Cameron should practise his listening shots: why radio is easier than TV
Kevin Bocquet
is a former BBC North of England correspondent. He appears regularly on Radio 4 and he has his own media training and crisis management company.
David Cameron has never given an unconfident, unpolished interview in his life. It’s what he does well, and it’s why he was chosen to lead his party: when the Tories had to take on Blair they needed someone a lot more voter-friendly than Michael Howard.
Fresh from a slick showing on the David Letterman Show (OK, so he didn’t know who wrote Rule Britannia, but does anyone really care?), Cameron arrived in Birmingham for a clutch of set-piece conference interviews.
Cameron on Letterman
Cameron on Marr
He had answers for all of them, obviously thought out in advance and well-rehearsed, and a neat way of steering his replies towards his own key messages (rebalancing the economy, a million new jobs created, unlocking aspiration, top 10% of earners paying 10 times more tax than bottom 10% etc).
“Ah, yes, but…” said the interviewers: what about zero growth, the growing deficit, unemployment and all the rest of it? Cameron stuck to his guns. Austerity was the right course, he insisted: it would all come right in the end, however long it takes.
Leaving aside the question of whether he’s right or wrong about austerity, as media performances they weren’t bad. His media advisers may have awarded him eight out of 10. A solid showing, but not quite full marks.
He looked his interviewers in the eye, spoke with passion and enthusiasm, and made you think that, rightly or wrongly, he believed what he was saying. He was authoritative, but friendly with it.
One of the few times he was knocked slightly off balance was on the Today programme when he was asked about tax rates for the rich. Jim Naughtie said that, since Cameron had already spelt out how low earners would be hit through reduced welfare, it was unreasonable for him not to reveal how he planned to hit high earners on the grounds that it would pre-empt the Budget.
It was a good question which goes to the heart, or rather to one of the biggest fault lines, of the Coalition partnership. I don’t think either Cameron or his advisers had thought of that one. His answer was unconvincing.
Like a lot of people, Cameron performs slightly better on radio than TV. With Andrew Marr, his answers were persuasive enough. But when Marr was asking questions Cameron looked fidgety. He sipped rather nervously at his water, clenched and unclenched his fingers, and wiped his upper lip - no fewer than seven times. Presumably he sweats a bit under the lights and worries he might end up looking like Richard Nixon. Actually, the sweat didn’t show and Cameron could have relaxed more. His advisers should tell him it’s not enough to be a good talker. You have to listen as well.
So they were two pretty competent, professional performances. But Cameron still only deserves eight out of 10 because neither interview was really all that tough, and you can’t earn top marks without a rigorous examination.
Cameron’s term of office has seen the worst economic downturn for a generation. Thousands of people who have no job, no prospects, and who can’t afford their rent, are feeling real, abject despair and a sense of total powerlessness. Why was it that in his interviews Cameron was only asked to speak in very broad economic terms about the deficit, the debt, zero growth? Why wasn’t he asked about the human misery which his government insists is a necessary precursor of recovery, but which his critics argue is unjustified?
I suspect that in years gone by the Today programme interview would have been preceded by a reporter piece from a sink estate somewhere grim, where there were no jobs and where benefits were being cut. Perhaps a few angry, desperate voices might have fractured the Cameron cool.
And then there’s Boris. Throughout the week the news has been full of rumour and speculation that he’s the man many Tories would really like to see leading their party, and that Boris is not exactly averse to the idea. But both on the Andrew Marr Show and on Today, it was given little prominence, just a cursory question towards the end of each interview.
Naughtie asked Cameron, who was celebrating his birthday, what present he would like to receive from Boris. What insightful gem was that supposed to elicit? Why didn’t Naughtie ask if Cameron’s authority is slipping, if he felt threatened by his old mate Boris? Or if he thinks we’re witnessing the first moves of a full-on leadership challenge?
It’s often the case that the tougher the questions in a media interview, the more the interviewee shines. And I think that might have been true of Cameron’s interviews this week.
People often perform better under pressure. While Naughtie was interviewing Cameron in Birmingham, I wonder what his co-presenter, Evan Davis, was thinking, back in the studio in London, presumably bound, gagged and manacled to the desk, to prevent a recurrence of his behaviour the previous week when he laid into Ed Miliband (an interview that had Radio 4’s Feedback listeners up in arms).
There was no over-talking this time, but maybe the interview didn't quite hit the mark.
For other comments by media coaches about recent interviews by party leaders, see:
