Another extended press release disguised as a speech - and does it matter?

Hardly ten days on from seeing David Cameron reading an extended press release on Europe as if it were 'a speech' to an audience (HERE) and we have Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne. doing much the same thing at the offices of JP Morgan in Bournemouth earlier today.

As with the PM's speech, the absence of any coughing, sneezing or applause left me wondering whether there was an audience there at all and whether this is yet another example of a politician reading out a long-winded press release as if it were a speech.

So what?
My blog on this after Cameron's Europe speech prompted an interesting comment on Twitter from speechwriter Sam Coates (@SamuelCoates):

"re: Cameron speech lacking non-media audience, are you in danger of being too purist? Better a speech than press conf/release?"

To which I admitted that perhaps I was being rather too purist and asked "but are you conceding that it was a press release?"

"No" he tweeted "a well-articulated speech seen live by many not in the room. But admittedly not one that had to worry about claptraps etc!"

Speeches as press releases - and does it matter?
From this, it seems that Mr Coates is rather more relaxed about this trend than I am - which gets me wondering whether my unease about politicians reading out what are, in effect, extended press releases to non-partisan audiences is a further reflection of my advanced years (and the relative youthfulness of Mr Coates).

As I asked in my last blog on the subject, "are we going to have to put up with more and more such non-speeches as the stock-in-trade of contemporary political communication?" - to which I'd add "does it matter?"

I'd be glad to hear what others think...

Is a lecture by Bill Gates (or anyone else) good television?

I don't often repeat blogs verbatim, but watching Bill Gates giving this year's Richard Dimbleby Lecture (HERE) reminded me of a question I asked two years ago that still baffles me and is still awaiting an answer, namely: 

Why does the BBC commemorate Richard Dimbleby with a televised lecture?

My thoughts from two years ago remain pretty much unchanged:

'Last night's Richard Dimbleby Lecture on BBC 1 was delivered by Michael Morpurgo, the latest in a long and distinguished line of famous people to have done so every year (except four) since 1972 (full list HERE).

'But what baffles me about this annual event is how and why the BBC ever decided that the most suitable memorial to a celebrated broadcaster would be something as ill-suited to television as a lecture.

'Wouldn't an annual Dimbleby Documentary, Dimbleby Debate or Dimbleby Interview have been a more fitting way to remember a current affairs journalist? After all, these were not only the kinds of things he was best known for, but would have come across better on television than celebrities, many of whom have little or no experience of lecturing, standing behind a lectern and talking for rather a long time.

'Given the BBC's increasing reluctance to show even very short extracts from political speeches in their news programmes (on which there's more discussion and links HERE and HERE), it strikes me as rather odd that the Dimbleby lecture has been allowed to carry on in its original format.

'So far, I've been unable to find out anything about why the BBC (or who) decided in the first place that a lecture would be the best way to commemorate his life - and would be interested to hear from anyone who knows something about its history.'

Cameron on Europe: a press release thinly disguised as a speech

Finding out when and where David Cameron's much-trailed speech on Europe was taking place today posed at least as much of a challenge as working out what the point of it all was.

What I eventually discovered was that that both the when and the where of the speech were quite unusual - unless it's suddenly become fashionable for our politicians to deliver major speeches at 8.00 a.m. in the morning on the off chance that the American news agency in central London (where the speech was being given) would be able to drum up an audience at a moment's notice to listen to it - or, to be more precise, to prepare reports on what he said for the rest of the day's news programmes.

Who was there?
From the above, there's very little evidence that anyone was there at all: no coughing or sneezing and not so much as a hint of applause at the end of the speech.

Yet there were, of course plenty of people there, not supporters who might have cheered or clapped, but representatives of the media busily writing notes on what he was saying - while he was saying it (which keen 'listeners' could follow live, as the words came out of his mouth, on the BBC website HERE).

Speech or press release?
So does this really count as a political 'speech' delivered by a leading politician, or was it merely a case of a leading politician taking the trouble to read out a press release - on the grounds that no one would  take any notice of it unless it were disguised, however thinly, as 'a speech'?

And are we going to have to put up with more and more such non-speeches as the stock-in-trade of contemporary political communication?