"Media-Training" and Populism

(there'll be more than one psychological 'expert' in this of course)

And so to drinks where I converse with the Commander of a Royal Naval destroyer. His "media-training" is mentioned so I ask him in what this consists. He proudly tells me that when one is asked a question the last thing one ever does is to answer it directly. Instead, one uses a "bridge" in order to divert the question content to where one wants to be and, then, one slams home the message and agenda one wants to push. This is seen as a skill or a sophistication. I suggest that the agenda -jousting that this engenders between the interviewer and interviewee may not be terribly edifying for the forgotten third party here - the viewer, who is being gulled into believing he is watching a real conversation. It could be averred, of course that these two consider the viewer to be too thick to understand what they are up to and that, therefore, my objection is of no moment. This seems to me to be the definition of arrogance; a conspiracy, generated by people like the bullying mental health victim, Alistair Campbell to treat the populace with contempt. Problem is the populace can see through this and, hence, the rise of a populism which hates these patronising elites in politics and the media.

What distinguishes the blessed JRM, peace be upon him, is that, instead of adopting these slimy stratagems, he always addresses the question directly (at which point the interviewer usually talks over him because he's being inconveniently cogent).