Paul Birch

They won't let you: any such statements will get ignored, and they will push until they get a statement they can twist to make you look silly. It is quite easily done, unless every interview you do is broadcast live and unedited.

Only by carefully saying nothing. I don't know of a single politician who, when the media turn hostile, has been able to avoid being made to look bad (at least in some peoples' eyes).

Any statement warning people of the dangers of the EU will be seen in that light by the europhiles. Radical or unwelcome messages will always be ridiculed. That's life.

That statement itself could be used to make you look a conceited fool. And so-called media training mostly makes one look phoney, evasive or out of touch with ordinary people (like the guy at the Bristol conference; he spoke well, but I'd never buy a second-hand car off him; he wasn't real).

C_steam

Your position, as i understand it is that no matter what, the media will make a fool out of you if they want to and the 'victim' can't do a lot about it.

True, but my belief (and I've witnessed it, and worked with experts in the field) is that the individuals themselves bring on a lot of the flak they get. Firstly, by putting forward extreme positions which then have to be defended (Nattrass), and secondly by "bumptious - humour, which has a tendency to backfire" (Bloom).

Contrast this with Farage who seems to present himself well to the media, or to Hockney, who comes over VERY well.

Regarding media training - I've seen this in action, and it works brilliantly. I guess it depends on which company you use, but the one we use is superb.

Finally, I don't think my self - belief that I would perform in the media better than bloom is conceited since most amoeba would perform better than bloom. These people are an embarrasment and a huge load on a party which wishes to be taken seriously. The more that Bloom and co get public airing, the worse UKIP will perform.

Why? He's supposed to be a serious politician.

[/quote]

Lawrie Boxall

On this subject - below an extract from my message to Berkshire members in our July 2004 newsletter. Ironic really that I have been unable finally to take my own advice.

"In the last few months some local members (and indeed members of my family) have expressed their annoyance to me over remarks made by some of our newly elected representatives and over certain decisions made by the Party leadership. The main bones of contention being the comments by Godfrey Bloom MEP about employment law and women’s role in the workplace and the leadership’s decision not to fight parliamentary by-elections unless we have both a substantial pot of money and a realistic chance of winning. I share many of these concerns myself but I think it is important that we do not over-react. Realistically, none of us will be able to agree with everything said and done by those who run our Party. We should also be prepared to give them credit for the successful strategy that has put UKIP onto the political radar for the first time. However, as one member recently put it; the time for jokes and flippant remarks is long gone - if we wish to be taken seriously by the electorate we must demonstrate that we have both the solutions to the issues which confront the Country and the professionalism to carry them through"

Paul Birch

All right, I'll accept that. But some people naturally have a cool head under fire. It's unreasonable to expect every spokesman to be as good as the best.

Remember too that different audiences react differently. Many people prefer Nattrass to Farage; they trust him because they think he says what he believes, whereas Nigel is so slick he can come across as insincere.

Whether or not that's actually true, a clever journalist could use your claim to make you look conceited.

I don't agree at all. I would be far less likely to vote for a party that bullies such people off the stage or pushes them INTO phpbb_the background, or tries to force all its spokesmen INTO phpbb_the same bland media-friendly mode.

I presume you mean, why is it easier said than done? Because it is very difficult to think fast on the spur of the moment under hostile questioning. The temptation to try to defuse the situation by joking is very strong. He should learn with experience, but that takes time. In theory, he could be trained faster, with practice interviews in which he is attacked similarly, but the real thing is different, and the risk of inculcating bad habits that look like insincerity or political correctness is considerable.

kernow

Unfortunately these days political leaders have to have TV savvy. It doesn't make any difference how nice they are off camera amongst friends, when we're trying to present ourselves as a serious political party, we cannot have our leaders acting the fool infront of the camera like Godfrey Bloom does. What we need is a few more Generals with the Nigel Farage type confidence and smoothness infront of the camera but with less of his "Tory Boy type :wink: " arrogance.