yes, madam, you in the pink
Late Thursday evenings have always been sacrosanct as I’m usually on a promise, a promise of fine ‘cut & thrust’ political debate via the Beeb’s Question Time. Who can forget the infamous ‘lynch mob’ edition featuring the odious Nick Griffin, the intentionally provocative pro-Palestinian supporter George Galloway during filming in Finchley and the clash of left-wing firebrand, Russell Brand with right-wing rabble rouser, Nigel Farage. And what about the disgraced Jeffrey Archer being accused by historian David Starkey, in a heated confrontation over the age of homosexual consent, that “Englishmen like you enjoy sitting on the fence so much because you enjoy the sensation.” Priceless.
However, is our weekly dose of politick now in jeopardy? Notwithstanding last week’s entertaining but irrelevant spat between new presenter, Fiona Bruce, and serial mis-speaker, Diane Abbot, there is a serious question to be asked concerning the future, intended direction of the country’s flagship political and current-affairs programme.
The format has noticeably changed over recent years where, as well as active politicians, many more journalists, partisan think-tankers, paid lobbyists, celebrities, satirists and comedians have made their presence felt on the panel. Personally, provided the majority remain ‘serious’ contributors to the debate, I have no major issue with this as I see it as an opportunity to engage with a larger, often younger and increasingly diverse audience. Furthermore, as the population becomes ever-more politicised over the irate, divisive Brexit argument, more opinion is certainly welcomed. It’s also become apparent that the ‘chair’ has been instructed to be a little more ‘chippy’, more verbally antagonistic to the panellists. Again, provided this is challenging and objective as opposed to biased or facetious, I see no problem with it.
However, the chair needs to be on the ball wrt their facts & figures and, on several occasions, Ms Bruce, has already been shown to be lacking or incorrect. Whatever previous host David Dimbleby’s politics may have been, he was resolute in his impartiality, objective to the end and always knowledgeable. Throughout his tenure he was witty, pointed and civil to all participants, to a fault. Robust debate was encouraged but never allowed to descend into a downright slagging-match.
Auntie has no shortage of highly capable political journalists (John Pinar, Mark D’Arcy, Laura Kuenssberg, Nick Robinson, Andrew Marr, Norman Smith et al) that I suspect would have jumped at the chance of stepping into Mr Dimbleby’s size 10s but they plumped for the most lightweight option, both physically and metaphorically. I am quite prepared to give the Antiques Roadshow/Fake or Fortune host the benefit of the doubt re accuracy and the time to come up to speed but the question remains that, in appointing such an individual, are the BBC attempting to dumb-down, infantilise, or God-forbid sex-up, one of their flagship politically and socially informative programmes? If this is their intent both the corporation and the audience will be less for it as, irrespective of her obvious style, Fiona is not worthy of tying the sartorially delightful, inaugural presenter, Robin Day’s signature bow-tie.
