Gordon Brown walks out .....

[Saracen]

....of an interview. It was a TV interview, and he stalked off while cameras were still rolling.

Apparently, our Great Leader had an interview with Sky’s political editor Adam Boulton, at the end of which he stood up and walked off, still connected to the microphone, and despite having an another interview scheduled with the BBC.

Brief footage of that one is on YouTube.

But then, after the BBC interview, apparently he did much the same again, walking off between BBC presenter Sian Williams while she was still doing the final piece to camera, walking between her and the camera. The Telegraph has a brief piece on it here.



I have a couple of thoughts on this. First, I'm not sure I can blame him when so much of the coverage is about him and his personality, when he wants to talk about politics.

But the other side of that is that an interview is an interview, not a party political broadcast where the interviewee gets to write the entire script.

Secondly, it worries me a bit that our Prime Minister (for now, at least) doesn't have better control of his temper than to let it show like that. And that's a large part of why he has problems getting his message across to the media ... because over a pretty protracted period, he's alienated a LOT of them. It's one more lesson Mr Brown needs to learn .... whether we (or indeed, he) like it or not, the media IS an important part of the political process, and so are keeping half-decent, cordial relations with the press. Like it or not, they DO have an impact on filtering the message the politicians can get across to us, the people that actually vote, because, Mr Brown, they decide on the flipping questions.

Granted, he's having a torrid time of it. Granted, he's fighting for his political life (and, IMHO, he's losing, and I think he's fully aware of that), and granted, he'd just be pooped on from a great height by the Sun who appeared to have an element of malicious glee in dumping him right after his great "rallying" speech, when they could have waited a few days, if they hadn't been determined to capitalise on the publicity value of the story, no doubt for their own reasons. So I can somewhat sympathise with his frustration at interviews being about personalities not policies, but you'd think that as a politician, let alone a Prime Minister, he'd have learned to control himself by now. So if he's upset with Sky/Murdoch/The Sun, just about the worst thing he could do is to show it, and then show it again on the BBC. Can't he see that he just ends up making himself the story by doing that, making it even harder to talk about policy. It plays directly into journalist's play-book, walks into the trap. That, at least, is one area where both Cameron and Blair had Brown beaten hands down - they know how to play the game.

It might not be right that you have to schmooze the media to a degree, but right or not, it's a fact of life, Gordon. And it's at least as good as us, the people, simply getting spoon-fed the carefully crafted cobblers most politicians would like us to gratefully accept and be satisfied with. At least a sceptical and marginally hostile press stands some chance of getting past the bulls .... erm, 'spin'.

So Gordon ..... live with it. You don't have to like it, but you do have to deal with it.

[directhex]

[Moby-Dick]

didn't realise Ricky Gervais was in V for vendetta ( to the right of suttler )

[MadduckUK]

still connected to the microphone

did the wire go taut and make him fall over?

[Lee H]

Maybe the camera was offset off centre and with his limited field of vision he didn't see it and walked off

[Clunk]

David Cameron in keyboard cat riddle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4bXaPJXrYs

[SammEl]

End of the day, he is a person, and if ANYONE, comments on a very personal subject to you i.e. the press he has had about his eye and painkillers, it takes its toll. And don't say "Well then he shouldn't be a PM then", but even a Veteran Mercenary would go crazy against comments like that.

My Dad has one eye through an attack, and it affects him quite a bit i.e. much daily medication - And he can only see half of what we see.

Try and walk around with one eye and see how bloody hard it is. It also affects him when walking around at night, again, it's hard enough walking around in darkness with two eyes.

These things should not be commented on and there are far more important things in his head than this utter nonsense that the tabloids are throwing out at the moment. Honestly, it isn't fair on him at all, and the MAJORITY of people who are against Brown are the people who read tabloids and know nothing of Politics. Also, A LOT of ignorant people in the UK i.e. the people who will vote for Cameron, think that the Global Recession was created by Brown, which is quite sad.

I haven't seen the full interview, but he looked pretty peed off, and who wouldn't be with everything going around.

I'd be worried if he WASN'T annoyed with everything, someone without emotion to a certain extent needs to be attended too.

[Clunk]

This smiley should also be banned.

[SammEl]

This smiley should also be banned.

Not funny at all

[peterb]

And the irony of it! This is the Government that assidiously courted the media, refined the art of spin, and used it to such great effect. Now the media it is biting the hand that fed it!

[santa claus]

Imho the media is way too big for its boots. It should stop trying to do all our thinking for us and get back to reporting the news. The media has turned the serious business of politics into utter farce and I'm not in the least surprised that our top politicians are getting exasperated.

I mean, come on; personal attack after personal attack followed up with a helping of the character assassination on a professional level. It is useless, negative and gutter 'entertainment'.

Andrew Marr came unstuck with it when he tried it on Peter Mandelson but why was Andrew Marr wasting PM's time?

At this time we need leaders to get on with their jobs not to sit in front of some overpaid oaf who's asking them the same old tired questions behind a smug smile. "Ooo, do you realise how much older you look these days Prime Minister" - this kind of rubbish is thrown in the face of people who are trying day and night to resolve problems for our benefit.

I am completely bored of the tripe these media people keep pumping out. The BBC should be ashamed of what it has become and newspaper rags don't even deserve comment. And all the voxpop people who criticize the Government we see these days carry equity cards and are related to someone already in TV. The nepotism sucks and the whole Corporation is starting to look like in-bred hillbillies.

Britain has become a TV show full of errant teenagers, ignorant loud mouths and slovenly layabouts and we're stupidly tuning in.

Walking out on the latest pointless interview was the right thing to do. Interviewers don't want to hear answers, they simply want to deliver the next barb as soon as they can.

It has to stop or we're all going to end up bitching about Gok Wan, or whatever her name is, whilst Rome burns.

[Rave]

End of the day, he is a person, and if ANYONE, comments on a very personal subject to you i.e. the press he has had about his eye and painkillers, it takes its toll. And don't say "Well then he shouldn't be a PM then", but even a Veteran Mercenary would go crazy against comments like that.

My Dad has one eye through an attack, and it affects him quite a bit i.e. much daily medication - And he can only see half of what we see.

Try and walk around with one eye and see how bloody hard it is. It also affects him when walking around at night, again, it's hard enough walking around in darkness with two eyes.

He has, AFAIK, never attempted to hide the fact that he's blind in one eye. And as a result no serious person has ever held it against him. The questions were about whether he was losing the sight in his other eye. This is a pertinent question for the leader of the country, albeit that if he were to lose his remaining sight it wouldn't in any meaningful way diminish his ability to govern.

and the MAJORITY of people who are against Brown are the people who read tabloids and know nothing of Politics.

Yes, but that applies to the large majority of people in this country. It's equally true to say that the majority of people who are for Brown are tabloid readers and know little (I wouldn't say nothing, personally) of politics.

Also, A LOT of ignorant people in the UK i.e. the people who will vote for Cameron,

Ouch. I won't be voting for Cameron personally, but you're inviting a slapdown there....

think that the Global Recession was created by Brown, which is quite sad.

Those of us who have had a keen interest in the economy for several years (myself, I've been interested since I was priced out of home ownership in about 2003) know that although Brown was not the architect of our economic downfall, he is undeniably complicit. He was the Chancellor when we started the house price bubble bubble which has been a major part of our downfall, and did nothing at all to stop it.

He said in 1997: "I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the future" (link).

That, quite demonstrably, was a lie.

[peterb]

Those of us who have had a keen interest in the economy for several years (myself, I've been interested since I was priced out of home ownership in about 2003) know that although Brown was not the architect of our economic downfall, he is undeniably complicit. He was the Chancellor when we started the house price bubble bubble which has been a major part of our downfall, and did nothing at all to stop it.

He said in 1997: "I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the future" (link).

That, quite demonstrably, was a lie.

The man who destroyed the company pension plans of millions by his tax raid on pension fund dividends in his first budget in 1997.

The man who sold a large proportion of Britain's gold reserves when it was at one of the lowest prices of the decade - and bought euros when they were one of the most expensive currencies

The man that forced several mutual life insurance companies to de-mutualise by changing the rules on liquidity in 2003. In order to comply the companies had to ell assets (usually shares) when the stock market was at a low, affecting the investments of millions (particularly endowment linked life policies) in order to comply in the short term - and demutualise to raise funds in the longrer term, further undermining the investments of private savers.

The man whose party has politicised the civil service, who's manipulation of the media has finally come home to roost.

The man who has played the fear card in the population to justify gross intrusions into privacy, and whose attempts at social engineering has fostered a fdependency culture, giving further control by the state over ever more aspects of an individulas life.

A man whose ill conceived legislation has prevented two job sharing friends to look after each others children while the other one works.

The man whose tax breaks penalise the small independant, but allowed Hedge funds to flourish with generaous tax breaks - the hedge funds that contributed to the economic downturn.

The man who helped damage one of the more successful banks by forcing it to take over HBOS - reducing the share value, and having a further adverse effects (at least in the short term) on pension funds.

But apart from that, he's done really well.

[santa claus]

But apart from that, he's done really well.

True. And yet you choose not to record any of his successes .

[Nick]

Has he had any?

Really?

Cos I can't think of one,

[directhex]

Has he had any?

Really?

Cos I can't think of one,

Some say that his politics are terrifying, and that he once punched a horse to the ground.