What should Newsnight be?
If you read this column regularly you probably subscribe to . But as of the last couple of weeks itâs also been available in a different corner of the web, to a much larger audience, on the ±«Óătvâs new blog called The Editors. If youâve arrived here via one route you might want to take a look at the other.
The reason I mention this is that normally weâd use this column to tackle the subject which has provoked the most feedback, but since The Editors site has been on fire all week about the rights and wrongs of our Scottish car experiment (and I accept there are many - including some at the ±«Óătv - who think we got this wrong), Iâm going to suggest moving on to a new, if not unrelated, seam.
One of the things that struck me about the torrents of comments we received about the car item was that many viewers questioned if this was the sort of thing a âserious news programmeâ should be doing.
- âCome on Newsnight. This isnât the sort of attempted sensationalist dumbed down news we expect from youâ
- "It's a totally incongruous notion for a so-called serious news programme."
One blog () even suggested .
Theyâre not alone in questioning what Newsnight should be. Our resident grumpy old man sees two factions within the programme â 'Old Newsnight' and the 'Modernisers' - and clearly favours the former. I hesitate to mention Emily Bell again, but in our (good natured) discussions about Newsnight she displays a suspicion of items like and and cries âmore news on Newsnightâ.
So was there a Newsnight golden age when all items were pure, serious and relentlessly high-minded? I donât think so.
If you look at the very first edition 26 years ago (watch it here) it is pretty heavy duty stuff: industrial relations, tension in the Gulf and the Soviet war in Afghanistan. But in those days there was also a sports section, and Iâm prepared to bet that at the time many were critical of Peter Snowâs analysis of the Afghan conflict using a sandpit and model tanks. What are toys doing on a serious news programme?
I first started on Newsnight in 1990 as a junior producer and worked under two editors â Tim Gardam and Peter Horrocks (now head of ±«Óătv TV News). Both were of course committed to serious journalism, analysis and intelligent debate, but in my experience equally committed to wit, mischief and humour. I suspect if you asked a focus group to think of words to sum up Jeremy Paxman, who joined the programme in that era, they might come up with all those words and a few more besides.
Programmes must, of course, evolve as times change â if they didnât they would, like Grandstand and Top of the Pops, eventually go out of business. And there is no tablet of stone on which itâs written what Newsnight or any other programme should be. Take Top Gear. Whoâd have thought that what was once all and driving gloves would one day have a studio audience and be trashing reasonably-priced saloons?
Anyway, let us know what you think Newsnight should and shouldnât be by leaving a comment below. Or if you want to talk trashing cars, click here, or maybe try Top Gear.
Comments
Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the job of a news programme be to deliver the news, only the news and nothing but the news? How you present the news is up to you, but the day you start performing social experiments, designed to titillate, is a sign that you are, perhaps in an attempt to regain your lost youth, resorting to the tactics of certain late night shows seen on Channel 4.
Perhaps you should rename yourself as 'The Every Week Night Project'
Newsnight should be an in depth examination of the dayâs news, leaving facetious items to the many facetious pseudo news programmes out there. We turn to the ±«Óătv for this because we expect quality.
Newsnight has never been entirely a straight "News" programme - at least not to my memory. Firstly it has always had space for the "Features" side of things - the kind of feature you might find in the inside pages or the weekend magazine of a 'quality' newspaper. Paul Mason's recent series on Latin America is a great example of this.
Newsnight can be pretty stodgy fare with considerably longer items than the main news bulletins (which items I feel are often too short - but that's another story) so an occasional bit of 'light' reportage leavens the mix a little. Evidently the flag story went too far for many watchers - and certainly could not be accused of being a rigorously scientific experiment.
I rather welcome a something a little more relaxed amongst all the highbrow intellectualism. Perhaps, it helps to remind me that life may have its lighter moments and that taking it too seriously all the time can be somewhat dour and drab. I enjoy Newsnight more now than I ever did & rarely switch over in the middle as I would have to admit I used to. Maybe I am just getting older & more dour!
It is useful to see what viewers thing about the way Newsnight appears to be trying to make news as well as report on it.
Growth in news has been massive over the decades, Sky News, News 24, CNN - loads of them dedicated to reporting, informing, often advising as well (public service?) but also latterly, many have come to need to make news, to turn news into something that is basically infotainment.
It is good to see experiments going on with Newsnight, Paxman making wry comments at the end of broadcasts, playing out with sax versions of the theme tune and other variations - might attract new viewers.
I stand by the principle (of having worked in television news myself) that (Channel 4's 7pm offering) and Newsnight should keep their pedigrees and try not to cave in to popularism.
It makes me cringe when I hear occasions on Radio's 4 and 5 where listeners are invited to email in, only to have maybe two of them read out when the presenter has under-run and needs something useful for 35 seconds up to the news - this 'aint quality :o(
Investigate, report and inform - Newsnight!
Pete
I think that Newsnight should stick to what it does it does best which is trying to get the truth out of political situations. There are many of us who appreciate what you do, out here.
Many thanks for your hard work
Newsnight? Call me crazy. The clue is in the title surely? It's on at night and it's the news?
Keep it simple is my advice.
At least you have never asked viewers to email pictures of their dogs (yes - be ashamed Today programme, be very ashamed)
I don't mind if Newsnight is experimental and tries the occasional wacky, obtuse or off the wall article. I do object if it tries to be right on, liberal lefty or politically correct. England is being literally swamped by immigration, with God knows what social, cultural and environmental effects - now there is a good topic for you to pursue.
The "infamous car news item" as it's no doubt destined to be remembered seemed entirely legitimate to me. There had been plenty of reports of anti-English sentiment elsewhere in the media coming from Scots MPs, musicians, football fans and members of the public, so why not ascertain their veracity, and indeed intensity. The piece clearly showed a range of feelings towards the Auld Enemy so could hardly be described as being one-sided. And why shouldn't Newsnight have something of a pot-pourri of items ranging from the serious to the ridiculous anyway? Leave them alone I say...!
For heavens sake, a bit of light hearted relief from the endless drone of politicians and dire news is welcome. Of course you are a serious news programme but so is PM on Radio 4 and they manage a bit of fun occasionally.
Next the puritans will be complaining because Michael Crick, Nick Robinson or (dare I say it?) Jeremy Paxman lace their comments with touches of acerbic (nay sarcastic) wit.
Leave the format alone. Don't fix what aint broke.
You should get the Today team from Radio 4 to do a nightshift. I listen to them every day, I used to watch Newsnight every night, not anymore........
As long as we have politicians (of all colours) who are such characterless and self-seeking dimwits, there is little chance of a good edition of Newsnight. And the female presenters hardly add seriousness to the program, since they are in themselves lightweight, e.g.the one who escaped from the lunchtime political show, and then was found spoiling a remembrance service in st. Paul's.
Newsnight has to be a completely reliable source of insight into the events of the day.
It is not primarily a "breaking news" programme but a provider of information more accurate than can be provided immediately and more detailed than can be fitted into a quick news report.
It must be authoritative enough to keep the respect of people who have inside knowledge of the subjects being reported.
It must neither hype nor trivialise events, nor must it adopt a 'standard line' (a common failing in news reports).
An intelligent sense of humour is essential.
You expect more than news in a newspaper, so if Newsnight were turned into a "pure" news programme it would have no texture, no crunchy bits... I thought the car "stunt" was a brilliant piece and just reinforces my attitude towards the "Midlothian Question" - let's rebuild Hadrian's Wall, re-dig Offa's Dyke, give Ireland back to the Irish and become four wonderful-but-seperate countries within Europe... which brings me to the one thing that is missing from newsnight: Opinion.
If Newsnight's brief is "serious journalism, analysis and intelligent debate" then the programme is clearly something more than just a news report. If the intelligence and analysis comes with a dash of mischief and humour, so much the better.
I can't help wondering how much of the outcry is because of the specific subject: intra-UK racism. If identical tactics had been used to get a rise out of white supremacists, for example, would we have had the same response?
I don't think it's up to us, the audience, to tell you, the program makers/editor, what the program should look like.
Otherwise you'd be doomed to simply ape the stuff the old guard wants, then, when they die off, you have no natural constituency to fall back on. No new blood = dried up corpse in very short order.
My guess that the England car was a topical stunt gone awry, but I see no reason why you shouldn't spin a decent story out of it. The animosity between the Scots and the English over sporting events is well known. But does it go deeper, is it being nurtured, or dare I say it, inbred.
There are things I would like to see more of on newsnight, more tech for example, and more making the right people look terrible.
Who the right people are, is a matter of some debate, and if a news and current affairs program cant find them then you're clearly not reading the newspapers, etc.
surprise me!
It should be informative, probing, serious, thorough, insightful and challenging; as well as amusing, entertaining, provocative and groundbreaking.
It is without question the best current affairs show on TV, it's a shame I am usually dropping off on the sofa and often miss bits.
As a Scot living in the Netherlands, I wasn't at all upset by the English car driving around Scotland. My experience is that most so-called racism is really classism - if your English/Pakistani/Kenyan/Chinese neighbour lives in a similar house and has a similar level of job etc. then you connect perfectly well with him/her, it's only when you encounter people in a different group to yourself regardless of their colour or creed that you start to see problems. It wasn't the ±«Óătv who trashed the car, it was the thugs who trashed the car. Newsnight is a wonderfully serious and simultaneously humourous programme and a great addition to grown-up debate. Even with the hour time difference with the Netherlands I stay past my bedtime to watch the programme. Carry on the good work! Mickey.
I consider Newsnight to be the plum programme each evening and miss it when taken for 'holiday periods.' It has gravitas, it has style, it has relevance, and it has critics. When the critics disappear, that's the time to worry.
Carry on the good work! Millions love the prog!
NEWSNIGHT fails to provide on fronts:
Geographic - important areas of the world not in the current news headlines. E.g. Morocco, Mauretania, Turkey, Yemen, Australia and New Zealand.
Complex topics on which there is much coverage but poor analysis and explanation. Prime example - the NHS. Very few contributors ever know anything about service which is enormously complex, vastly expensive and expected to defy all laws of economics in being all things to all men. The level of debate is tragically low. Ignorance and dogmatic statement widely accepted.
Lastly, be really brave: treat theology as a topic in its own right, exposed to the rigours of science and philosophical argument. How does one argue with the believer who will hear no argument ? Topical, I think. The world is full of religions. And of secular non-believers. This one could run and run.
To create space / time, veto all pop stars, all sports, they have their places. And human reproduction which already runs wall to wall in the news programmes.
I have nothing against items in Newsnight" that are not strictly news", that, after all, is part of the programme's attraction in that it can go behind pure headlines.
What I think it should be doing, is running more arts "news" items, like Channel 4 News which does this very successfully. In the absence of a regular "Late Review" other than on Fridays, this might be a good move.
As far as the flag/wrecked car goes; England are out of the World Cup but I am not sure what this was supposed to tell us other than the blindlingly obvious.
I find it alarming that the editor of Newsnight should think that Top Gear has relevance to Newsnight. Newsnight is a supposed to be a serious news programme not an entertainment show like Top Gear. So often you seem to be trying too hard to inject "wit, mischief and humour" into serious topics. By all means let's have some wit and humour if it is intrinsic to the item. But some of your stuff is just contrived and not really funny, whether it is "mischief" or studio presentation. For example, last week you had an item about the rouble becoming convertible which you presented as a wild west metaphor for some reason. Every week it seems, you waste valuable airtime on an item about something called the Gordaq; it is neither funny nor informative. You seem to want to turn everything into a joke and you often end up trivialising.
Please leave Newsnight alone. The U.s. can be a pretty dark, desolate newsscape without ±«Óătv newsnight. ±«Óătv newsnight sheds light on subjects/people that the american dont/wont even touch.
Please ignore the news snobs that believe, fun, opinion and women should be banned from the news.
I'm wholly against 'dumbing down' but the purpose of Newsnight is surely to offer a perspective on the news, not merely to report it. There are other programmes (deceptively called 'The News') where you can find more straight-laced reporting; there is room within the schedules and within Newsnight itself for a little leeway.
The football supporters car sequence belonged elsewhere, in fact anywhere except Newsnight.
Iraq and Afghanistan reporting lacks depth and analysis. See Patrick Cockburn's articles 'On the Iranian Border' in the June 8th London Review of Books and 'The End of Iraq' in the 6th April issue. Naturally Cockburn has an ideological position but the analysis and picture he paints seem more coherent and informative than the relatively disjointed pieces from Newsnight. You seem to shy away from in depth analysis of both the USA's strategic interests in Iraq and the real nature of the situation there, for example the reasons for the handing over of power to militias. Channel4 has done this well and I sometimes wonder if the ghost of Kelly/Hutton lurks and inhibits your coverage.
Newsnight is a serious news programme. It should stay that way.
Newsnight 2006 has its serious head beautifully balanced with a delicate sprinkling of mischievous wit. Stick with it. i've been watching since the early days and it's better now than ever.
Is Martha Kearney the hardest working person on ±«Óătv? She always seems to be on TV or Radio. She can't possibly be married but whatever she's on, I want some.
I'd say that the programme has got the balance pretty much right recently, treat serious news seriously, but with the occasional bit of light relief/wackiness to stop as all shooting ourselves because of the relentless horror of the modern world. On a slight tangent, I think Jeremy's disparaging comments about the podcast are great ('if you prefer your television without the inconvenience of pictures' etc). Keep up the good work.
Ed
What a thoroughly interesting comment from the editor tonight.
For me Newsnight has to be authoritative and provide insight and comment on what is going on. Interviewing politicians is seldom productive - they all go on courses to get Paxman-proofed. It is independent experts who can bring news into sharp focus. New name? Well maybe Insight, instead of Newsnight?
The studio interviews are pretty good, but the filmed reports can be dire. The most irritating thing about them, by far, is the heavy, plonking, literal-mindedly joky attempt to illustrate every single metaphor. The other night we had somebody referring to heads turning, and what did we see but a row of goats obviously provoked by some signal all, yes, turning their heads.
This is just silly. It's the sort of thing a smart-alec fifth-former would do with a new video camera. It's the sort of thing someone with no sense of humour does in order to demonstrate what a great sense of humour they have. Please grow out of it.
Don't change Newsnight! The mixture of highbrow news reporting and the slightly more offbeat stuff makes it brilliant.
I wouldn't call the lighter stuff 'dumbing down', as is still done in an upmarket and suitably satirical way.
For the sake of proving a point, I would genuinely wear a Newsnight t-shirt to highlight my enjoyment of the programme to people who look at my torso.
I think Newsnight should be just what it is at the moment - a mix of serious discussion about topical events and some light hearted things thrown in for a good balance. We don't need to be depressed all the time!
Keep up the good work
I am quite satisfied with the way Newsnight is presented, and would not want it changed in any way.
It does its job, dont fix what isnt broke.
What a lot of stuff and nonsense about this business of the car in Scotland. The SNP chap on Newsnight (alongside the v sensibly amused Anne Leslie) epitomised the hysterical reaction to what was simply good television. The film was hardly suggesting that Scots in general are loutish or racist hooligans, and there were indeed Scottish people interviewed who were supportive of the English team in Germany. In fact, as one of them pointed out (and any producer trying to paint the Scots as all anti-English would surely have cut this), many English people supported Andy Murray at Wimbledon, therefore why shouldn't Scots support England in the World Cup? Yes, it was a highly provocative film - but why shouldn't Newsnight provoke debate?
Calum
Newsnight is about the only serious news program on television. I now rely on the Internet for my news as the ±«Óătv main news is McNews a tv news version of HELLO for people who do not wish to think. I have lived in many nations and worked in Iraq between the wars. I do not want pap I want news. Make it controversial and be tough - Paxman interviewing politicians is great. The worst part of Newsnight is the "arts" part at the end. If you are going to change make it more serious not less.
I am absolutely in agreement about the need for humour as part of the Newsnight package. I grew up on a diet of Nationwide and the skate boarding ducks. But don't forget that programme also covered serious issues such as homelessness as well.Last night's feature on migration was excellent. I am all in favour of the 'Ethical Man' strand. Even if Paxo may not be keen, our purchasing decisions as consumers have a huge impact on the environment, in an age when many corporations have more clout than countries. I'm even prepared to see the light hearted side of Gordaq. But parking an old crock in an area with a high crime rate to make a specious point about Anglo - Scottish relations isn't big, or clever, and certainly no relation to humour as I understand it. Have the humility to admit its stupidity and admit that you made a mistake.
Love the show when I get to see it. I am from Liverpool living in the US.
Whatever else you do please do not stop the 'Jokes fit for an 11 year old' They are precious
Have a good look at the Lehrer Newshour on the PBS station in US/Canada (shown at 6:30 pm, immediately after the ±«Óătv World evening news).
You could model Newsnight on this program - ie in depth analysis, highly intelligent & professional presenters, civilized and rational discussions, well qualified guests, etc.
Newsnight tends to be argumentative, confrontational, etc - ie both the hosts and the guests.
One of the reasons I've been a regular Newsnight watcher for the last 26 years is because it has always made quirky/ironic reports. Memory tells me it used to do them more frequently, but that might be faulty recall.
The formula has always been 2 or 3 in depth reports upon the major items of the days news, with a strong emphasis upon politics and the Westminster gossip. Topped off by an item or feature unrelated to the days events.
Whilst I'm now hugely more questioning of the editorial line of establishment deference, that mix has served me very well over the years, and I hope that continues.
I'm willing to accept many things on Newsnight, even last night's attempt to appeal to the youf by having on the student panellist and young studio audience. What I can't accept, is people like Richard Madeley. I can't bear to watch him and his equally dim and banal wife on their Channel 4 show and I didn't watch him on their ITV show. If you can't keep him off the Beeb, at least keep him off Newsnight.
Hi guys,
Serious news / serious issues has to have the occassional something a bit different.
A shift from "heavy stuff" to the light hearted with perhaps a mischevious streak?
Keep up the great work and the slant to amusement, but just occassionally.
The Scottish car incident was right on. Have the young "persons" been nicked yet by the vigilant Police?
Newsnight should be less one so-called "editor" who hasn't got the guts to admit he got this so-called "Scottish experiment" - actually a trashy tabloid-style stunt - badly wrong. Peter Barron should be ashamed of taking a salary for producing that puerile rubbish while claiming to be a "professional" journalist.
I think some of the other comments are wrong about Newsnight. There are plenty of straight news shows available in the evening - ±«Óătv1 at 10, ITV at whatever time it is nowadays, ±«Óătv News 24 at whatever time you want it. I think Newsnight should be a bit different from those, and tak a more 'current affairs' approach, presenting a short news bulletin for those who missed it elsewhere, then a few longer, more discursive pieces presenting more depth and analysis on a few selected stories. A bit like a quality newspaper, and like all quality newspapers there's ample room for wit, erudition and humour in the reportage. Newsnight generally achieves this tone brilliantly, which is why it has been a staple of my evening ever since its first broadcast.
I think the problem with the flags piece was that it misjudged the tone a bit - it did seem like a stunt, and a slightly mean stunt which only served to make a number of otherwise unremarkable Scottish teenagers look stupid and loutish. And maybe that's what they are, but it scacely needed the resources of Newsnight to make the point that kids do stupid things sometimes. I much prefer the programme to use wit to tackle the complacency of power than to mock the man in the street.
While Newsnight should always focus on the news and serious issues, I think items such as ethical man are important to the show; they too convey information about the modern world, just in a more up-beat way. What is wrong with that? Most news broadcasts feature a light-hearted story, which helps to take the edge off the serious news which is almost always bad news. Without such stories, I for one, would find the news depressing. After all, news is about what is happening in the world, and while a lot of serious issues occur, we must not forget that comical and trivial events also make the world what it is.
To create a news programme that ignores anything that isn't serious would defy the point of news.
You are not on top of any of the serious issues, if the average age of your viewer is 10- then you should promote your programme as a CHILDREN'S programme.
Newsnight has every right to exhibit public opinion, however acquired, as part of a structured programme of news and current affairs.
In fact, the truth, nowadays, is very often told only by those not realising that they are being probed.
Do you want to know what people are really thinking? Use a hidden microphone or a CCTV camera (or even a car bedecked with the flag of St. George) and you usually get the answer.
Serious and fun! Just how it should be.
Keep it up Newsnight.
Call me suspicious but it seems your Scottish Car Stunt served its purpose admirably. You tell us your Editor's site is 'on fire.' You can't beat a bit of racism to get people interested. Why didn't you present a balanced piece? Why didn't you also place a car festooned in Scotland flags in a bad area of say London, Birmingham or Manchester?
I believe the majority of people in England or Scotland are not overtly nationalistic nor are they rascist. In my opinion the nation's media have focused far too much on a handful of anti-English attacks. Do remember to feature the story of the Portugese tourists, flying their flag on their vehicle, who had to be rescued from a mob in Berwick, to balance things up a bit. It also illustrates that visiting another country and flying your flag can be provacative and a bit too 'in your face'. In Scotland we have noted the lack of English cars in England flying the St George's cross. Why put them on to visit Scotland or Wales?
To finish, if you must feature that prune faced anti-Scottish monster from the Mail to give her opinion, at least balance her up with someone pro-Scottish who doesn't constantly come out with that tired old line about us whinging. Or send her to Oz (preferably one-way) to ask the Australians why they refer to English immigrants as 'Whinging Poms.'
Good Evening Peter. R5L makes me cringe too.
Newsnight is essentially a political programme, and the public simply arenât interested in âtraditionalâ politics anymore. Flashy graphics, cheap stunts etc arenât going to change this.
So what can Newsnight do to avoid being the next TOTP?
Iâd suggest reinventing newsnight as a the front end of a âhubâ for political debate. A place where an interest in politics can develop, not be stifled by the vested interests of the party system.
If you want the nitty gritty youâll have to prove this is no 606esc PR exercise where you ask our views after having already made your mind up about the shape of things to come.
What should Newsnight be?
Well it's simple really, Newsnight should deliver civilised debate on important issues. If newsnight doesn't show itself as a strong serious programme then we would be losing a great resource.
But thats not saying that Homour isn't needed, it is. Badgering experts oftens gets the truth out which is in the end what Newsnight should be aiming to get.
Keep the dry humour and the pointed questioning. Both are a refreshing change here in North America. Please don't lapse into navel gazing - that would be stealing the Canadian identity.
You prepare a show on current events five nights a week and fifty two weeks a year - did I miss the newsletter in which you promised your multi-faceted audience that all of your programs would please all of your audience - all of the time?
Go on doing what you do, quietly evolving as the new rubs against the old - attracting criticism on occasion means that you have people in your audience who not only apathetically switch you on to doze to, but actually watch and evaluate and care. Good for you - keep it up.
At the 'car'point I switched off. I watch the programme for informed comment on NEWS.
What should Newsnight be ? In no particular order : (1) space to look and think about longer-term issues, (2) good analysis of developing situations (3) provocation
Of course, a little-lightheartedness is not out of order from time-to-time. I suspect that Jeremy Paxman [well-known as an angler] may have been the inspiration of the "flag car" - a juicy bait indeed. Well, the SNP took it, hook, line and stinker ! Congratulations on a pretty cast Mr Paxman - but take care, too much flippancy in the diet can lead to mental constipation
Lastly, keep up getting interesting guests - more historians too please (often the most insightful people of all)
I have given up my practice (during the past 2 years) of responding to ±«Óătv's 'Have Your Say' as so few of my comments ever appear, although they do not infringe your criteria.
The simple fact is that if a panel selects what appears and what does not, then it is no longer the collective or average view of your respondents, but the desired view of your panelists. Thus are opinions massaged and corrupted in today's media circus. If any bias is to be encouraged it should be to respect and favour comments from your long-term and loyal viewers.As a 74 year-old Englishman who has spent years working on 3rd world development projects, married to an Asian, and with children aged from 11 to 45, I have been a life-long ±«Óătv listener/ viewer. Some anchoring of our culture should be a desirable feature in this age of blip and dumbing down.
With regard to Richard Marriot's comment about immigration, Newsnight has regularly covered this subject. Indeed Thursday's edition of Newsnight included a report on the impact, both in the UK and Poland, of much higher than expected immigraton from Poland following the enlargement of the European Union.
Overall, I think Newsnight is by far the best current affairs programme on UK TV. In fact, I think it should be simulcast, or repeated, on ±«Óătv World.
My only complaint is that somestimes Newsnight can appear to be a little obsessed with itself. The Newsnight weather report debate springs to mind.
As far as I am concerned, I shall continue to watch Newsnight because it is the only news programme which takes the viewer seriously.
I seem to remember that Vincent Hanna's reports often bordered on the facetious, yet nobody would ever have accused him of cheap tabloid journalism!
Keep it sober and crisp. As the Germans say: In der Beschrankung zeigt sich erst der Meister. There is no need for stunts on Newsnight, and if you ever feel the urge to drive a pink Beetle down Niagara Falls, repress it.
The best items I have seen on Newsnight over the past year must have been the contributions by the Baghdad Blogger. Austere, but gripping.
And Newsnight should resist the urge to cover what everybody else is covering. We expect from Newsnight that it will show us more than we can discover elsewhere.
I have already complained about that "car item" but I wouldn't condemn you for experimenting. Newsnight should take a deeper and perhaps more reflective view of current news items then the Six and Ten O'clock ±«Óătv1 slots.
This may mean experimenting with story telling methods and angles and thats all well and good, humour is a fundamental to life and is not out of place on a news programme (the car thing was meant to partly humourous wasn't it?).
When experimenting you get success and failures and you can learn from both. For my money your batting average on successful experiments is something that the English cricket team would be proud of. The gordaq, ethical man and the wanderings of Michael Crick all brighten up an evening. The occaisional items on figures from the music scene are also most welcome. There is a whole world of stuff out there, find us the important, the interesting and find a little bit of room for odd frivolous story.
Keep trying new things and don't be afraid to revisit the car issue - just try another angle next time
It's a sad testament to the Newsnight programme when they have to ask people what they want to see on it. In fact the question strikes me as a bit tongue in cheek...
Maybe those involved in the making of the clip should show some guts and actually admit they were wrong in making and broadcasting it. It's one way of gaining the respect that they've lost.
Newsnight should show more news and reports on countries that never seem to get a mention...that also applies to the rest of ±«Óătv TV...or will we be exposed to yet another UK or US inspired story...
Newsnight should be a serious programme of political analysis. All the football reports were not really news stories at all, but sports stories that should be left to sports programmes. It was not so much that the England car story was wrong (though it looked like the reporter had had to really work hard to find a place to get the car trashed) as that the total number of football stories during the world cup was excessive for a news programme.
The occasional off-beat item is good. The historical pieces, for example, are a great innovation.
Changing the theme music, by the way, especially the versions sometimes played at the end of the programme, was not a success. The Montenegrin national anthem was better.
#38, I think you're thinking of Question Time, not Newsnight!
Irrelevantly, I like how Newsnight packages its, erm, packages, in clever and inventive ways... like a few weeks ago each report was introduced with a rip-off of the TV series "Sleeper Cell" title sequence (I'm guessing I'm the only person who noticed this), and a few years ago now, the Blair/Brown relationship was portrayed as a parody of the West Wing ('The Westminster Wing'.
Little things like this make it even better.
Why do people think there is anything different about the car news story as compared to other news reporting? It is hard to pinpoint any Newsnight piece which doesn't have some kind of investigative aspect. Some commenters appear to think a news programme should consist of nothing more than a passive reporting of events. There is space for such a programme or service, but Newsnight isn't it.
A large part of Newsnight is based around interviews: these "create" news by posing questions to individuals in a situation where their responses are made public, as an indication of their feelings or intentions, in the public interest. The car piece was an "interview" with a small selection of the Scottish public, posing the question "what would you do or say to a car decked out in English flags?", and the response varied considerably. It was undoubtedly an interesting piece, clearly it was not a "scientific experiment" (how many pieces on Newsnight are?), but I assume intelligent viewers will be able to recognise this and judge it accordingly? And no matter what their geographical location happens to be.
Keep poking the bear, Newsnight.
Stick to your guns Peter... I totally agree with your column this week and see the need for a programme to change. What would we do it the ±«Óătv dropped Newsnight - attempts must be made to bring in more (and younger) viewers - these old-timers wont live forever! Items such as the Scottish car experiment are interesting and provoke debate... that's what we want! Also, Newsnight still covers all the "serious" news in ways unmatched by any other news programme. Keep it up!
Whatever the modernising just-out-of-grad-school people suggest as changes, you should do the opposite.
I'm thirty-five, and I'm continually being annoyed by news and current affairs being turned into "entertainment" for the under 30's. Most people for whom "youth stories" might apply are out down the pub at 10.30. Don't try attracting a younger, stupider audience; keep your current viewers happy.
The ±«Óătv has got to stop taking things away from its core viewers. Once young people have been lost to sex, drugs and gameboys, they're not gonna come back, so stop chasing them.
I think the first half of newsnight is actually really good quality and strikes a pretty good balance. Being a Scot and watching the second part of the programme, I have to say that I am disappointed.
The Scotland segment, post devolution is absolutely needed, but the content is repetitive and the presentation is tired and boring beyond belief. Message to the UK production team - help!
Newsnight sets the standard by which all news and current affairs programmes should be judged. It is well edited, well presented and, above all, it does not speak down to us. It allows enough time for serious issues to be discussed seriously and it allows that humour has a place in this.
It does not assume that our attention span is so short that we need two presenters throwing material backwards and forwards like a shuttlecock.
As a grandfather, I love Newsround. As an adult, I love Newsnight. Heaven preserve us from the middle ground.
I do not see what's the fuss with the Scottish car thing. Mind you, what can be expected from a programme whose anchormen call SUV owners pariahs?
As an American who has lived in Britain for a dozen years now, it is easy to forget just how radical Newsnight continues to be â especially given that it appears on a terrestrial channel sponsored by taxpayersâ money. I periodically ask my US friends to watch the web-versions of the more striking set-pieces, such as the debate over the Guantanamo detainment, which managed to compress an enormous amount of information, speculation and emotion into a very tight dramatic format. (For example, nobody spoke for more than 3 minutes at a stretch.) My friends found it sensationalistic but it certainly got them talking in ways that forced them beyond the nostrums one finds on both the right and the left of the mainstream US media. In the US, the press prides itself on political neutrality, whereas in the UK it prides itself on a consistent adversarial attitude toward the default position â be it in politics or the public opinion (though the two can be played off against each other).
I am always impressed by the strategic efforts taken by Newsnight reporters and anchors to âbreak frameâ with the interviewees, especially the more robotic (a.k.a. âon messageâ) politicians like David Miliband and Hazel Blears, by forcing them to contemplate whether what theyâre saying is really B.S. at the end of the day. (Under the circumstances, they usually manage to acquit themselves reasonably well.) This happens much less often in the US, sometimes because questions need to be vetted in advance, which does amount to a muzzling of a free press.
When Lord Reith described the ±«Óătvâs tripartite mission â inform, educate and entertain â Iâm not sure he meant that the three things should be equally captured in each programme. However I think this is really the standard that Newsnight lives up to, more than any other programme the ±«Óătv produces. There is really nothing like it, and I would simply let the people in charge to follow their instincts.
Newsnight is too often a soapbox for news-views, rather than news. As a viewer of many years and family rows with my wife who needs the weather forecast on ±«Óătv1 at 22:35 I've stuck by you thro' thick and thin but now I can switch you on at 22:40 etc. I sometimes do comparisons between you and Jon Snow and you both sing very definitely from the same hymn sheet and I guess voted the same way in elections. As someone who's never ever voted for New Labour my feeling is Kirsty is a closet card-carrying Lib Dem. There is so much more than happens outside our little universe, but you are too glued to your own bubble.
Tony Nolan
Newsnight should carry on what it's doing. It's great. Don't be swayed by politicians having a pop for their own political ends and please don't go down the news-lite route chosen by the other news providers.
I became suspicious of NewsNight after being offered the name of the editors pet Hamsters in a newsletter.
Keep it sober with a dry wit!
Newsnight is THE ONE news program that my daughter has been watching regularly since she was 13 (she is now 21). So, you do have young and commited viewers.
We like both the polemic nature of the items. It gets us talking. The range of anchors is also good and allows for their own approach to emerge.
We have noticed that in recent months you have tried too hard to become populist - for instance some of Michael Crick items had no real news in them. Others, like the one looking at Leipzig were quite thought provoking.
If you want to get wider audience, then one way of doing it is to have a broader line of guests. Same old boring politicians repeating party line in the studio are not much fun to watch!
As for Newsnight Review, new presenter has a lot to learn to get close to others before him. We are losing patience with him.
it is critical that news is 'accessible' - people hate that word but as far as i'm concerned if it means a little bit of light and dark in the programme leads to a few more people watching it then do it. what do the rest of you want to do - sit in a little private highbrow news box?
what does need changing at Newsnight - and i know this is not quite the question being asked - is some of the interview style. in my view there is simply no need for an incisive and thorough, delving interview also to be rude. it's the Paxman question. the other presenters generally manage without being too sneering and rude to guests, why can't he? it's macho and not much else. that's what's old-fashioned and tired about the programme.
Give us the truth in the news,not like it is in America and so many other countries now where the media is no-longer a vessel for the truth but is controlled by the government to control and brain-wash the people.
Is an example of the power that the internet has and it wont be long before they try to control sites such as this that tell the truth over issues we deserve to know about.
I for one dont care when Posh+Becks have done this or x,y,z "celebrity" have done something equally inane.
This is not news and we deserve to know what is happening around the world to better ourselfs and arm ourselves with the truth.
I often turn to Newsnight in preference to the London centric view of the world on the main ±«Óătv nightly news. The Scottish car stunt story seemed at odds with Newsnight's normal serious news programming. It look like mischief making and probably provided a laugh for dim wits that dreamt it up.
I actually preferred the old format of the program. The split for Newsnight Scotland would appear to shorten time spent on some important news items. Restoring the old Newsnight format and having a "regional" ±«Óătv Scotland six o'clock news would provide more editorial balance for license payers north of the border.
I've been watching Newsnight on and off for 20 years. I've loved being entertained, informed and occasionally enraged by your pieces.
I was living in Iran until a couple of years ago, and I find that Neswnight is the only programme that gets close to bringing the British public a deeper view of what is happening in the region.
Please keep it up - and keep up the humour too, there should always be space for that.
Being a relatively new addition to British society, I have always been fascinated by the way how my English boss cusses my scottish colleagues all the time.. quite openly at that.
The 'English Car in Scottish Parts of Britain' was the other side of the coin that viewers like me would never have otherwise seen.
Regardless of the debate whether this piece is sensational journalism or not.. it definitely caters to the curiosity of viewers like me.. who pay equal license fees as others.
Sorry i never said in my previous post but i think you guys and girls do a fantastic job.Keep it up !!
Newsnight wit is intelligent it is not a tabloid humour - news is so serious a little light relief contrasts so that the more serious subject matter is treated as such.
A whole program of serious discussion would test most viewers, please keep the wit and humour. In these trying times we need to lighten up as well as take important matters seriously.
Always watch Newsnight. It is at its best when Jeremy does not allow a politician to wriggle away from the question in order, usually, to blame the "Other" party/politician.
Yes, no more stunts but serious analysis of the day's news. Not keen on Kirsty Wark,"but more of that later!"
You keep on and on and on about change. Have you ever heard the term "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"?
Your constant angling about potential changes to the programme is getting tedious. You must have had enough feedback to fill hundreds of programmes when you were asking about the format, decor, music. On and on and on. Haven't news editors got enough to write about, with the country in tatters?
Please keep the content of the programme we know as "Newsnight", otherwise there is no point. You might as well end it and have an entirely new programme. What about one called "Big Brother's Big News"? Viewers could eliminate the news items they liked least.
I must do something else before my blood pressure goes sky high. Incidentally the 'dumbing down' so far has made me lose some interest.
I understand that there have been some complaints and even an Early Day Motion raised in the Commons over Tim Samuels' Newsnight piece last week. The story, where the reporter took a car bedecked in England flags on a tour of Glasgow - to gauge local reaction, was extremely revealing.
A Scottish MP described the piece as:
'...clearly a set up by the ±«Óătv to encourage anti-social behaviour...to tarnish and besmirch the reputation of Scottish sports fans...'
The reality, whereby a parked car was openly vandalised in broad daylight by hooded youths (simply because it displayed the colours of another country), was a horrifying show of racist violence.
The MP in question would be better served campaigning to remove racism from the streets of his constintuency, rather than rasing inane Commons motions trying to justify the out of control violence that is obviously rife in that part of Glasgow.
Agree totally with Ann, the humour in the programme is welcome and intelligent.
My dad watched the programme right from day 1 and never missed; he still watched practically every night up to the day he died, which was only two years ago. He enjoyed seeing the format and style evolve over time. Above all, he always valued the programme and what it delivers.
It's a good format precisely because it has changed with the times - if it hadn't it would probably be long gone by now.
Those that think that Newsnight should be all about serious news are obviously not hardcore Newsnighters. There has always been wit, levity, and a lighter-hearted approach to national and international events on the programme. Please don't let that change or i will have to revert to other late night, hardcore pursuits.
It hardly needed these special efforts to determine if there is animosity between some Scots and some English. It is a fact.
However, most English and Scots are tolerant, work and play well together, in Scotland and in England.
So Newsnight would have been wiser to consider the fact of those majority and minority attitudes within the United Kingdom as part and parcel of the whole 'racial problem that exists.
At least 'we' do not kill each other because of our differences, perhaps some other races and religious could be as wise?
Discuss.
I'm Collected Eric (the one with the blog). I'm just a viewer like the rest of us. The reason I watch Newsnight is because it has, over the years, provided the background for serious issues, at home and abroad.
On the blog I make all sorts of witty (or puerile, if you like) comments about the items examined, but part of the reason I make them is not because I'm permanently grumpy, but because I want Newsnight to remain one of the few ±«Óătv TV programmes (like Question Time and This Week, for that matter) that can balance serious coverage with an element of humour. But the seriousness comes first.
The reason I've mentioned the idea of Old Newsnight and New Newsnight (reflecting the same dichotomy within the Labour Party) is because I have indeed been worried over the past few months that some innovator has got hold of the programme and wants to tweak and turn it into another lighthearted, substanceless babble about random news and "news", with lightweight items about the arts sprinkled about for the sake of amusement. Tabloid news programmes are two-a-penny; Newsnight should remain aloof from the drive towards populism.
I like the established format of three main items plus a bit of news in the middle and the Review on Fridays. I see no reason whatsoever to tinker around with that basic framework, though obviously exceptions can be introduced now and again to lighten it up a bit.
Without mentioning names, I have found some innovations interesting, because they simply wrap up a serious issue in a little wit. However, the core of the item must be sound. If too many witty comments are made about matters that are steeped in trivia, Newsnight will be devalued to the level of yet another news show. It should remain a programme, not become a show.
The news, like the arts, is a deadly serious business.
I began turning Newsnight off because of the introduction of music into so-called news items. Music biases the emotions, so setting the tone for films and other ENTERTAINMENT. But, if you're after improving your brain, this bias seems to go along with a lower intellectual content. Basically, the analysis is replaced by sad repetitions of old views. Seems to me it's to do with Americanising things, either for sales or the politics our lords and masters want us to have. Either way, they're to be congratulated at their audience-turn-off powers. Maybe quality will return some day.
Enjoyed Mark Urban's piece on this evening's, Thursday's, programme. However, in it, and in his live piece with Martha on the divide in the UN, I was very surprised to see Britain's stance being left out of the duscussion. It was made to appear that only the US had sided with Israel against the UN call's for an'immediate ceasefire'. A quick glance at this morning's 'The Independent' front page paints a very clear picture!
I wonder what viewers'posts about "Newnight" are for, exactly? Does anyone take a concensus of views and act accordingly? Maybe the producers at the ±«Óătv have taken a leaf out of the Government's book, i.e. let people have a rant, do-as-we-like-anyway, then during the holidays heated views on a topic will all melt away, especally in the long summer one, after which everyone will have forgotten what was said ages ago.
I have noticed a decline in the quality of in depth analysis in recent months. Where is the programme going. If it is trying to engage a more materalistic generation in real issues, prehaps we can have trinnie and sussie,disect the dress sense of our top politicians and how that relates to their ability to run the country. Jade Goody on the present situation in the middle east. the point is that the now generation being brought up in our celebrity/conspicuous consumptive society have no interest in what is really happening today. They will only engage when they really need to, and then only to find out who is going to pull them out of the sh**.
If serious news and debate is now secondary to whats hip and happening, put newsnight on ±«Óătv4 and as has been said previously said run News Of The Night with davina and dermott hosting. Perhaps bono (minus his stooges) could be war correspondent. The people who really interested in news and debate will add to viewers of ±«Óătv4, the rest can continue to muse on the real problems of the day, Is brown the new black and where can I get a my ordinary face and ordinary life the most exposure.
Last night' s edition of Newsnight included a discussion by an assembled panel on the chances of ever attaining peace in the current middle east conflict. All but one of those invloved were introduced and thus defined in a manner which provided we the viewers with a clear context for their presence. The curious exception to this arrangement was one Azzam Tamini who was introduced rather coyly by the presenter as one who had attend conferences with Hezzbola. I read today that this individual is an ideologue for an group called the Muslim Brotherhood who espouse an ideology characterized by hatred of both Israel and the West. Why was this person chosen by your editors to appear and why was he not introduced clearly for what he is and what he represents ?
A word of praise for Ethical Man Justin Rowatt. Excellent that he can go into great depth on eco-stories, interviewing academics, policy wonks, slightly strange eco-warriors (the bloke who showers in his own egg-cup, etc), whle at the same time preserving a light touch, illustrating eco/ethical issues graphically & personally. The repeated flocks of water bottles hammered home our profligacy in using 150 litres per day per head in the UK. Sure, sometime the exercise feels a bit of stunt, like a tabloid reporter "living" a story for duration (e.g. the World Cup, the Falklands, Justin as the "Boy who Supports our Biosphere") - but on the whole, it is in the best traditions of sceptical, intelligent, investigative journalism. His series succeeds in unpicking both our lifestyles, and the eco-arguments which often set in opposition to them. The Ethical Wife and Ethical Offspring are pretty telegenic too !
As usual with all this ther is the standard attitute of "look at grandstand" etc.. Well Newsnight has definately suffered lately ther is definately soomthing in the air to do it down. And Grandstand and other prgrammes have not suffered it merely the will of the Corporation. It is rubbish to say ther is nothing left to broadcast on Saturday or Sunday which is sport. There is clearly plenty that is why sport will continue on the ±«Óătv at the weekend. It has just been decided, for whatever reason, that it should not be under the Grandstand banner which is a great shame - to betray the roots of ±«Óătv sporting broadcast history. It should not be forgotten that the ±«Óătv are by far away the best at covering any sport which you choose to watch.
The latest Newsnight (10Aug) item about journalists' tapping mobiles was appalingly condescendent. It was as if this is a minor (and frequent) occurrence and (probably) should be tolerated. Typical of journalists to apply lower standards of conduct for themselves (Newsnight included)than to any other source of news. Had the same been done by an MP, doctor, ministry official, Newsnight would have made a huge fuss and taken the highest moral ground in their stance, with extra-tough questioning of interviewees (all of whom were journalists; not a decent person in the panel). We are all increasingly having to watch News with distrust, guessing which newscaster's career will benefit from whatever disclosure, by applying the highest level of spin (for others) and the lowest for their media hacks peers.
Please stick to giving out the news.
We get all the humour we need from reading the feedback.
Dear all,
I am glad you finally present Iran's President to the camera. Lots of things were said about him and Iranians but not much space is given to him and other Iranians to expose their opinions direct to the public.
I am also very relieved you keep covering international news (Lebanon, Iraq,). Other ±«Óătv news programmes are giving too much time, almost the whole programme, to this alleged new terrorist plot without examining the reasons behind it.
Regarding International news, I would like to suggest better coverage, perhaps a special report about what is going on in Sri Lanka. Yesterday 61 children were killed. Why, how, who did it?