Prime-time television news reading: double act or solo performance?

When it come to watching news programmes that compete directly with each other, like the BBC and ITN bulletins at 10 o'clock on weekday nights, I've long thought that ITN's deloyment of two news readers works better than the BBC's preference for leaving the whole thing in the hands of a solo performer - for two main reasons:

1. It dilutes any dislike of a particular performer
If you're not too impressed by the BBC's Huw Edwards, it's tough luck: like him or hate him, that's who'll be reading the news for the next 25 minutes - so your only available escape is to switch over to ITN, where the likelihood of two news readers both turning you off is obviously considerably less than when there's only one of them.

You might be a fan of Julie Etchingham but not particularly like Mark Austin (or vice versa). But at least you know that, for about 50% of the time, you'll get relief from whichever one of them you don't particularly like.

2. It helps to keeps viewers on track
People don't watch news programmes so closely that they always know when one story has ended and another one has started. Nor is every story of equal interest to all of us.

When there are two readers taking it in turns to deliver different news items, you can tell at a glance when something new is coming up. If your concentration has lapsed, the other face and/or voice alerts you to become more attentive again, if only to check on whether the next story sounds any more interesting than the last one.

'The art of oratory is fast on the way out': at last, some support from a top journalist

At last, a top political journalist, Steve Richards (@steverichards14), has come out with an article in today's Independent making a point that I've been writing and blogging about for years.

As no one in the media or politics has taken much notice of the argument so far, I was delighted to see it coming from so distinguished a source - and very much hope that it might mark the beginning of a concerted reaction against the depressing way in which politics has become more and more mediated by journalists and editors.

Under the headline In the age of Twitter, the art of oratory is fast on the way out - The interview on the 'Today' programme matters more than giving a speech. Politicians thrive by being dull and cautious, he starts off by saying:

'In the UK an important political art is no longer practised, even though the skill brings politics to life in an era of determined apathy. The demise is neither mourned nor noticed and yet the absence makes for duller politics – politics at a distance. We make do with a cabinet minister's parking ticket and the alleged redistribution of penalty points to make up for the lack of excitement.

'This is the first generation of national politicians without a single orator, a single mesmerising speaker. There is not one who can cast a spell. Tony Blair was the last great speaker, an underestimated orator who never delivered a dull speech. Blair could make a lacklustre text and sometimes a silly one come to inspiring life. Even when making a complex argument, he was worth seeing live, transfixing an audience.

'The decline is sudden and marked. Not so long ago Michael Foot, Tony Benn, Michael Heseltine, and Neil Kinnock could fill halls around the country, and when they spoke in the Commons MPs would leave their offices to attend. Last week's brilliant BBC4 documentary on the rivalry between Harold Wilson and Ted Heath showed how important it was for both of them to find ways of engaging directly with voters. Neither were natural orators, and yet both, especially Wilson, became at least interesting public performers....'

Richards then poses the key question: Does it matter that such characters or characteristics no longer play a part in British politics?

He thinks that it does - which is why I strongly recommend you to read the whole of his article.

And so do I - for reasons outlined in some of the posts below - which is why I've started work on updating my book Our Masters' Voices: the language and body language of politics.

Originally written in 1984, the data, mainly recorded from televised speeches, could not have been collected during any British general election since 1987 for the simple reason that so few excerpts from speeches were ever broadcast on television after that.

So the only (minor) point where I disagree with Steve Richards is that, if by 'The decline is sudden and marked' he means that it's only just happened, it hasn't. The rot actually set in more than a quarter of a century ago. There were already signs of it in title of the paper I gave at the Essex conference after the 1983 general election, namely 'The 1983 elecion and the demise of live oratory' (in Ivor Crewe and Martin Harrop (eds.), Political Communications: the General Election Campaign of 1983, Cambridge University Press, pp. 38-55).

Related posts

Will Blatter's barmy contrast live on to haunt FIFA?



On this blog and in my books, I've written quite a lot about how rhetorical techniques can trigger applause and are likely to be singled out by the media as soundbites for reporting to wider audiences.

One of the most powerful techniques is the contrast, as is exemplified by some of the most famous quotations of all times - ranging from "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him" through "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country" to "You turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning."

Today, from FIFA president Sepp Blatter we heard another (above). We are not in a crisis. We are only in some difficulties may not have triggered any applause, but it was a line that began to circulate on Twitter within seconds of the words coming out of his mouth.

I'll be very surprised if sundry tweets will be the last we hear of it - which is why I'm looking forward to checking out tomorrow's newspapers...


P.S. Shortly after writing this, the lead headline on the BBC website was "Fifa is not in crisis - Blatter", which is the first of what I expect to be a lot of media quotes of part or all of this particular contrast.

P.P.S. Tuesday, 31 May: the line was also picked up by the Daily Mirror, Guardian, Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, Daily Express, The Sun and The Times (if you can get behind the paywall).

Also on Blatter: