BNP leader Nick Griffin 'defensive, evasive and flustered' on Question Time

 
 

4 article comments.

The BNP leader Nick Griffin's controversial appearance on BBC's Question Time was not underpinned by any credible media strategy, senior PROs have said.

BNP leader: Nick Griffin
BNP leader: Nick Griffin

Griffin's hotly anticipated performance provoked a mass protest from anti-fascist campaigners outside the Television Centre. This morning, comms professionals provided PRWeek with their take on his media skills.
 
‘On balance, the BBC and producers Mentorn Media got it right with the panel selection, questions and audience and a normally polished Griffin was left looking seriously defensive, evasive and, at times, flustered,' said Freud Communication's consultant Clarence Mitchell.

‘If he had a media strategy beyond simply appearing to be pleased to be on the programme, then it wasn't apparent. This was no early Christmas present to the BNP,' added Mitchell, who is also PR adviser to the McCann family.
 
Band & Brown's head of public sector Simon Francis agreed: ‘What this week has shown is that the BNP can be beaten through debate. Griffin was uncomfortable, uncertain of his own policies, exposed for having no idea of British history, not even sure of his own past and branded a "thoroughly deceptive man".'

Francis asserted: 'The BNP performance, coupled with the headlines this morning, will not have helped win new support.'
 
Insight Public Affairs account director Olly Kendall said Griffin exposed himself as devoid of ideas and bereft of leadership, but Kendall said he was disappointed the questions allowed the BNP leader to ‘duck scrutiny on the key policy issues'. 

Kendall also pointed out that Griffin will no doubt delight at the universal front-page coverage today: ‘The BBC had little choice but to give Griffin a platform. Their shortcoming was in allowing the entire show to revolve around him.'
 
Porter Novelli's director of media Laurence Lee criticised the BBC for focusing too heavily on Griffin, allowing other politicians to evade questioning on other issues.
 
‘This wasn't Question Time, it was a witch-hunt, and the cherry-picked west London set made sure of it. In this, Nick Griffin did everything he could to help them. He could hardly string a sentence together, shook like a leaf and even grinned and clapped when they took turns in character assassination. He could hardly say "indigenous", let alone describe what he meant by it,' he said.
 
‘As an exercise in playground bullying they probably succeeded, but I bet if they'd held the debate in Burnley or Hull it would have been very different. They may have made Griffin look silly, but I really wonder whether they changed the minds of those who feel the need to lash out,' he said.
 
Francis praised the BBC's use of social media to maximise publicity for the show, which saw even Sky News trailing the time and the channel slot. He also said the message that the BBC is a bastion of free speech has come across clearly.

But Francis questioned whether the show managed to reach a wider audience. ‘Until we see the viewing figures, it's difficult to predict whether the controversy actually helped take Question Time itself to genuinely new audiences outside the Twitterati.'

 
X

You must log in to use Clip & Save

 
 

All Comments

 

Dirk Singer - 23 October 2009

I'm not sure whether the fact that he displayed media skills or not is even relevant. Indeed I wonder whether we're falling into the trap of seeing this through the prism of marketing people.

From Nick Griffin's point of view there were many upsides and very few downsides from last night. It was essentially an hour long interview, where he managed the feat of making himself look less odious than he really is.

As has already been pointed out, he was able to almost assume underdog status and by zeroing in purely on immigration, something that does instill a lot of impassioned viewpoints, the panel didn't really catch him out.

Just one example: Griffin got away with airing his views on the NHS...an NHS which survives thanks to a lot of non UK staff.

Does he think they should all be packed off? None of the panel, and the BBC, didn't bother to find out

 
 
Tony Watts

Tony Watts - 23 October 2009

This was too important a debate not to be held through any niceties of political correctness and, on balance, the BNP came off second best. But we all ignore some unpalatable truths at our peril.

Scrape off the polite veneer of British society and you'll find millions of people who are racist, sexist, Islamophobic and homophobic. Most of those people are still voting for the main parties and having their prejudices regularly confirmed by some of the tabloids. Had the debate taken place in a BNP stronghold, the audience reaction to Nick Griffin would have been very different.

This is the bigger battle that has to be fought, and it will take probably several generations to win.

What came over last night were two main themes: one is, that the main parties have still not addressed the underlying concerns that many people have about immigration \(which is a separate issue to racism); and, while that remains the case, there will still be people who will vote for the BNP.

The second is that some of the BNP's viewpoints border on the bonkers – the Ice Age Britons being one of the most laughable. Significantly, the site that sets out all of its policies and principles has been replaced by a holding page – presumably so they can excise some of the worst offending passages.

If the BNP is to be defeated at the ballot box, the main parties need to tackle the genuine concerns that many people have; and some of the nonsenses the BNP espouse need to be shot down in flames – exposing them for what they are. Ignoring them won't help. Banning them will make them 'martyrs of free speech'. So more interviews and debates please – it's the one sure way to cut this cancer out from our society.

 
 

James Michael Convey - 24 October 2009

it must never be forgotten that Hitler, served time in prison for open revolt, never won a majority of german votes and was never in any way popular, with the business or intellectual elite of Germany. And yet once he gained a small "niche" within the body politic he went on to eventually corrupt the whole of German society.

Certainly Britain and the british people of my generation, have clear memory of the Global distress WW2 caused, but do the youth of today have similar concerns, or even sufficient knowledge of history to be wary of this twisted man and his twisted views of reality? And just how easy it is to engineer a simple coup d'etat once he gains additional popularity and a few more seats? The BBC providing this opportunity for him to be an item of disruptive attraction, plays right into the anarchist need for publicity, any publicity. I believe it was an error on their part and also it deflected from the other "real" problems of the nation that need to be debated.

 
 

Nicholas Rennie - 26 October 2009

I am studying for an MA in public relations and all the accepted theory indicates that Nick Griffin scored a monumental own goal on Question Time.

To be able to persuade an audience to change its views about some of the BNP leader's extreme beliefs would have required him to come across as a credible and authoritative speaker.

He plainly failed to do so and I explain why in my blog http://isallpublicitygoodpublicity.blogspot.com/2009/10/is-all-publicity-good-publicity.html#comments

Please read it and leave any comments or observations you might have.

 
 

Comments

 
 

To post comments please log in here

 
 
 

PRWeek Agency Showcase

 

Bulletins

You can sign up for our bulletins. Select bulletins you are interested in, enter your email adress an click the button below

Preview
Preview
 

Poll

Is it OK for journalists/bloggers to name and shame persistent PR professionals?

 

View Results