Home > Alex Massie

Monday 21 May 2012

New Politics, Same Old Media

Wednesday, 23rd June 2010

When Jeremy Paxman grilled Danny Alexander on Newsnight yesterday he spent most of his time on politics, not economics. Fair enough. That's what the media does and one wouldn't expect it any other way. But it was the type of attack Paxman employed that was both mildly interesting and futile.

This was because Paxman decided to tear into Alexander and attack him for all the things in the budget that weren't in the Liberal Democrat manifesto. Some of them, as Paxo pointed out time and time again, were actively opposed by the Lib Dems. Gotcha! Hypocrites! Why, he sneered, should anyone ever listen to anything you have to say in the future, far less take it seriously?

In as far as it went it was effective. Unfortunately it didn't go very far. But I wonder if this kind of thing interests the public. I suspect - though this is based on a hunch rather than anything else - the public is ahead of the broadcasters and much of the rest of the press. The punters, you see, have twigged that this is not actually a Liberal Democrat ministry and so, actually, they're not surprised that lots of Lib Dem policies (most of which made little impression on the public anyway) have been ditched, postponed or watered down. Instead, I suspect they find this kind of thing - in which Paxo invites Lib Dems to confess their hypocrisy - wearisome.

I may well be mistaken but I suspect many voters have already priced this in to their appraisal of the new government and, frankly, don't mind it very much at all. In the first place it confirms certain base prejudices; more importantly it's what they expect from a coalition government. So far the public seems better placed than the media when it comes to appreciating and accepting the compromises that are an integral part of any such arrangement.

Which also means - if I'm right - they may not mind that most, though certainly not all, of the meat in Osborne's budget was Tory meat. Unlike sections of the press they may not think the Lib Dems' job is to thwart everything the Tories might have done had they won a thumping majority. (Some of it, yes, and to trim it and take some of the rough edges off but most of all, I think, to give the appearance of comity and partnership and delay for a while the moment when people feel they better start hating this government too.)

So, sure, this does mean that the Lib Dems are, in some respects, the government's human shields. But this too is pretty much an inescapable feature of coalition government. It also means that there will come times when Cameron must give ground to Clegg and be seen to help him out too. (Perhaps some rather senior Tories will surprise us with their enthusiasm for the Alternative Vote?)

Perhaps it's asking too much to expect the press to appreciate that the mere existence of a coalition means that, pace Keynes, the facts have changed and so, accordingly, should some of the rules of engagement. When the next election rolls around the government will be judged on its record, not the distance between that record and the aspirations contained in the parties respective manifestos. This too, in my view, strengthens the argument for a joint-ticket in 2015 but this, clearly, is so far distant that it's only marginally useful to contemplate such a thing right now.

Still, that's where we could be headed, even if some parts of the press don't seem yet to have twigged that a coalition means you can't get everything you want. But that's also something that the country seems happy with. For the time being anyway. It suits the national mood.

NOTE: Just to clarify matters: of course splits and tensions within the coalition are a "story", they're just not the only story or always the most interesting one.

Filed under: BBC (87 more articles) , Britain (737 more articles) , ConLib (132 more articles) , Jeremy Paxman (2 more articles) , Lib Dems (101 more articles) , Tories (273 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (12)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Beer Moth

June 23rd, 2010 6:06am Report this comment

Paxman's criticism of the constraints put upon LibDem policy, by their being part of the coalition, are fine in theory; but in practice, we have nowhere else to go.

In practical terms, who would he hold up for his audience, as an example of how the nation should be run?

dearieme

June 23rd, 2010 6:47am Report this comment

I gave up Radio 4 15 years ago because it was full of this sort of twaddle-journalism: lazy, ignorant and often remarkably stupid. I watch silly Paxman only on University Challenge, particularly enjoying his frequent mispronounciations and misapprehensions.

Cuffleyburgers

June 23rd, 2010 8:12am Report this comment

Paxman is basically an idiot.

He has this attack dog reputation which is a substitute for thought, analysis and propoer holding the government to account.

Far more effective in my view is Andrew Neil and even Randall and Boulton.

The sooner the tories restructure the beeb the better (and it will be before the next election).

The public get astonishingly poor value for money from most of this behemoth - sell off beeb 3&4, keep radio 4 &3 (and possibly 2) , improve the world service back to what it used to be, and pay sensible salaries to everyone. there are no star presenters on the beeb, very few good enough to justify these insane packages.

Andrew SW18

June 23rd, 2010 8:48am Report this comment

I confess I was vaguely disappointed that Ozzers didn't announce a plan to steadily eliminate the BBC over the life of the current Parliament...

HFC

June 23rd, 2010 8:53am Report this comment

What Cuffleyburgers said. Hear, hear.

Yam Yam

June 23rd, 2010 10:46am Report this comment

Ah, well done, Alex. A media commentator who actually gets it.

Michael Sweeney

June 23rd, 2010 11:23am Report this comment

Paxman became his spitting image puppet years ago. Just watch his interview with Eurfyl ap Gwilym of Plaid Cymru for all you need to know about the pompous lightweights at Newsnight. You can see it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gy7f8vP2QY

With regard to the Today programme, Evan Davies has been a very civilising influence in my view. Even John Humphries sounds more reasonable since Davies joined the programme. Davies asked a very interesting and generously intended question to George Osborne this morning about why politicians can't be honest about spending cuts during elections - but Osborne ducked it.

paulg

June 23rd, 2010 11:59am Report this comment

I have to agree with you Alex, it is entirely unreasonable for commentators to expect the implementation of the Lib-dem manifesto, when they are a very junior member of a coalition.

However, the lib-dems were able to extract key concepts that they hold dear, i.e social justice.

A party with fifty odd M.P's have been able to influence the largest, most powerful party in British politics. Where social justice is not high on the priority list of many of their members.

Politics is the art of the possible. Adopting precious attitudes are for the smug and the lazy, a good description of Paxman.

We are now in a new period wher old assumption must be set aside: argument, debate and confrontation are the life blood of democracy; and more of it I say, and a hand shake at the end of the day, is the way forward, this is how we need to view these extraordinary time.

Yorkshire Pit Village

June 23rd, 2010 12:00pm Report this comment

The 880,000 people lifted out of income tax will consider Paxman nuts.

Compromise indicates maturity as far as I am concerned, and marks a refreshing change from the amateurs of the last 13 years.

Irene

June 23rd, 2010 1:17pm Report this comment

Yes, I agree entirely.

I do wish some Tory and Libdems would express it more when they are grilled about broken promises etc - any idiot knows that in a coalition you have to compromise and I think the public do get it, unlike the usual suspects.

Alex

June 23rd, 2010 1:51pm Report this comment

Good stuff, Alex. I've always suspected that Paxman is actually quite thick.

Andrea Gill

June 23rd, 2010 2:05pm Report this comment

The responses on LBC 97.3 to James O'Brien's slightly provocative call against Lib Dems for "campaigning in their manifesto against VAT rise*" certainly confirm your own conclusions :)

* Some individual MPs may have made PERSONAL pledges but the suggestion that this was party policy is simply not true. You might even say we were after all right in saying the Tories would up VAT - although I do feel the poster, which is actually a response to a Tory anti-Labour poster from 2008, was a mistake because it was always our view that we would not and could not exclude the possibility of a VAT rise to finance our pledges. http://twitpic.com/1vy2ht

Post comment