Friday 7 May 2010

What a farce(1)



Flicking between channels last night as events unfolded, it quickly became apparent that the way major news networks covered the election was little short of puerile. On a night of very unusual swings and an exit poll that became more credible as the evening developed, we were treated to ‘toys for the boys’ graphics and a reliance on celebrity and wild speculation. Detailed analysis and facts and figures were in very short supply, even when the results started to pour in. Andrew Neil, a most capable political questioner, stuck on a boat on the Thames making inane conversation with B-list celebrities, epitomised the misplaced priorities. Jeremy Paxman in his Rottweiler role when there was little to Rottweil about.  Too many glitches and too many shots from helicopters of people in cars – Why?

Where were the facts and figures? Why were there so few voting figures from the last election compared to this? Why did ITV establish a result lead early in the evening? Why did these programmes treat us like imbeciles?

1 comment:

  1. Totally agree. The Beeb were more interested in the graphics than in sensible analysis and the others didn't seem to have the resource. Radio5Live was much better (rushing etween TVs 40 miles apart!!)

    ReplyDelete