17/05/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:18. > :00:21.Hello and welcome to Newswatch with me, Samir Ahmed. Coming up: After a

:00:22. > :00:24.tumultuous couple of years for the BBC flagship programme, where next

:00:25. > :00:27.for Newsnight? The editor is here to talk about its mixture of political

:00:28. > :00:46.and international coverage and its future without long serving

:00:47. > :00:49.presenter Jeremy Paxman. Ian Katz took over as Newsnight editor last

:00:50. > :00:52.September. In a moment we have the first broadcast interview with him

:00:53. > :00:56.since then but before we talk, here is a reminder of some of the issues

:00:57. > :00:58.he faces on a programme with a long heritage.

:00:59. > :01:01.The theme tune is familiar, but back in 1980 the idea of mixing news and

:01:02. > :01:05.current affairs, along with an occasional taste for the unexpected

:01:06. > :01:11.and quirky, was radical. Good evening and welcome at last to

:01:12. > :01:14.Newsnight. That has remained through the years, as has its capacity to

:01:15. > :01:16.arouse controversy, but it was the Government accusing Peter Snow of

:01:17. > :01:23.being patriotic in the way the Falklands law was covered, that

:01:24. > :01:33.interview with Michael Howard... ``unpatriotic. Did you threaten to

:01:34. > :01:35.overrule him? Or more recently the highly damaging rows over its

:01:36. > :01:37.failure to broadcast an investigation into Jimmy Savile,

:01:38. > :01:40.following the calamitous error of the McAlpine report which led to the

:01:41. > :01:47.resignation of BBC Director General George Entwistle. Ian was hired a

:01:48. > :01:50.year ago from the Guardian, with a brief to revitalise the programme,

:01:51. > :01:55.which had lost a third of its audience in a year. He revitalised

:01:56. > :02:11.with things like this interview with Russell Brand and this dance with

:02:12. > :02:14.Kirsty Wark. But there have been critics of this with out Nelson

:02:15. > :02:20.writing to us about the dumbing down and intellectual castration of

:02:21. > :02:31.Newsnight. And: Audience figures have stabilised but the challenge

:02:32. > :02:33.remains. How can Newsnight provide a distinctive offering which will make

:02:34. > :02:40.it compulsory viewing in a multichannel world with lots of news

:02:41. > :02:57.sources? This point was raised by viewers... One of the programme's

:02:58. > :03:08.raison d'etre has always been its in`depth coverage of politics. The

:03:09. > :03:10.task here is to make the subject compelling, a challenge exposed by

:03:11. > :03:13.Ian's tweet following this interview with Labour frontbencher Rachel

:03:14. > :03:39.Reeves, who he described as boring snoring. He later apologised. But

:03:40. > :03:42.viewers also found it revealing... Part of the mix is still lengthy

:03:43. > :03:45.films on serious subjects such as last week's 15 minute report on a

:03:46. > :03:56.slum skyscraper in Venezuela, made by the film`making residence at

:03:57. > :04:08.Newsnight. ``film`maker in residence. It also has a team that

:04:09. > :04:10.implies that serious journalism following the Jimmy Savile scandal

:04:11. > :04:14.is back on the agenda. Jeremy Paxman is leaving next month, so how will

:04:15. > :04:17.the man many regard as the Grand Inquisitor be replaced? Ian joins me

:04:18. > :04:20.now. Thank you for coming on Newswatch. When you got the job,

:04:21. > :04:25.Newsnight was in a state of crisis so what have your priorities being?

:04:26. > :04:33.There was an initial task of revitalising the show and bringing

:04:34. > :04:35.back the energy levels. There was a staff of fantastically talented

:04:36. > :04:39.journalists who had been through a tough year or so and just needed the

:04:40. > :04:50.energy and confidence back. That was the first thing. The second was to

:04:51. > :04:54.identify what was the formula for Newsnight that made it for so many

:04:55. > :04:56.years, I think, one of the most wonderful things on television

:04:57. > :05:00.anywhere in the world, and also to work out what was missing in the

:05:01. > :05:03.application of that formula and I think it was the breaking of

:05:04. > :05:06.original news, a classy analysis of the day that has just happened and

:05:07. > :05:15.the day to come, and an air of jeopardy and excitement about what

:05:16. > :05:18.might happen in the live show. Those are the things I have worked on

:05:19. > :05:22.bringing back in the last six months or so. Jeopardy is an interesting

:05:23. > :05:25.word when a lot of what you know you are doing about rebuilding trust. I

:05:26. > :05:28.would say it is absolutely the case that when it comes to the reporting

:05:29. > :05:31.that Newsnight does, there was absolutely a task of re`establishing

:05:32. > :05:34.trust after McAlpine and Jimmy Savile. What you want with Newsnight

:05:35. > :05:40.is the sense that something exciting might happen during the live show.

:05:41. > :05:42.You want viewers to think that they might miss something that could

:05:43. > :05:47.happen live tonight that people will talk about later or tomorrow. Can

:05:48. > :05:50.you give me an example of something like that that you think has worked?

:05:51. > :05:57.Things like Matthew Perry arguing about drugs. Friends actor? Yes,

:05:58. > :06:03.arguing with Peter Hitchens, which we all watched with our faces in our

:06:04. > :06:10.hands in the gallery. We thought somebody might thump somebody during

:06:11. > :06:15.the interview. That was one of those moments. But also the interview with

:06:16. > :06:17.Terry Pratchett about his Alzheimer's, that was one of the

:06:18. > :06:30.most extraordinary arresting interviews, partly because we were

:06:31. > :06:33.not sure if it would work live. Investigations are back on the

:06:34. > :06:35.agenda and you took on some controversial stories, the Edward

:06:36. > :06:39.Snowden revelations and WikiLeaks. We can't do that at the BBC, can we?

:06:40. > :06:43.I have left the Guardian so I can't speak about that. I think Newsnight

:06:44. > :06:46.is in a fabulous position to tackle complex and controversial

:06:47. > :06:49.investigations. We have hired a team of really strong investigative

:06:50. > :06:59.reporters and we can give them the time and space and support to do

:07:00. > :07:04.difficult investigations. I would hope there is not a subject that we

:07:05. > :07:07.can't investigate. One of the subjects that we got a lot of

:07:08. > :07:13.e`mails about were the jokey pay`outs. People can understand the

:07:14. > :07:16.idea of drawing in an audience, but they feel the juxtaposition with a

:07:17. > :07:19.serious story can make them feel uncomfortable. Is there a danger of

:07:20. > :07:29.trying to attract new and younger viewers and alienating the loyal

:07:30. > :07:32.older Newsnight viewers? Not everybody will love everything you

:07:33. > :07:35.do, which is an iron law, and when I look at the Twitter response to an

:07:36. > :07:50.individual Newsnight programme, if the response is running at 70`34 and

:07:51. > :08:00.against, that is broadly right. ``Seven for and three against.

:08:01. > :08:04.Humour has always been a strand of the Newsnight identity and it is

:08:05. > :08:07.true that I have tried to dial it up a bit, partly to answer the question

:08:08. > :08:11.of what Newsnight offers at the end of this very long cycle, when people

:08:12. > :08:14.have been exposed to hours of news bulletins, and I think a humorous

:08:15. > :08:17.and distinctive take on the day is part of that answer. The key

:08:18. > :08:21.question is really whether it is at the expense of the seriousness of

:08:22. > :08:24.the show and I say emphatically that it isn't. Adding more fun to the

:08:25. > :08:28.show was not the same as dumbing down and you only have to look at

:08:29. > :08:31.our running orders over the last month to see that we are serious as

:08:32. > :08:33.ever. This challenge about how to make political news compelling is

:08:34. > :08:36.critical. That boring snoring comment, some people thought it was

:08:37. > :08:38.revealing that television should be about confrontation and

:08:39. > :08:41.illumination. How do you answer that? I make no apology for trying

:08:42. > :08:52.not to produce a boring show, which is something we try to do every

:08:53. > :08:56.night, or try not to do. There is a really interesting discussion to be

:08:57. > :08:58.had and I hope I have tried to have it about the balance between heat

:08:59. > :09:01.and light in interviewing, particularly political interviewing,

:09:02. > :09:04.and I think it is a really interesting question to ask, whether

:09:05. > :09:07.we have strayed in that balance too far towards the heat. I think what

:09:08. > :09:10.the Rachel Reeves affair really pointed to was, frankly, an arid

:09:11. > :09:19.state of affairs in political interviewing. A lot of politicians

:09:20. > :09:22.come into a studio and their primary objective is not to move by a

:09:23. > :09:26.millimetre from the line that their party has taken. And we collectively

:09:27. > :09:32.go out to move them by one millimetre from that line. I think

:09:33. > :09:34.there is a moment now when it would be interesting to have a public

:09:35. > :09:37.conversation about how we collectively feel about these

:09:38. > :09:40.encounters, and to ask whether there is a more productive way of doing

:09:41. > :09:51.them, both for viewers and for journalists and politicians. Viewing

:09:52. > :09:55.figures are always going to be brought up and they are not great

:09:56. > :09:58.compared to five years ago, which is a long`term trend. What will you do

:09:59. > :10:03.about that and how far can you expect to reverse the decline? I

:10:04. > :10:08.would be very cheerful about the viewing figures at the moment. As

:10:09. > :10:22.you say, we have seen a 30% or 40% fall in viewing figures over five or

:10:23. > :10:26.six years. If you look at this year, which is really when my watch kicked

:10:27. > :10:29.in and my new people arrived on the show, the audiences have been very

:10:30. > :10:32.stable. Two out of three months, we have been up on last year. Jeremy

:10:33. > :10:39.Paxman has been the most dominant face of Newsnight. How are you

:10:40. > :10:44.replacing him? You might have to ask me back to talk about that. You

:10:45. > :10:48.obviously thinking about it now because you know he is going at the

:10:49. > :10:52.end of June. I am thinking about it, that is right, but I cannot give you

:10:53. > :10:55.an answer because I don't have one. We are in an incredibly lucky

:10:56. > :10:57.position by having three strong presenters after Jeremy has gone,

:10:58. > :11:04.all of whom are brilliant at presenting the show. I think there

:11:05. > :11:13.are many other wonderful presenters in the BBC. We are in an incredibly

:11:14. > :11:24.lucky position. Thank you very much. Thank you for your comments this

:11:25. > :11:31.week. You can call us with more thought. Join us again next week.

:11:32. > :11:50.Until then, goodbye. Friday was the warmest day of the

:11:51. > :11:53.year so far as we got within 24 Celsius. We could beat that in the

:11:54. > :12:00.days ahead. Some very warm weather in the forecast. Our weather is

:12:01. > :12:01.never that straightforward. For some of us, there will be rain over the