0:00:02 > 0:00:03BBC Four Collections -
0:00:03 > 0:00:06specially chosen programmes from the BBC Archive.
0:00:06 > 0:00:07For this Collection,
0:00:07 > 0:00:08Sir Michael Parkinson
0:00:08 > 0:00:10has selected BBC interviews
0:00:10 > 0:00:12with influential figures
0:00:12 > 0:00:13of the 20th century.
0:00:13 > 0:00:15More programmes on this theme
0:00:15 > 0:00:16and other BBC Four Collections
0:00:16 > 0:00:18are available on BBC iPlayer.
0:00:22 > 0:00:25Ed, you're the most... Without being unduly flattering,
0:00:25 > 0:00:29you're the most famous television interviewer in the world.
0:00:29 > 0:00:33As far as this country's concerned, I'm probably the most infamous.
0:00:33 > 0:00:35How do you manage to interview people so interestingly,
0:00:35 > 0:00:37and talk so little?
0:00:37 > 0:00:41Well, Malcolm, may I begin by registering a complaint?
0:00:41 > 0:00:42Yeah.
0:00:42 > 0:00:44You have intellectual advantages over me.
0:00:44 > 0:00:46But, you also have sartorial advantages.
0:00:46 > 0:00:49You should've told me you were going to wear a dinner jacket.
0:00:49 > 0:00:51I have one, you know, made by a London tailor.
0:00:51 > 0:00:53I'm sure you have, Ed,
0:00:53 > 0:00:56but the pure excuse for my being in a dinner jacket
0:00:56 > 0:01:00is that I'm going to dine tonight with a very eminent person,
0:01:00 > 0:01:02and it's unusual for me to put on a dinner jacket,
0:01:02 > 0:01:05and I wouldn't have done it, unless it had been the case
0:01:05 > 0:01:08that I was going to dine with this very eminent,
0:01:08 > 0:01:10dare I say, newspaper proprietor?
0:01:10 > 0:01:14Yes, and now, to your question, though.
0:01:14 > 0:01:17Interviewing seems to me reasonably simple.
0:01:17 > 0:01:20It consists only of finding an interesting person
0:01:20 > 0:01:23and then finding questions to ask him.
0:01:23 > 0:01:26But, when it's not an interesting person, what do you do then?
0:01:26 > 0:01:29Well, then, you listen harder than you do, normally.
0:01:29 > 0:01:32I find it a real strain, if you're interviewing someone
0:01:32 > 0:01:37and you get the answer that says, "Yeah, no, don't know,"
0:01:37 > 0:01:42then the physical effort of listening so hard that you try to extract
0:01:42 > 0:01:46from that individual a little more of an answer than you have already had.
0:01:46 > 0:01:49But you do that without talking too much.
0:01:49 > 0:01:52Yes, I rather prefer doing an interview with the camera
0:01:52 > 0:01:54working over my shoulder,
0:01:54 > 0:01:57so that the interviewer does not get between the subject
0:01:57 > 0:01:59and the audience, so that the subject is in fact,
0:01:59 > 0:02:02rather, talking to the audience instead of talking to me.
0:02:02 > 0:02:06Ed, now, the point that always puzzled me
0:02:06 > 0:02:09about this television interviewing is this.
0:02:09 > 0:02:12If you're having an interesting conversation with someone,
0:02:12 > 0:02:14- you must participate in it. - Yes.
0:02:14 > 0:02:19If you participate in it, you must speak a bit.
0:02:19 > 0:02:21You must have a position.
0:02:21 > 0:02:25You can't be a purely neutral personage.
0:02:25 > 0:02:26Now, how do you get over that?
0:02:26 > 0:02:30Well, I think perhaps the honest answer to that is that I don't.
0:02:30 > 0:02:35But, the way I try to do it is to do enough research in advance
0:02:35 > 0:02:39so that one can ask the offbeat questions, as we call them.
0:02:39 > 0:02:42By which I mean, if you are interviewing a movie star,
0:02:42 > 0:02:45you try to find out whether that movie star is interested
0:02:45 > 0:02:50in shooting or fishing or doing woodworking or something like that,
0:02:50 > 0:02:53so that, instead of doing the typical fan magazine sort of interview -
0:02:53 > 0:02:55"How did you get started in the movies?"
0:02:55 > 0:02:57"What is your favourite role?"
0:02:57 > 0:02:59"Who is your favourite director?" And so forth...
0:02:59 > 0:03:01- Which are boring questions. - Boring questions,
0:03:01 > 0:03:03and have already appeared in print and elsewhere.
0:03:03 > 0:03:07You ask about hobbies and, as I say, offbeat interests and activities.
0:03:07 > 0:03:10You see, my great difficulty is that, if I get interested
0:03:10 > 0:03:14in a conversation, I want to say what I think about it.
0:03:14 > 0:03:18And, if I say what I think about it, I begin to talk a lot.
0:03:18 > 0:03:24And that detracts interest from the person you're talking to.
0:03:24 > 0:03:27- Have you had that difficulty? - Yes.
0:03:27 > 0:03:30And I haven't seen, unfortunately, enough of your interviews
0:03:30 > 0:03:33to be able to give a critique on them.
0:03:33 > 0:03:36Sometime, when I can spend more time here, I will do it,
0:03:36 > 0:03:38but I have the same difficulty.
0:03:38 > 0:03:40- I am always tempted... - To hone in.
0:03:40 > 0:03:43Yes, but I think that results from
0:03:43 > 0:03:47what is called in the House of Commons, supplementary questions.
0:03:47 > 0:03:50But I always want, I never know, when I'm doing an interview,
0:03:50 > 0:03:52where I'm going.
0:03:52 > 0:03:56Because my questions generally arise from the preceding answer.
0:03:56 > 0:03:58Rather than being carefully thought out.
0:03:58 > 0:04:01I am very much opposed, as I'm sure you are,
0:04:01 > 0:04:04to the rehearsed, planned interview.
0:04:04 > 0:04:06I'm sure that's a mistake. It's a complete bore.
0:04:06 > 0:04:09Because there's no sort of spontaneity in it,
0:04:09 > 0:04:11there's no sort of interest in it.
0:04:11 > 0:04:14For instance, you take the most interesting person
0:04:14 > 0:04:17I have interviewed on television, was Mr Somerset Maugham.
0:04:17 > 0:04:18Yes.
0:04:18 > 0:04:22Right, we began talking about the novel.
0:04:22 > 0:04:26And my single desire was to bring out from Mr Maugham
0:04:26 > 0:04:27what he thought about it.
0:04:27 > 0:04:30But the moment he began to talk about the novel,
0:04:30 > 0:04:34all sorts of ideas of my own began to develop
0:04:34 > 0:04:37and I couldn't help myself expressing those ideas.
0:04:37 > 0:04:39Do you think that's bad, or not?
0:04:39 > 0:04:42I think it depends upon what you elicited from Mr Maugham
0:04:42 > 0:04:44as a result of your questions.
0:04:44 > 0:04:47I think the most interesting interview I have ever done,
0:04:47 > 0:04:50where I did not have that difficulty, Malcolm, was with Dr Oppenheimer.
0:04:50 > 0:04:53Because, he stood up at the blackboard
0:04:53 > 0:04:57and started doing these symbols, and I didn't understand a word
0:04:57 > 0:05:01he was saying, but the cameraman took a cutaway shot,
0:05:01 > 0:05:03and when I looked at the cutaway shot,
0:05:03 > 0:05:05I was sitting there, fascinated,
0:05:05 > 0:05:08looking at these entirely unintelligible symbols.
0:05:08 > 0:05:11Well, there, I was in no danger of interrupting or talking
0:05:11 > 0:05:14because I didn't know what he was talking about.
0:05:14 > 0:05:16I quite agree, and I don't want to be rude, but that was
0:05:16 > 0:05:20money for jam, because none of us know anything about those symbols.
0:05:20 > 0:05:23But if you begin to talk about something like the novel,
0:05:23 > 0:05:25it's terribly difficult.
0:05:25 > 0:05:28We've all got views on those things.
0:05:28 > 0:05:30Not for me. I don't know anything about novels, either!
0:05:30 > 0:05:32HE LAUGHS
0:05:33 > 0:05:35Ed, I would like to switch on
0:05:35 > 0:05:37from the particular thing of interviewing,
0:05:37 > 0:05:39to this question of television altogether.
0:05:39 > 0:05:42Now, you were a famous broadcaster here in England,
0:05:42 > 0:05:44and there's not a single person here
0:05:44 > 0:05:48who doesn't remember your broadcasting in the war.
0:05:48 > 0:05:51What do you feel about this thing, television,
0:05:51 > 0:05:54which has taken the place of sound broadcasting?
0:05:54 > 0:05:55Well, in the first place,
0:05:55 > 0:05:58I don't think it has taken the place of sound broadcasting,
0:05:58 > 0:06:00insofar as news is concerned.
0:06:00 > 0:06:02Which is the only thing I pretend to know anything about.
0:06:02 > 0:06:08I think, in the field of news, it is basically a pictorial supplement.
0:06:08 > 0:06:11Where you have a set spectacle, a coronation.
0:06:11 > 0:06:13The Trooping the Colour,
0:06:13 > 0:06:17something like that, then television cannot be equalled.
0:06:17 > 0:06:19But, I think in the realm of news,
0:06:19 > 0:06:21and I would contend that news consists,
0:06:21 > 0:06:23to a large extent, of ideas.
0:06:23 > 0:06:26And you know how difficult it is
0:06:26 > 0:06:28- to translate ideas into words. - My goodness, yes.
0:06:28 > 0:06:32But then, when you have to translate them into pictures as well,
0:06:32 > 0:06:35it becomes exceedingly difficult and, to answer your question,
0:06:35 > 0:06:40so far as I am concerned personally, in the area of news,
0:06:40 > 0:06:43I continue to get more personal, psychological dividend,
0:06:43 > 0:06:48and I don't believe that television is going to replace radio.
0:06:48 > 0:06:52For example, I had meant to say, earlier on,
0:06:52 > 0:06:55how pleasant it is to be back in London,
0:06:55 > 0:06:57where I spent nine years.
0:06:57 > 0:07:03And where I left all of my youth and much of my heart.
0:07:03 > 0:07:08Well, one can say that on radio, I think,
0:07:08 > 0:07:13as effectively, perhaps more effectively, than on television.
0:07:13 > 0:07:17I see exactly what you mean, but I'm still thinking, for instance,
0:07:17 > 0:07:19the last time I was in the United States,
0:07:19 > 0:07:21I had to cover the Chicago Conventions.
0:07:23 > 0:07:27Now, the television coverage of those conventions,
0:07:27 > 0:07:30seemed to me so perfect, so complete, that, you know,
0:07:30 > 0:07:34we foreign correspondents didn't go into the convention hall at all.
0:07:34 > 0:07:35I remember.
0:07:35 > 0:07:38We sat in our hotel rooms with the television going on
0:07:38 > 0:07:41and covered it from that.
0:07:41 > 0:07:45Yes, but, Malcolm, this was the set, predictable spectacle.
0:07:45 > 0:07:48- Like the Coronation? - Like the Coronation.
0:07:48 > 0:07:52But, when it came, at that convention in Chicago,
0:07:52 > 0:07:55to finding out what was happening in the party caucus,
0:07:55 > 0:07:57the television cameras weren't there,
0:07:57 > 0:08:03and that is where the old reportorial effort had still to be applied.
0:08:03 > 0:08:07So, you really feel that, just as newspapers have survived radio,
0:08:07 > 0:08:09sound radio will survive television?
0:08:09 > 0:08:12I do indeed, and I think it's going to be a different type
0:08:12 > 0:08:16of news reporting in radio. I think it will go in greater depth.
0:08:16 > 0:08:20It is not going to be just the pictures of what happened today.
0:08:20 > 0:08:26Radio is going to have to devote more time to backgrounding the news.
0:08:26 > 0:08:29Not only saying this happened, but this is the background,
0:08:29 > 0:08:32this is what caused it to happen, these are the results
0:08:32 > 0:08:35and the consequences that may be expected to flow from it.
0:08:35 > 0:08:38I think radio news has got to change due to the impact
0:08:38 > 0:08:40of this incredible device called television.
0:08:40 > 0:08:44I remember when, the last time I saw you, which was in New York,
0:08:44 > 0:08:48you had just done what I think was a sort of historic thing,
0:08:48 > 0:08:54was your very effective attack,
0:08:54 > 0:08:59effective because it was based on reason and not on passion,
0:08:59 > 0:09:01on the whole business of the McCarthy hearings,
0:09:01 > 0:09:03which we all hate in this country, you see.
0:09:04 > 0:09:06Now, I remember asking you
0:09:06 > 0:09:10whether that would lead to any trouble with your sponsor.
0:09:10 > 0:09:13And you said no, it wouldn't lead to any trouble with your sponsor.
0:09:13 > 0:09:16And I frequently use that argument.
0:09:16 > 0:09:20Are we absolutely sure that the withdrawal of this sponsorship
0:09:20 > 0:09:24is not due to any considerations of that kind?
0:09:24 > 0:09:28No-one is ever quite sure what is in the mind of a sponsor or an editor.
0:09:28 > 0:09:32- But your honest opinion. - I can only tell you this.
0:09:32 > 0:09:37That, since the McCarthy programme, the Aluminum Company of America
0:09:37 > 0:09:41had four opportunities to drop the sponsorship,
0:09:41 > 0:09:45contractually, that is, contracts expired.
0:09:45 > 0:09:46They didn't.
0:09:46 > 0:09:50They chose to do it now, and I choose to accept their explanation,
0:09:50 > 0:09:55that it is because of a change in their merchandising programme.
0:09:55 > 0:10:00You see, this programme, had... Oh, it was, what?
0:10:00 > 0:10:0425th, 30th, something like that, in terms of popularity rating.
0:10:06 > 0:10:10A corporation that is trying to sell consumer goods is obviously,
0:10:10 > 0:10:13as an advertiser looks for the preferred position in a newspaper,
0:10:13 > 0:10:16is obviously going to try to get up
0:10:16 > 0:10:19with the programme in the first five, ten, 15.
0:10:19 > 0:10:22Now, I accept their explanation in this case and, as I say,
0:10:22 > 0:10:24the answer will come
0:10:24 > 0:10:27in terms of whether anyone else decides to sponsor it. We shall see!
0:10:27 > 0:10:30And you think they will, of course.
0:10:30 > 0:10:33I have no alternative but to think they will!
0:10:33 > 0:10:36But whether they do or not, and this, again,
0:10:36 > 0:10:39is an aspect of commercial television, in this particular case,
0:10:39 > 0:10:43whether it is sponsored or not, it will remain on the air.
0:10:43 > 0:10:45But you see, I remember seeing in your room in New York,
0:10:45 > 0:10:49and it rather touched me, that among the various trophies that you had
0:10:49 > 0:10:54was the BBC microphone that you'd used in the war.
0:10:54 > 0:10:58Which is the only trophy I have ever kept, and I have received many.
0:10:58 > 0:11:01The most touching thing that ever happened to me.
0:11:01 > 0:11:03When I left here, after nine years,
0:11:03 > 0:11:07they went down and just cut loose that old-fashioned microphone,
0:11:07 > 0:11:11literally cut the cable, put a little plaque on it which said,
0:11:11 > 0:11:15in substance, "This is from studio B4.
0:11:15 > 0:11:19"For Morrow, who used it with," I think they said "some" distinction.
0:11:19 > 0:11:20- Which is... - Very fair!
0:11:20 > 0:11:25...overstatement. And this, I value above anything else.
0:11:25 > 0:11:29I just want to ask you one last question. You know the BBC.
0:11:29 > 0:11:33You know what monopoly broadcasting means.
0:11:33 > 0:11:36We have embarked, and we are about to embark,
0:11:36 > 0:11:39unless the election has it otherwise,
0:11:39 > 0:11:45we are about to embark on the experiment of commercial television.
0:11:46 > 0:11:50Do you think that that is going to be good or bad?
0:11:50 > 0:11:51HE LAUGHS
0:11:51 > 0:11:53It's a good last question, Ed!
0:11:53 > 0:11:59Malcolm, I lived here long enough to know that the British have
0:11:59 > 0:12:04this admirable trait, when they go abroad, of not attempting
0:12:04 > 0:12:08to give counsel or comment on domestic affairs.
0:12:10 > 0:12:14I don't know the results here.
0:12:14 > 0:12:15I do know one thing.
0:12:15 > 0:12:17That, after about four years
0:12:17 > 0:12:20of discussing here in London with my friends,
0:12:20 > 0:12:25the relative merits of British and American broadcasting,
0:12:25 > 0:12:28I finally concluded it was an utterly futile undertaking because,
0:12:28 > 0:12:32if you compare the two systems, in the end of the day,
0:12:32 > 0:12:35or rather, at the end of a long evening,
0:12:35 > 0:12:38you come down to a comparison of the two countries.
0:12:38 > 0:12:43Neither system could be transplanted effectively to the other country.
0:12:43 > 0:12:46It has always seemed to me that American radio,
0:12:46 > 0:12:48and the same thing perhaps goes for television,
0:12:48 > 0:12:51is highly competitive, it is commercial,
0:12:51 > 0:12:56it is loud, it is vulgar, it is... At times vulgar, it is experimental.
0:12:56 > 0:13:02British broadcasting is careful, cautious, rather paternalistic.
0:13:02 > 0:13:03And, at times, vulgar.
0:13:03 > 0:13:06And, not quite so often, vulgar!
0:13:06 > 0:13:08At least to these tired old ears.
0:13:08 > 0:13:12But, when you finish comparing the two systems,
0:13:12 > 0:13:14you have compared the two countries.
0:13:14 > 0:13:19Both radio in the States and in Britain are, I would contend,
0:13:19 > 0:13:22accurate reflections of the political,
0:13:22 > 0:13:26social and economic climate in which the two grew up.
0:13:27 > 0:13:30I think it's a very true and interesting point of view.
0:13:30 > 0:13:36The only thing is that we now are going to embark upon this change,
0:13:36 > 0:13:39which I have supported, Ed, not for any reason,
0:13:39 > 0:13:41except that I hate monopoly.
0:13:41 > 0:13:44- I'm always for competition. - So am I, I loathe monopoly.
0:13:44 > 0:13:48I loathe one person or one entity controlling anything.
0:13:48 > 0:13:52And I just wonder what it's going to be like.
0:13:52 > 0:13:54Well, I'm curious to know what the commercials
0:13:54 > 0:13:56will be like, for example.
0:13:56 > 0:14:00I'm sure they will not be the jingles,
0:14:00 > 0:14:05the singing commercials, that we have in the States in many instances.
0:14:05 > 0:14:10But, certainly, competition, I think it would be most deplorable
0:14:10 > 0:14:13if Punch were the only publication
0:14:13 > 0:14:17permitted in this country. Wouldn't you? Would you go that far?
0:14:17 > 0:14:21It would be more than deplorable, it would be a catastrophe,
0:14:21 > 0:14:24an immeasurable catastrophe!
0:14:24 > 0:14:27I say that as one of your loyal subscribers in the States, Malcolm!
0:14:27 > 0:14:30And, if that be a commercial, so be it!
0:14:30 > 0:14:32Well, it's commercial!