Parsons' film piece was indeed weak and wideboy-bolshy: it would be interesting to know the extent to which the content was determined by The Pundit vs the show's Producer or the item director - but it was quite invigorating to see politicians actually calling someone out on tis crap on TV instead of sitting there and tolerating abuse because they don't want to alienate any voters
he seemed initially *stunned* by the instant retort from claire short before it all started kicking off - i kept waiting for the old 'fuck you' music journo side of him to kick in, and it did, and it was quite a charged atmosphere - but by the end of it, when he actually had engaged in argument with clarke, he pretty much had the stuffing kicked out of him(it was a shame in a way to see one win over the other - spoiled the schadenfruede of seeing 2 assholes kicking lumps out of each other)
: was it a triumph of complex political argument over simplistic tabloid crap, or indeed an illustration of the hermetic politicking or (necessary?) bumptious self-belief of politicians as moral/societal leaders - or should there be a pox on both their houses ?
― Snowy Mann (rdmanston), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:13 (twenty years ago)
― JimD (JimD), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:19 (twenty years ago)
― JimD (JimD), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:20 (twenty years ago)
hey it has just occurred to me that it might be available for repeat viewing on this new 'teleport' thing that Telewest are rolling out
haha a likeley scenario - it's all gonna be soaps and suds
― Snowy Mann (rdmanston), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:25 (twenty years ago)
it was like seeing one of those middle-aged 'lads' reduced to being a naughty schoolboy
― Snowy Mann (rdmanston), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:29 (twenty years ago)
and illiterate
― Snowy Mann (rdmanston), Friday, 11 November 2005 02:30 (twenty years ago)
― Alba (Alba), Friday, 11 November 2005 09:16 (twenty years ago)
Isn't there a programme that repeats good stuff? Like The Video Box, kind of thing.
― PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Friday, 11 November 2005 09:30 (twenty years ago)
Parcel arrived safely, tied with string.
Thank you, NickyNoo.
― PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Friday, 11 November 2005 09:31 (twenty years ago)
― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Friday, 11 November 2005 09:53 (twenty years ago)
― Britain's Obtusest Shepherd (Alan), Friday, 11 November 2005 10:07 (twenty years ago)
― Oh No, It's Dadaismus (and His Endless Stupid Jokes) (Dada), Friday, 11 November 2005 10:22 (twenty years ago)
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Friday, 11 November 2005 11:02 (twenty years ago)
― Oh No, It's Dadaismus (and His Endless Stupid Jokes) (Dada), Friday, 11 November 2005 11:07 (twenty years ago)
― Oh No, It's Dadaismus (and His Endless Stupid Jokes) (Dada), Friday, 11 November 2005 11:08 (twenty years ago)
From what I saw it was a missed chance by Tony P. There was a good opportunity to prick the balloon of smug self-satisfaction enveloping Clare and Ken. But he fluffed it...
― Bob Six (bobbysix), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:20 (twenty years ago)
As (presenter) Andrew Neil said at one point it was just like kids screaming at eachother in a playground. I don't blame Short and Clarke for being so angry. I would have been too, Parsons' piece was stupid and ignorant. And I suspect he knew it; just trying to do his "voice of the people" act as per.
Normally with these films the 'Pundit' that Snowy refers to has carte blanche to say whatever he/she likes. The whole idea is to take a provocative stance. Parsons' film however was just rude, no substance.
But as I remember it, the response was just a lot of huffing, blowing and name-calling. It wasn't obvious to me that anybody 'won'. Also worth noting that Short and Clarke are not the regular politicos on This Week, they were subbing for Diane Abbott and Michael Portillo. Now those two might have taken Parsons apart.
― Jeff W (zebedee), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:21 (twenty years ago)
― Oh No, It's Dadaismus (and His Endless Stupid Jokes) (Dada), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:23 (twenty years ago)
― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:24 (twenty years ago)
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:25 (twenty years ago)
Andrew Neil displays it in spades - his completely unnecesary solo introduction to the programme is like watching a painful and poor imitation of Clive James circa 1987.
Michael Portillo and Diane Abbott just seem to think that the audience will find it mind-boggling for all time that they're appearing together, so much so that there's no need to say anything of substance.
It was the self-congratulatory "this was a good day for parliamentary democracy' vibe to Ken and Clare that really turned me off them.
― Bob Six (bobbysix), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:33 (twenty years ago)
― Oh No, It's Dadaismus (and His Endless Stupid Jokes) (Dada), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:34 (twenty years ago)
I don't think they think about the audience much.
Andrew Neil makes a good fist of it.
I used to like Archer and Boateng, back in the block party era.
Portillo did a radio programme about Guernica the other night. He was good, I thought. I wish I could see his Great Railway Journey.
― PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:37 (twenty years ago)
― Bob Six (bobbysix), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:41 (twenty years ago)
― PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Friday, 11 November 2005 13:43 (twenty years ago)
I had to check, as they are diametrically opposed to mine.
― Bob Six (bobbysix), Friday, 11 November 2005 14:09 (twenty years ago)
― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Friday, 11 November 2005 14:18 (twenty years ago)
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 11 November 2005 14:23 (twenty years ago)
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Friday, 11 November 2005 14:59 (twenty years ago)
― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Friday, 11 November 2005 15:07 (twenty years ago)