BBC political journalist Andrew Marr made his return to TV screens today for the first time since the lifting of his controversial superinjunction. His reappearance followed accusations of hypocrisy in the media and this morning we posed the question, via Twitter, whether recent revelations undermine Marr's credibility and his ability therefore to effectively fulfil one of the BBC's most high-profile journalist roles.
Mark Colvin, an ABC radio presenter, responded: "Journalists who use repressive laws forfeit their right to champion free speech. I'm an interviewer by trade and I'd say any time my behaviour becomes 'the story' I've failed."
And positive responses were certainly few and far between.
Bob Owen said Marr was "doing a pretty good job" on his BBC reappearance but added it was "ironic" for a journalist to limit the freedom of the press with a court order.
Other's thought irony was better described as hypocrisy. Gillian Dearnley said "he's now open to charges of hypocrisy, which can't be a good thing when grilling politicians for whom it's a way of life".
Charlotte Stamper suggested it may also limit Marr's willingness to delve into instances where MPs' private lives conflict with their professional roles and responsibilities.
Whether that is true or not, once an audience thinks a journalist is pulling punches lest a few choice remarks come back the other way, their effectiveness as an interviewer on the biggest stage is surely undermined. Though PR professional Tommy Flisher added that Marr's effectiveness "depends to some extent on whether his confidence has gone", but warned "if the viewer can feel it, then he's a goner".
So what next for Marr?
One respondent likened his situation to Angus Deayton. In 2002, tabloid claims about Deayton's private life saw him dismissed from his role hosting Have I Got News For You after it was decided that his part in calling others to account for hyprocrisy, scandal and abuses of power was untenable. Deayton clung on through one round of tabloid revelations but a statement from the BBC at the time attributed his eventual departure to "continued stories [that] made him the subject of headlines, rather than commentating on them."
Comments