Hand in glove
People have been telling me all week I should have seen this great report from Newsnight, in which a plucky chap with a camera pursues the new Conservative leader discussing the various merits of Smiths albums. In case you didn't see it, .
Comments
Surely the most apt Smiths' song for 'Dave' Cameron would be This Charming Man.
Listening to his speeches I feel the need to put on Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now or Stop Me if You've Heard This One Before - his compassionate conservatism is surely a re-hash of what every Tory leader has been saying since Thatcher.
I'm sure DC is hoping that the most apt Smiths songs don't become "I Know It's Over" or "Bigmouth Strikes Again".
The interesting point in that little expose was seeing Camerons facade drop when he was persued enough. If he can't handle one journalist being friendly what's he going to do when the journo pack smell blood and go for the jugular?
As a film maker I was not impressed with this "effort". The producers went out of their way to try and catch Mr Cameron out and were totally facile. It looked like a bunch of students trying (and failing) to cause humiliation, with no attempt to make a serious product.
I may not be a Conservative, but the only person who came out of it well was Mr Cameron.
I have to say that I only caught the end of this piece and it did rather have the word "stunt" written all over it!
One major problem in provoking reaction or doing set ups is that, as a certain Chris Morris once discovered, the "setupper" can look as idiotic as the "setupee" - or worse!
I can understand that producers and editors are keen to find which buttons to press when it comes to Politicians and Celebs, but it doesn't help the rest of us when it comes to finding out what is going on out there. Okay, so some politicians have tempers - Churchill famously so - but it is words and deeds that matter most in the end. In Churchills time the press understood that. Have we lost that judgement now?
Could the wannabe-Louis Theroux film maker have appeared in the frame any more times? Are you sure this wasn't meant as a spoof?
That's what passes for journalism these days? With his "unprecedented" access, the least the filmmaker could have done was ask questions of relevance. Is there no room for serious journalism anymore? Everyone needn't produce the professionalism and persistence of Paxman, but is it to much to expect a little more than this? Ah, perhaps my expectations are too high. This was little more than a filmmaker choosing to badger Mr. Cameron with questions about pop groups and ipods for six weeks and profess surprise when Mr. Cameron lost his temper. After six weeks of in-depth reporting, we can conclude that Mr. Cameron is a human being who occassionally is irritated by strangers. Fabulous investigative work! Cheers!
'Great report' Nick? Come on. An attempt to undermine Cameron's 'normal guy' credentials, which founders when we discover he's either a world-class bluffer, or (shock!) an honest man with a tolerant streak. Neither of which is a bad outcome for a senior politician. Frankly, I'm just surprised his PR team didn't step in sooner. Cameron 1, Newsnight 0.
I thought it was quite a funny little piece, actually - a sad reflection on the state of politics that high-profile politicians have to turn into homogenous products to appeal to as many people as possible.
Then it goes too far - like the PM appearing on a football show, or William "18 pints a day" Hague's entire time as Shadow Leader.