³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Sad to see that sexist drivel still gets an airing at all, let alone being dignified by writing a whole blog about it.

I want reporters and newsreaders appointed on merit alone, I don't care which bathroom they use or what they look like, although I do appreciate the ability to speak clearly, as well as some level of understanding of the matters they are reading off of the teleprompter.

I don't listen to Today very often because I don't like the aggressive interviewing, the trivia and the programme's self-importance. However, in fairness, the presenters are way ahead of most of those on ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Television. I couldn't imagine most of the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ News channel presenters being able to present Today, whether male or female.
I suspect that, yet again, this is a media issue and the media are in a great flutter over it but nobody else could care less.

the best presenter of course is John Humphreys. He is not confrontational, just questioning. Trying to get a slippery politican to answer a question, never mind tell the truth, is next to impossible and I admire his determined efforts to get answers to his insightful questions. I can't say the same for the others though, male or female. I won't name names but one particular individual is devoted to asking question within question like some kind of verbal russian doll. The two seconds or so left to the guest is not enough to answer one of these multiple questions.

Ceri,

I hope that your experience with a live interview will be reflected in ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ output but instead I expect that all manner of importance will continue to be read into every impromptu soundbite from politicians etc.

This is exactly why politicans are so cautious in their responses; they are expected to get everything right in their answers first time.

PS Megan #1 Did you read this blog? It's purpose is to show that there was no sexist intent and that the media response was unjustified.

Ceri

Stop digging.........!

A dose of your own medicine Ceri? John Humphrys leaps at any opportunity to ridicule political guests by miscontextualising the point they are trying to make. Is this the elite of news broadcasting which females should aspire too? I hope not. I've taken to sharing my drive to work with Chris Evans and Moira.

#3. At 12:06pm on 06 Apr 2010, exlabour wrote:

"the best presenter of course is John Humphreys. He is not confrontational, just questioning."

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion but as someone who has been listening to "Today" since the late 1970s I must say that only JH can make me turn off - he might not go out of his way to be 'confrontational' but he sure does come over as being rude (sometimes, gratuitously so...), and unfortunately such is his broadcast persona many up and coming broadcasters are copying his style.

As I said in the blog about Feedback (on the Radio Four blog), I'm not suggesting that total deference should be brought back but respect costs nothing, at times I simple do not think that the "Today" programme shows such respect, at times the "Today" programme and certain of it's it's presenters seems to consider that that they are bigger than the story they are reporting...

"Trying to get a slippery politican to answer a question, never mind tell the truth, is next to impossible and I admire his determined efforts to get answers to his insightful questions."

But is it for the broadcaster to point out such things, surely the audience should be allowed to make up it's own mind, and if they can't make up their own mind then surely the broadcaster should not be telling the audience what to think, that lies accusations of bias - presenting current affairs is not the same as presenting a documentary, especially were politics (and elections) are concerned.

Bring back Jack de Manio, his legendary inability to get the time right, or event the hour right was just what one needs!!! (And what about the dog that said 'sausages'.)

In all honesty I can't tell any of the male presenters apart, but I an quite happy that someone else gets up at what ever ungodly hour to bring me some (mostly) informative talking in the morning. Do not have any music please.

Anybody who is fool enough to get up so early so regularly must be daft be they a man or a woman. We (through the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ) con them into believing that it is a career stepping stone and they they do it till they retire!

I actually don't see the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ's Today interviewing style as overly aggressive - I am sure we are all a lot nastier to the idiots we come into contact with every day. Pomposity and arrogance need puncturing regularly and forcefully. So many of the 'experts' (be they politicians or others) quite often mask a massive personal ignorance of the issues they discuss - this is often so bad that they don't even know that they don't know what they are talking about!

Has it been forgotten that one of the worst performances ever by Maggie Thatcher was her being interviewed By Kirsty Wark for ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Scotland and having her credibility in Scotland utterly destroyed by Kirsty's carefull and incisive questioning until she got the answers. I doubt if any male interviewer could ever have got so sucessfully under the skin of the Iron Lady. So do not assume that their is only one way to question a politician.

Whenever ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Radio presenters, editor of reporters become the story something has gone wrong.
Often this happens alongside a desperate striving for equality of representation or, worse, 'balance' of views. This is usually compounded when there is inevitable bias (right-wing as it happens), for example in the cases of Caroline Quinn, Eddie Mair (voted the 5th most powerful person on radio in 2005) and Nick Robinson According to Wikipedia Robinson was president of he Oxford University Conservative Association and in 1986, he spent a year as national chairman of the Young Conservatives. Leopards don't change their spots. But this is small potatoes.
More generally, the worst offence on R4 is the regular sneering and derogatory presentation of politics and politicians generally (which is coming from Caroline on the PM programme at 17.40 as I write) and which has done more to turn people against genuine political discussion and understanding of political issues than any amount of MP's allowance.
The next thing to watch out for is off-the wall items from barmy professors of political science in our blessed universities. UK elections are seedbed of crazy theorisation from far-flung Strathclyde, Oxford, Cardiff and Ulster who have a brief pre-election window to peddle their nonsensical views, among other things, about the future of the Labour, Conservative, Liberal, BNP, UKIP, the electoral system, political representation and what will happen if, or if not there is a hung parliament, is it the end for Brown, Cameron, Clegg, and how much we all love the ageing foot-tapper Vince Cable (or do we -in 1979 he was rejected (along with Ken Livingstone) as Labour parliamentary candidate for Hampstead and took his bat and ball away to play with barmy David Owen and the Social Democrats.

What is more shocking is that some people actually believe this is important ? To illustrate the point what about people from a Chinese background or red heads etc, where are they represented ?

The media should actually focus on the serious issues. it doesnt matter whether its a man, woman, or even a child that delivers it. Whats important is the message.

If women need to better represent, then form lobby group or become an MP. Being a presenter doesnt help form opinion, it should only convey it.

Yet another example of feminazi oppression. What a mess they have made of everything.

I don't believe that Ceri Thomas is a misogynist and can see why this story has developed. Just a shame that others interviewed by the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ (and other parts of the media) aren't given the same right of reply when soundbites are taken out of context and used to turn a weak story into a sensation.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Did anybody see Joanna Gosling's interview with Nick Griffin yesterday?
She was lovely. And charming. And only asked one difficult question and didn't push when Griffin dodged it. Griffin still managed to look and sound like a street-corner spiv (which is yet another reason to keep the BNP in front of the cameras), but if she had been interviewing a pro. she would have been toast.
It was a pleasure to watch though.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Trevor Habeshaw is completely correct in his appraisal of Radio 4's political journalism, exemplified by Eddie Mair's petulant interview with Ed Milliband yesterday. It's a game for the presenter and we live with the consequences. Those of us who work, live and struggle in the real economy, employing people who make things and contributing to the wealth of the nation are victim to the hyperbole of Robert Peston. The vested interest for the next generation of journalists is a change in power and all the effort of Mr Robinson et al. is to have an inside root and so the bias is against the government, good or bad. A group of prima donnas, high on publicly-funded over-inflated salaries and expenses; if there's one group of people who represent me less than those elected to Westminster, it is the unelected fat cats at the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ.

Good luck is all I can say! It's tough for women in the media - sure, I'm a female journalist, I should know - but I think the unnecessary misogyny labels being bandied about are out of line.

Hang in there Ceri!

Oli ()

Re: Boilerplated at 7:

But is it for the broadcaster to point out such things, surely the audience should be allowed to make up it's own mind

Isn't the point rather that in order for the audience to make up their own minds based on a politician's answers to questions, someone must first get the answers?

If a politician simply refuses to give their view on something, how is anyone to decide whether or not they agree with them?

25. At 6:50pm on 07 Apr 2010, _Ewan_ wrote:

[in reply to Boilerplated at 7:]

"Isn't the point rather that in order for the audience to make up their own minds based on a politician's answers to questions, someone must first get the answers?"

They can do that by asking questions... Their job is not to offer, or indeed imply, answers and then badger the interviewee until they have agreement!

"If a politician simply refuses to give their view on something, how is anyone to decide whether or not they agree with them?"

Then that, in it's self, is an answer, and one most people would pick up on - and isn't it a failure of the media if they prefer to offer (what they consider) answers rather than the information that would allow the viewer, listener or reader to make up their own minds, do we really need/want to be told how to think by the media ...

To be honest from what I've seen the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ is quite lagging behind other countries abroad in terms of representation of women in media. I'm based in South Africa and particularly over the last few years, SA has made dramatic improvements in gender equality - particularly in the media sector (of course, in other areas political agendas on gender issues such as those involving have probably set South Africa back a few decades in terms of the cause).

Regardless though, I think branding Ceri a misogynist is completely uncalled for. And quite rightly said, I seriously doubt Boaden would have made the appointment had she even considered the possibility! Dobs (#13) I think has hit the nail on the head: It's a pity that others interviewed by the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ aren't given the same right of reply when soundbites are taken out of context and used to turn a weak story into a sensation - this is exactly what has happened here.

The media has an existing establishment in which women are grossly under-represented and they only promote from this existing establishment, so catch-22. Why can't the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ look outside its ranks and bring in fresh talent? Are there really, in the whole population, no well-educated women who can think quickly, speak clearly and interview incisively? Sexism is perpetuated simply by doing what we've always done.

Really I think the reason why women aren't good as presenters is because they can say reckless things at times. I have never seen a confident and proud female presenter. they waffle very often but they have to talk about something they have a good understanding of. I think someone like Gary Lineker is good because he has a good view as his job is reviewing the sport which was once his career. the man knows what he's talking about. Same with Jake Humprephy on F1. He may not have been a pro driver but it is certainly obvious he was an eager fan at a young age. He is always checking up on his facts, doing research and while he's on air it becomes obvious he enjoys his job. It's not exactly the same with women.

I am a bit of a poet, hopefully getting published, and would like an
opinion on this. Thankyou
GREASY POLITICIANS.
The World of the smoothing ,
moving Train,
passengers
insitu
Reading, Chatting , Chewing.
Their views ever changing.
Political Trains ,
setting forth their agenda
on the net,th airways , the box,
And in the papers.
Scenery changing, never static, upwardly mobile,
Election pending , careers on hold, to be made, at an end.
As the voting nears,
the electioneerings smoothing moving train nears its conclusion.
The election to be won, lost for what I ponder?,
with the slurring shannanigans of all, to be haerd in full glory.
Raucus Voices arguing on the trivial, the medium , the major ,
Points of their policies, policies never truly vague, never truly to be understood; as long as it's their partyline, They don't care in this landed Democracy,where politics is a career. where politics is life and death,
where a life in Politics enables you to put your snoutinto the gravy train, Whilst the average don't get a look in.
I wrote this when all the moneyscandal etc began.
Not one for political poetry but lately have started to toy with it.
What do you think.ps not aimed at anyone party.

Would like to say , where are the female political poets,(may be I'm one)
Men do tend to get all the juiciest fun at elections why.

The media has an existing establishment in which women are grossly under-represented and they only promote from this existing establishment, so catch-22.
----------
Not at all. The answer is simple, more women will get into the media as time goes on. Eventually they will filter tot the top if they are good enough, a woman starting out now has every bit the same chance as a man.

I used to listen to Today from 6am-9am until the strident Sarah Montague joined in, not employing robust questioning but self-righteous and accusing. Love it when she's 'partnered' with the dithering, creepy Evan Davis - he of the sloppy speech.... then I switch off and have three extra hours in the day. The others are brilliant and unmissable..

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

Ceri:

I am placing this on the record that I have never listen to *Today* on ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Radio, but, I think that women should have fair right to be presenters on the programme....

(D)

Dear editor,
Whatever your said here can be readable and some time passing discussions can be done.
Why some are bringing gender bias towards news editors, news reporters and TV coverage strategist and so on.
we are all humans, i expect a very good presentations,good voice,moderate dressing and quick articulate knowledge and pulse of the viewers.
Now a days, in many fields, women are coming nearer to men and they are in challenging positions.
Of course,too many women reporters,news anchors also poses some problems in work fields and at their home fronts.

Is misogonisy another name for FOOL.

Half the brains are female! Lets have more women on TV, Radio etc.. I want the best brain not the prettiest face, what are the FOOLS who run the media doing?

Get a grip for heavens sake, we are in the 21st not the 19th century. Leave you prejudices behind in the boys toilets, there is no room for it in the real world.