and appealing the public
(See Postman, 1987; Franklin, 2004)
7

8. THE ‘CRISIS OF PUBLIC
COMMUNICATION’
Gordon’s fake smile
8

9. THE ‘CRISIS OF PUBLIC
COMMUNICATION’
Political elites accused of internalising a media-inspired
desire to be both entertaining and appealing the public
(See Postman, 1987; Franklin, 2004)
OR
Modifying political discourse so it meets the needs of the
media might be beneficial as it might bring much needed
clarity when dealing with complex political issues and
engage the public more widely
(Norris 2000; Jones 2005; Temple 2008).
9

10. CELEBRITY AND THE
PUBLIC INQUISITOR
„Celebrity culture‟ as negative?
Concerns since the 1950s
The construction and maintenance of a celebrity image is
central to the marketing of contemporary politicians (P. D.
Marshall, 1997)
David Cameron – PR specialist
Head of Communications at
Carlton TV
10

11. CELEBRITY
JOURNALISTS
Brian McNair (2000: 96): „star‟ interviewers entrusted with
high profile events
11

12. CELEBRITY
JOURNALISTS
They inquire on behalf of the public
Empowered by their civil responsibility to engage their
quarry in an interrogative mode
The public prefers this over „gentle probing‟ (see Ross, 2004)
12

13. PUBLIC INQUISITOR
Higgins (2010: 96) – 1968 Life magazine
David Frost
Sir Robin Day
Ed Murrow
13

14. PERSONALITY
JOURNALISM
The public inquisitor is thought to represent a particularly
malign form of personality journalism (at least by politicians!)
“the whole thing has been taken to a quite different level by the
hostile, bantering, sneering, cynical performing celebrity
interviewers” (Kenneth Clark, above, cited in Cockerell 2003)
“Newszak” (Franklin, 1997: 13)
14

15. PERSONALITY
JOURNALISM
Jeremy Paxman vs Michael Howard (former Home Secretary)
13th May 1997
15

16. PERSONALITY
JOURNALISM
Hostility = trouble
2005: BBC was forced to defend Paxman and
Humphreys in front of House of Lords Select
Committee
Politicians complained they were „not given
sufficient respect and are often disparaged‟
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/435329
9.stm
16

17. THE ROLE
Complex rhetorical strategy
Frequently they ask questions to which they already know
the answer so as to further incriminate the respondent at a
latter stage
inquisitor Vs. interviewee
viewers
17

18. THE ROLE
Shift their „footing‟ (Clayman, 1992, 2002):
- institutional media representative
- concerned citizen
- oppositional party‟s position
18

19. JEREMY PAXMAN
Long career at the BBC (since 1977)
Born in Leeds
Currently lives in affluent Oxfordshire and
Earns in excess of £1 million per year from the BBC alone.
One of his sisters is a producer for BBC Radio
One of his brothers is the British Ambassador to Spain
Privately educated at Malvern College
Read English at St Catherine‟s, Cambridge (Masters degree)
BBC series Who Do You Think You Are revealed he was
descended from 14th C politician Roger Packsman.
Presents University Challenge
Regular on BBC Radio 4
Published widely
19

20. PAXMAN’S PERSONA
Higgens (2010: 100) claims what is significant is that „the
form of engagement and mediated persona developed in
political programming is the very one that is used in
University Challenge‟
The „public face‟ of „brand-Paxman‟ = highbrow intellectual
Authenticity is crucial to his success and to undermine this
„front‟ is to damage the „brand‟
20

21. JEREMY PAXMAN
A man of the people or a man for the people?
4:40
21

22. PAXMAN’S PERSONA…
… Is to the disadvantage of any politician seeking to
dissemble, conceal, or tell outright lies
… Designed to make politicians or the powerful
uncomfortable
22

23. CRITIQUE
Too much emphasis on a confrontational mode of
engagement, and provides more a competition of wit
and obstinacy than a search for political meaning and
consistency (Barnett and Gaber 2001: 144)
Jon Snow has suggested that there is an undue
emphasis placed upon “cynicism” over “rigour”
(quoted in Thorpe 2005).
23

24. CRITIQUE
Whom does Paxman really serves in his interrogative role:
the public or himself?
24

25. SUMMARY
How appropriate are public inquisitors for facilitating the
public‟s right to know?
Do they function as a proxy and is this an ideal when they may
be compromised by the requirement to build their own „brand‟
Have they descended into shock tactics to solicit results from
their guests – our elected representatives?
Do they represent the interest of the public, or some notional
„public opinion‟ – a tool they frequently employ or brandish as
justification for their trade?
25

26. REFERENCES
Barnett, S. and I. Gaber. 2001. Westminster Tales: The Twenty-First- Century Crisis in Political Journalism. London: Continuum.
Blumler, J.G. and M. Gurevitch. 1995. The Crisis of Public Communication. London: Routledge.
Clayman, S.E. 1992. “Footing in the Achievement of Neutrality: the Case of News-Interview Discourse.” In P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds)
Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 163–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clayman, S.E. 2002. “Tribune of the People: Maintaining the Legitimacy of Aggressive Journalism.” Media, Culture & Society 24: 197–
216.
Cockerell, M. 2003. “Who is to blame for making us sick of politics?” The Guardian, February 4. Available online at
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,888415,00.html.
Franklin, B. 2004. Packaging Politics: Political Communications in Britain’s Media Democracy, 2nd edition, London: Arnold.
Gnisci, A. and M. Bonaiuto. 2003. “Grilling Politicians: Politicians‟ Answers to Questions in Television Interviews and Courtroom
Examinations.” Journal of Language & Social Psychology 22: 385–413.
Habermas, J. 1992. “Further Reflections on the Public Sphere.” In C. Calhoun (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere, pp. 421–61.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jones, J.P. 2005. Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture. Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield.
Louw, E. 2005. The Media and Political Process. London, Sage.
Marshall, P.D. 2005. “Intimately Intertwined in the Most Public Way: Celebrity and Journalism.” In S. Allan (ed.) Journalism: Critical
Issues, pp. 19–29. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
McNair, B. 2000. Journalism and Democracy: An Evaluation of the Political Public Sphere. Routledge: London.
Montgomery, M. 2007. The Discourse of Broadcast News. Abingdon: Routledge.
Norris, P. 2000. A Virtuous Cycle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Postman, N. 1987. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. London: Methuen
Ross, K. 2004. “Political Talk Radio and Democratic Participation: Caller Perspectives on Election Call.” Media, Culture & Society 26:
785–801.
Schudson, M. 1995. The Power of News. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Street, J. 2004. “Celebrity Politicians: Popular Culture and Political Representation.” British Journal of Politics & International Relations
6: 435–52.
Temple, M. 2008. The British Press. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Thorpe, V. 2005. “Snow wants Paxman to show respect.” The Observer, April 17, p. 12.
26