political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Questions for Matthew Parris
This afternoon I shall be interviewing former Tory MP and Times columnist Matthew Parris for my next IN CONVERSATION interview for Total Politics magazine.
If you have ideas for questions you'd like me to ask him, please leave them in the comments.
Would the demise or watering down of the independence of the BBC be the death knel of our democratic system? Is the ethnic mix in the BBC reflective of our society and don't you think that there is a tribal inbalance of ethnic representation where one minority dominates the scence propurpting to satisfy the diversity. That diversity is farcical - (diversity One Zainab Badawi recently resurected again plus one fresh faced, One oriental lonesome pioneer, egging the pudding.) should mean a mix not a selected band of one tribe or incestious bunch of crowned successors. The BBC must reflect society's mix and talent. How do we go back to real talent programmes and programme makers rather than reality junks. Real comedians real acting of plays real people who are trained from theatres. Our front screen presenters are now untrained- ex sports men and women or ex big brother instant celebrities x factor contestants. This country is in danger of a melt down of culture and hence the very ideals for which many came this far to settle. We are in the main chasing popularity than quailty. We have the interviews rivalling for the same audience as the tabloid press. The BBC is not to be dumbed down but society should measure up to its standards. The overseas servis is a much respected news source all around the world BBC is this nation's greatest export not quantified but has an input into its external trade indirectly. This institution is one of the last great institutions in the world it is a truly global institution.
A fellow postgraduate student at university used to write (some/many of) "his" columns in The Sun newspaper. Ask him if that is standard practice in Grub Street.
Matthew, as the coalition is more in tune with your liberal conservatism ideals, would you consider standing for election to parliament under the coalition banner.
I think this coalition is an ideal way to keep Labour out forever and could see a new party form in 5-years or Tory right and libdem left move away leaving core coalition as a party.
An obvious start would be 'does he concur with DD's statements at the Boot and Flogger? Particularly does he agree that 'Big Society = Small State'?
and then
Has he read 'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein and can he discern any difference between coalition policies and those she describes as having destroyed ever economy on which they were practiced, starting with Pinochet's Chile?
How will the government protect social entrepreneurs and activists trying to help their communities from aggressive overpowerful regulators, empowered by quango-derived and EU regulations?
there is no big society possible without a less powerful state.
The Times offered me a 60% discount to renew my cancelled subscription. Is that evidence that the paywall has failed? I wouldn't return even if that dreadful ponkwabbler Camilla Long was sacked because the MSM now just regurgitates press releases.
Given that Matthew Parris has been, and is a voice that has been heard above the babble of the mob, and given that his voice is individual and full of truly oringinal insights, what is his opinion on the state of public debate, in arenas such as the BBC's Question Time, or indeed party political discourse? Does popular public debate have any true heuristic value, or are they too busy arguing over whether Nick Griffin should be on?
Does Parris support the idea of visas for sale, recently trailed by Damian Green? How much should they cost? £100,000-£200,000 for residence? £5,000 a year for working visa?
This could help the deficit by raising billions every year, and save a lot of administrative cost.
Matthew Parris has decided opinions of Afghanistan. What does he make of the wikileaks affair, and in particular this take on it (btw, it's worth reading the link below in full):
http://tinyurl.com/25o4pk2
" ...I’ve been trying to write about this observation for a while, but haven’t found the means to express it. So I am just going to state it, in what I admit is speculative form. Here’s what I said on Twitter Sunday: “We tend to think: big revelations mean big reactions. But if the story is too big and crashes too many illusions, the exact opposite occurs.” My fear is that this will happen with the Afghanistan logs. Reaction will be unbearably lighter than we have a right to expect— not because the story isn’t sensational or troubling enough, but because it’s too troubling, a mess we cannot fix and therefore prefer to forget.
Last week, it was the Washington Post’s big series, Top Secret America, two years in the making. It reported on the massive security shadowland that has arisen since 09/11. The Post basically showed that there is no accountability, no knowledge at the center of what the system as a whole is doing, and too much “product” to make intelligent use of. We’re wasting billions upon billions of dollars on an intelligence system that does not work. It’s an explosive finding but the explosive reactions haven’t followed, not because the series didn’t do its job, but rather: the job of fixing what is broken would break the system responsible for such fixes.
The mental model on which most investigative journalism is based states that explosive revelations lead to public outcry; elites get the message and reform the system. But what if elites believe that reform is impossible because the problems are too big, the sacrifices too great, the public too distractible? What if cognitive dissonance has been insufficiently accounted for in our theories of how great journalism works… and often fails to work?... "
Do you fell that politics and politicians have become sleazier?, or, was it always there but covered up by the Lobby and Media for their own vested interests.
I'd like to hear again the story about eating llama dung in mistake for a biscuit. Its almost as good a story as my friend's mistake of reaching out in the dark and smothering his face in Deep Heat in mistake for mosquito repellant.
This afternoon I shall be interviewing former Tory MP and Times columnist Matthew Parris for my next IN CONVERSATION interview for Total Politics magazine.
18 comments:
Now that the paywall is up, do you miss your audience?
Please can he get out from behind that blasted paywall? He is one of the few MSM political pundits worth reading.
Would the demise or watering down of the independence of the BBC be the death knel of our democratic system?
Is the ethnic mix in the BBC reflective of our society and don't you think that there is a tribal inbalance of ethnic representation where one minority dominates the scence propurpting to satisfy the diversity. That diversity is farcical - (diversity One Zainab Badawi recently resurected again plus one fresh faced, One oriental lonesome pioneer, egging the pudding.) should mean a mix not a selected band of one tribe or incestious bunch of crowned successors. The BBC must reflect society's mix and talent.
How do we go back to real talent programmes and programme makers rather than reality junks. Real comedians real acting of plays real people who are trained from theatres. Our front screen presenters are now untrained- ex sports men and women or ex big brother instant celebrities x factor contestants.
This country is in danger of a melt down of culture and hence the very ideals for which many came this far to settle. We are in the main chasing popularity than quailty. We have the interviews rivalling for the same audience as the tabloid press. The BBC is not to be dumbed down but society should measure up to its standards.
The overseas servis is a much respected news source all around the world BBC is this nation's greatest export not quantified but has an input into its external trade indirectly.
This institution is one of the last great institutions in the world it is a truly global institution.
A fellow postgraduate student at university used to write (some/many of) "his" columns in The Sun newspaper. Ask him if that is standard practice in Grub Street.
How can the BBC best be dismantled ?
Matthew, as the coalition is more in tune with your liberal conservatism ideals, would you consider standing for election to parliament under the coalition banner.
I think this coalition is an ideal way to keep Labour out forever and could see a new party form in 5-years or Tory right and libdem left move away leaving core coalition as a party.
An obvious start would be 'does he concur with DD's statements at the Boot and Flogger? Particularly does he agree that 'Big Society = Small State'?
and then
Has he read 'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein and can he discern any difference between coalition policies and those she describes as having destroyed ever economy on which they were practiced, starting with Pinochet's Chile?
How will the government protect social entrepreneurs and activists trying to help their communities from aggressive overpowerful regulators, empowered by quango-derived and EU regulations?
there is no big society possible without a less powerful state.
The Times offered me a 60% discount to renew my cancelled subscription. Is that evidence that the paywall has failed? I wouldn't return even if that dreadful ponkwabbler Camilla Long was sacked because the MSM now just regurgitates press releases.
That is one I will be reading in full. Parris is undoubtedly my favourite pundit of the past 20 years.
You could ask him if he is truly unbiased after being a Tory MP.
Given that Matthew Parris has been, and is a voice that has been heard above the babble of the mob, and given that his voice is individual and full of truly oringinal insights, what is his opinion on the state of public debate, in arenas such as the BBC's Question Time, or indeed party political discourse? Does popular public debate have any true heuristic value, or are they too busy arguing over whether Nick Griffin should be on?
Does Parris support the idea of visas for sale, recently trailed by Damian Green? How much should they cost? £100,000-£200,000 for residence? £5,000 a year for working visa?
This could help the deficit by raising billions every year, and save a lot of administrative cost.
Since the conservatives are against PR, do you think it is hypocritical of them not to campaign against the PR method used in the EU elections.
(It is up to the member state to determine how its representatives are elected)
Matthew Parris has decided opinions of Afghanistan. What does he make of the wikileaks affair, and in particular this take on it (btw, it's worth reading the link below in full):
http://tinyurl.com/25o4pk2
" ...I’ve been trying to write about this observation for a while, but haven’t found the means to express it. So I am just going to state it, in what I admit is speculative form. Here’s what I said on Twitter Sunday: “We tend to think: big revelations mean big reactions. But if the story is too big and crashes too many illusions, the exact opposite occurs.” My fear is that this will happen with the Afghanistan logs. Reaction will be unbearably lighter than we have a right to expect— not because the story isn’t sensational or troubling enough, but because it’s too troubling, a mess we cannot fix and therefore prefer to forget.
Last week, it was the Washington Post’s big series, Top Secret America, two years in the making. It reported on the massive security shadowland that has arisen since 09/11. The Post basically showed that there is no accountability, no knowledge at the center of what the system as a whole is doing, and too much “product” to make intelligent use of. We’re wasting billions upon billions of dollars on an intelligence system that does not work. It’s an explosive finding but the explosive reactions haven’t followed, not because the series didn’t do its job, but rather: the job of fixing what is broken would break the system responsible for such fixes.
The mental model on which most investigative journalism is based states that explosive revelations lead to public outcry; elites get the message and reform the system. But what if elites believe that reform is impossible because the problems are too big, the sacrifices too great, the public too distractible? What if cognitive dissonance has been insufficiently accounted for in our theories of how great journalism works… and often fails to work?... "
Do you fell that politics and politicians have become sleazier?, or, was it always there but covered up by the Lobby and Media for their own vested interests.
Word verification:- Toser......
I'd like to hear again the story about eating llama dung in mistake for a biscuit. Its almost as good a story as my friend's mistake of reaching out in the dark and smothering his face in Deep Heat in mistake for mosquito repellant.
Given his Career path, does he now regard himself as a Politician who writes political commentary? or a political commentator who used to Politician?
@ Desperate Dan
Worse, much worse, was the mistaken use of Deep Heat instead of KY Jelly. It's a true story.....
Post a Comment