Entwistle on the Today programme: What went wrong?

George Entwistle’s appearance on the Today programme with John Humphrys was the nadir of a terrible few weeks for both him and the BBC. It made for some gripping radio but it was also a textbook case of how not to handle a defensive media interview.

Simon Brooke, one of Media First’s team of experienced, high level media trainers and consultants and an advisor to Cabinet Ministers and senior executives on media interviews, provides a commentary on the former director general’s performance. If you have not yet heard the interview you will find a link to it at the bottom of this blog.

00.07 seconds

Humphrys asks, “What went wrong?” This is a classic journalist’s question and immediately puts the interviewee on the back foot. In this case something clearly has gone very wrong but normally we would advise clients not to accept this very negative premise and get drawn into this unhelpful discussion. Instead, they should switch on to the positive as soon as possible.

2 minutes 25 seconds

Entwistle offers a full and unreserved apology in simple language. He then goes out to set out the action he has taken. Well done.

2 minutes 35 seconds

“You must have known what happened because a Tweet was put out 12 hours beforehand telling the world that something extraordinary was going to happen that night on Newsnight,” says Humphrys.

This is the point at which Entwistle begins to lose confidence and a sense of direction. He gets drawn into a discussion about Tweets and mentions that he looks at Twitter “sometimes at the end of the day.” Really? This is a damning admission by a man who hopes to convince us that he is in charge of the situation and aware of what is going on within his organisation.

He would have been better to move away from this level of detail and reiterate his determination to see the inquiries carried out.

3 minutes 40 seconds

With typical hyperbole, Humphrys puts to Entwistle that it was extraordinary that he did not know that Newsnight was about to broadcast a story about child abuse and a senior Tory politician. He asks for confirmation that nobody mentioned it. Entwistle replies with a simple “No”.

This is very clear and concise but the problem is that our interviewer can then come in for the attack again. Entwistle would have done better to answer this question briefly but then to have taken the initiative and put across some more key messages.

4 minutes 17 seconds

Again, Entwistle answers are short and monosyllabic, losing him the opportunity to take charge of the interview. His toe curling stuttering shows how much he is now on the back foot.

5 minutes 40 seconds

He starts to take the initiative but it’s too late by now.

7 minutes 20 seconds

This is one of the worst examples of Entwistle’s sounding slow, passive and reactive rather than as the leader of a huge organisation in crisis.

7 minutes 50 seconds

“No, John, I was making a speech yesterday morning.” Getting slightly irritable now – always a mistake, Entwistle allows Humphrys to drag him into admitting that he hadn’t read the Guardian front page story about Newnight’s possible error. He should have avoided this subject entirely.

8 minutes 40 seconds

“How do you define your responsibility as the editor-in-chief?” asks Humphrys. “The editor in chief has to take complete responsibility for the BBC’s journalistic output but that does not mean that the editor-in-chief signs off every piece of it.”Another attempt by Entwistle to take the initiative but again he should have said this earlier and stuck to this line.

10 minutes 52 seconds

“Did you ever think about stopping the Newsnight last night?” Humphrys is clearly bored by a relatively long (but very positive and useful) answer by Entwistle and decides to interrupt. Entwistle makes the mistake of answering or at least responding to each interruption instead of pausing, announcing politely but firmly, that he is going to finish answering the question before continuing to make his points.

11 minutes 20 seconds

“You’ve already said that Newsnight will carry out no more investigations,” says Humphrys. Summarising the situation or paraphrasing an interviewee’s comments is standard journalistic practice. But correcting it when necessary is vital. It’s just a shame that Entwistle does so by stammering and sounding flustered instead of pausing, taking a deep breath and clearly stating what the policy is.

11 minutes 25 seconds

“Have you given any thought at all to shutting down Newsnight?” asks Humphrys. Entwistle does well to provide some context in this crisis by reminding listeners of Newsnight’s honourable heritage. He says: “Newsnight is a 32-year-old programme with an…excellent record of award-winning journalism… it would be absolutely disproportionate to talk about closing Newsnight down.”

Context is essential in any crisis. Here again, though, Entwistle sounds flustered and irritated and so his positive point is almost lost.

12 minutes 40 seconds

“I don’t believe that it’s been destroyed,” says Entwistle of the trust that the BBC enjoys. Why on earth does he repeat John Humphrys use of the word “destroyed” in his answer?

A simple but very useful rule of media interviews – never repeat an interviewer’s negative phrase as it confirms it in the mind of the listener or viewer and in print interviews you can be quoted as saying it in the article.

14 minutes 05 seconds

“John you’re effectively asking me to become editor of Newsnight,” says Entwistle.

“No I’m not,” counters Humphrys.

“Yes you are,” says Entwistle, clearly ready to add “Nyah, nyah, nyah-nyah, nyah”. This kind of spat is just undignified and any good interviewee should rise above it, change the subject and move back seamlessly to their key messages.

14 minutes 13 seconds

“I was editor of Newsnight,” says Entwistle. This is a very important point, why on earth doesn’t he make more of it? Any kind of personal, practical experience is a very useful way of establishing authority in a media interview. He could have given some examples of his own time in the editor’s chair to back up the points he was making.

15 minutes 11 seconds

After more than 15 minutes it’s finally over but the damage is done. One final point - why is the interview so long? Two minutes is the normal length of a live broadcast interview. At most it might run to seven or eight minutes. Either way a much shorter interview would given Entwistle enough time to make his points without getting dragged into too much damning detail.

You can listen to the full 15 minute interview on the BBC iPlayer by clicking here