Humphrys - A day like today: memoirs

William Collins

An imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers

1 London Bridge Street

London SE1 9GF

www.WilliamCollinsBooks.com

This eBook first published in Great Britain by William Collins in 2019

Copyright John Humphrys 2019

Cover image Jeff Overs/Getty Images

All images courtesy of the author unless otherwise stated.

Every effort has been made to trace copyright holders and to obtain their permission for the use of copyright material. The publisher apologises for any errors or omissions in the above list and would be grateful if notified of any corrections that should be incorporated in future editions of this book.

John Humphrys asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. By payment of the required fees, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of this e-book on screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, down-loaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of HarperCollins.

Source ISBN: 9780007415571

eBook Edition October 2019 ISBN: 9780007415601

Version: 2019-09-13

For Sarah

In which I answer the questions in the way I choose

JH: Good morning. Its ten past eight and Im John Humphrys. With me live in the studio is John Humphrys. Its just been announced that hes finally decided to leave Today after thirty-three years. Mr Humphrys, why leave it so long?

JH: Well, as you said its been thirty-three years and thats

JH: I know how long its been far too long for the taste of many listeners, some might say. Its because your style of interviewing has long passed its sell-by date, isnt it?

JH: Well I suppose some people might say that but

JH: You suppose some people might say that? Is it true or not?

JH: Im not sure its really up to me to pass judgement on that because

JH: What dyou mean youre not sure! You either have a view on it or you dont.

JH: Well I do but you keep interrupting me and

JH: Ha! I keep interrupting you! Thats a bit rich. Isnt that exactly what youve been doing to your guests on this programme for the past thirty-three years and isnt that one of the reasons why the audience has finally had enough of you not to mention your own bosses?

JH: I really dont think thats fair. After all it was only politicians I ever interrupted and only then if they werent answering the question.

JH: You mean if they didnt answer YOUR questions in the way YOU chose

JH: Again thats not fair because

JH: Are you seriously suggesting that you didnt approach every political interview with your own views and if the politician didnt happen to share those views they were toast? You did your best to cut them off at the knees.

JH: Thats nonsense. The job of the interviewer is to act as devils advocate to test the politicians argument and

JH: And to make them look like fools and to make you look clever. Its just an ego trip, isnt it?

JH: No and if that were really the case the politician would refuse to appear on Today. And mostly they dont

JH: Ah! You say mostly, which is a weasel word if ever I heard one. Isnt it the case that when they do refuse its because they know you will deny them the chance to get their message across because all you want is a shouting match?

JH: Not at all. Theyre a pretty robust bunch and Id like to think they hide from the live microphone because they dont want to be faced with questions that might very well embarrass them if they answer frankly and honestly.

JH: Im sure thats what youd like to think but the facts suggest otherwise dont they? And when they do try to answer frankly, you either snort with disbelief or try to ridicule them.

JH: Look, I wouldnt deny that I get frustrated when the politician is simply refusing to answer the question, and Im sure the listeners feel the same. Its my job to ask the questions they want answered and if the politician refuses to engage or pulls the I think what people really want to know trick, then its true that occasionally I do let my irritation show.

JH: Nonsense! The fact is you have often been downright rude and that is simply not acceptable.

JH: Well we agree on something at last! Youre absolutely right when you say being rude is unacceptable and I admit that Ive been guilty of it but not often. In my own defence I can think of only a tiny number of occasions when its happened and I regret it enormously not least because it really does upset the audience. One of the biggest postbags Ive ever had (in the days before email which shows you how long ago it happened) was for an interview in which I really did lose my temper. The audience ripped me apart afterwards and they were quite right to do so. If we invite people onto the programme we have to treat them in a civilised manner.

JH: So weve established that youre not some saintly figure who always occupies the moral high ground. I suppose thats a concession of sorts. But what Im accusing you of goes much wider than that. Of course you have a responsibility to the audience and to the interviewee but you also have a wider responsibility. Let me suggest that when people like you treat politicians with contempt you invite us, the listeners, to do the same. And thats bad for the whole democratic process.

JH: Once again, I agree with you. Not that we treat them with contempt, but that programmes like Today might contribute to the growing cynicism society has for politicians and the whole political process. But which would you prefer: a society in which politicians are regarded with awe and deference, or a society in which they are publicly held to account for their actions by people like me who question them when things go wrong or when we suspect they might be misleading us?

JH: Not for me to say: Im the one whos asking the questions this time remember! But what Im asking you to deal with is a rather different accusation. If people like you, whove never been elected to so much as a seat on the local parish council, dont show any respect to the people the nation has elected to run the country why should anyone else?

JH: But thats not what Im saying. Quite the opposite. I cant speak for my colleagues, but I have huge respect for the men and women who choose to go into politics. I hate the idea that for so many people politics has become a dirty word. Henry Kissinger once said ninety per cent of politicians give the other ten per cent a bad reputation. The wonderful American comedian Lily Tomlin put it like this: Ninety-eight per cent of the adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. Its the other lousy two per cent who get all the publicity. But then we elected them. Yes, thats funny, but its wrong. One of the greatest broadcasters of the last century, Edward R. Murrow, got closer to it when he chastised politicians who complained that broadcasters had turned politics into a circus. He said the circus was already there and all the broadcasters had done was show the people that not all the performers were well trained.