Debate: Was Eddie Mair right to call Boris Johnson a ‘nasty piece of work’?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
What's going on?
Boris Johnson was made to squirm in a Sunday morning interview with Eddie Mair in which the stand-in Andrew Marr Show host subjected the Mayor of London to a grilling on matters of personal integrity.
Mair, whose rise has been profiled by our Media Editor Ian Burrell, challenged Boris on three controversial episodes from his past, including a made-up quote, a denied affair and his decision to hand over the address of a journalist so a friend could have him assaulted.
Summing up, Mair said: "Aren't you in fact making up quotes, lying to your party leader, wanting to be part of someone being physically assaulted...you're a nasty piece of work, aren't you?"
Boris said he would challenge all three allegations.
But was Mair's abrasive interview justifiable broadcasting?
Case for: Incisive
At last, a journalist was incisive enough in their dealings with the Mayor to break through Johnson's blond force-field of buffoonery. The kind of questions Mair asked are exactly those to which answers must be given if the public is to have a true appreciation of a politician's character. Mair will have reminded the electorate that Johnson, for all his ahming and erring, is no mild-mannered eccentric; he's a ruthless sort willing to lie and fight his way to the top. His interview has set a new bar to which all broadcasters (except the esteemed Paxman) should aspire. Deference is out the window, holding MPs to account back in.
Case against: Trivial
The sight of a Conservative getting pummelled has distracted the majority from what was, in essence, a small-minded ambush on live television. Who expects politicians to have gone through a career without making a few personal mistakes? (And two of the three questions Mair asked were undeniably personal). What bearing does a phone conversation with an irate friend have on Johnson's record in power? Less than zero. Mair puffed out his chest and acted cock-of-the-roost, but he debased himself by pursuing such a trivial line of questioning. Our politics is weaker, not stronger, for his intervention.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments