Tova O'Brien destroys a fringe politician. Credit: YouTube
It feels so good, watching New Zealand TV journalist Tova O’Brien demolish failed politician Jami-Lee Ross. The trouble is, you can’t trust anything that feels that good, because inevitably you end up wanting more than is wholesome: Negronis (make you sick), cigarettes (come on), attractive flirtatious people (make you stupid). And then there’s the particular kind of gratification that comes from seeing a dumbass made to look like a dumbass in public.
In a clip that’s been viewed more that 10 million times, O’Brien interviews Ross, whose Advance New Zealand Party failed to secure enough votes to win a single parliamentary seat in the recent general election — although “interview” isn’t quite the right word for what happens. Maybe what I mean is “humiliate”.
She starts by calling him a “loser”. He smiles gamely. Then O’Brien asks if he has any regrets; he rattles off a boilerplate answer praising the people he worked with, and she bowls straight back in. “Do you want to have another crack at answering that?” she says, “Because I just asked you if you have any regrets. You’ve just been part of a political movement which has been peddling misinformation during the election campaign. Do you have any regrets?”
Advance New Zealand are often referred to as an alt-right party, which doesn’t quite convey its full bizarreness as a political entity. For the 2020 election, Advance formed an alliance with the Public Party, which is a kind of grab-bag of the conspiracist and crankish. Imagine someone scraping all the maddest bits from the carcass of Facebook — a reclaimed slurry of 5G alarmism, anti-vax propaganda and scaremongering about electromagnets — and turning it into a manifesto. That, very roughly, is the Public Party.
One of the group’s candidates was a self-proclaimed psychic who withdrew from the race 24 hours after announcing her candidacy, presumably due to unforeseen circumstances. And that’s the most benign end of the lunacy that Ross bound himself to by allying the two parties, since the Public Party is also an avid promoter of covid conspiracies, something Advance New Zealand were happy to go along with. During the campaign, the New Zealand Advertising Standards authority upheld a complaint against Advance for spreading misinformation about coronavirus; Facebook shut down the party’s page for the same reason.
That’s why O’Brien went in hard on Ross with her questioning. When he tries to defend himself, she slaps him down, saying: “You know exactly what you were doing; you were whipping up fear and hysteria among vulnerable communities.” When he ventures something dubious-sounding about death rates, she talks clean over him: “No, no, no, I do not want to hear any of that rubbish.” At the end, after he’s manifestly failed to salvage any dignity from the encounter, she terminates the interview with a tart, “You’re dreaming, mate.”
New Zealand apparently already has a word for this: Ross had been Tova’d. But for most of the rest of the world this was new, delightful, glorious. Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept called it “an absolute masterclass”. NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen said it was “the way it should be done”. Such fun! Well here I am, the killjoy who says you don’t need a third Negroni and that the hot bartender encouraging you to order it probably doesn’t really fancy you anyway.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeGood article. This style of ‘journalism’ is one of the reasons I stopped watching or listening to the MSM. I first noticed it – or at least it first annoyed me – during the New Labour years, when BBC interviewers would consistently interrupt the minister or whoever. And it’s got a lot worse since then.
At least the politicians, ministers and candidates have had the guts to put themselves on the line in terms of standing or making policy, and will face the consequences. The TV presenters and so-called journalists have nothing to lose as they bark and belittle from behind their desks and make-up.
Since it is mathematically impossible for everyone to be a politician (put themselves on the line of fire) most people have to do other things. Some of those people are going to become journalists and it is their job to be the 4th estate.
What is must do (and it has failed to so) it is to grill politicians in power that make policy. Since the voters don’t seem to care (remember your comment about the British people, Iraq War and GE2005 ) who is supposed to do the “dirty” work?
Do you not understand the difference between holding politicians to account and not letting them speak?
It’s worse than that, though. Very often, the ‘journalists’ are not interested in asking the politicians about the real issues of current concern, but finding an old tweet, text or email they can harangue them about, and try to paint them as sexist, ageist, racist or some other moral failing. Meanwhile, the public policy issues lie discarded in the corner.
I watch newsnight – they ALWAYS cover the daily issues including policy ones. The 2 issues right now are C19 and Brexit! And they are ALWAYS covered by the media.
What is must do (and it has failed to so) it is to grill politicians in power that make policy.
Which is why, under Ian Katz (a man only too happy with foreign interference in the 2004 US election, so long as it was from his Guardian side
https://www.theguardian.com…
it drove Paxman out?
And then the BBC went on to close This Week.
.
I do, do you?
I have seen plenty of interviews! Have I seen them all? Of course not! Who has?
But I do know a straight talker from a BSer. And I also understand the difference between equivocation and lying.
One constant complain from The People is that the politicians never answer questions. They go round and round and round….and the people complain!
When TV News interviewers just spend their time insulting people, they achieve absolutely nothing for the viewers that actually want information they can consider for themselves.
It’s a real skill to ask incisive questions politely and not many people have this skill.
The BBC ex Newsnight lead Evan Davies had this talent (in spades), whereas (the organisations Remainer favourite) Emily Maitlis achieves nothing with her arrogant, insulting and ineffective manner.
These cheap “showboaters” just generate (often unwarranted) sympathy for the interviewee, and their smugness offends most right-minded individuals.
Best to go to non-MSM media where politicians are more likely to be given time to explain their reasoning (often in a self-incriminating manner) as well as also receiving a polite grilling.
“given time”…a TV program can not be more than 1hr – we have plenty of studies that show that your average watcher (and voter) has short attention span. Do you want Maitlis to go over (in endless details) about logistics, IT systems, tariffs, border guards, port capacity, ships, parking lots, custom officers with Michael Gove (a man that shamelessly lies!) ?
Loius Theroux managed to get a lot out of people with the “no, go on, keep talking” look. Although of course he’s no live, so he can simply edit down any 4 hour long rants.
nul
No, I want Maitlis and her ilk to ask questions that have a possible answer. Newman on Sewer 4 does not engage in truth. Jordan Peterson proved that. Every answer was interrupted by her trademarked tag line “so what you are trying to say is”? No, its not what he even hinted at. Not a single question she asked was made to be anything other than rhetorical. A guest of a political nature when interviewed, wants to make the point about why he / she is there and for what they were invited to discuss. The “newscasters” – Peston, Bradby etc. regard themselves as the news. A newscaster given his own show?? Reggie Bosanquet was a professional newscaster, not a media floosy. Attack journalism is the new tool for the left. I am delighted that the pompous prig Pierced Organ has been hoisted on his own petard for producing that silly clapper board of the number of days without a Tory spokesperson on his crushingly tedious morning show. Like my ex wife who stood under the mistletoe on Christmas Eve waiting for a kiss. She was still there waiting on Easter Monday 😉
“Attack journalism is the new tool for the left.” – that is your problem not the style of journalists.
We have conservative press – DM/DT/Sun/Express…need I say more?
Are they paid for by the taxpayer?
True, nothing stopped the taxpayers (voters) from changing the arrangement.
No – I just want Maitlis to show good manners occasionally – including desisting from interrupting all the time
Having just watched it on YouTube it didn’t look much like a demolition to me and nor might it qualify as wincingly or darkly funny.
Regardless of whatever platform he was on, dodgy or no, he was respectful and tried to answer her questions and she was immature, unprofessional, arrogant and not remotely interested in any answers he might wish to give.
Her accusation of narcissism toward him at the end should have been directed by her toward the make-up mirror before this began.
In short, that couldn’t in a million years be considered as ‘good’ journalism, let alone journalism. This lady clearly needs to rediscover the meaning of the word.
I don’t suppose she ever ‘discovered’ or was ever taught the meaning of the word ‘journalism’ in the first place. This is why, for instance, you could no more ‘reform the BBC than you could reform the EU or Nazi Germany or Pol Pot’s Cambodia. They are what they are. They do not possess the neural pathways or knowledge that would enable them to behave differently.
‘Her accusation of narcissism toward him at the end should have been directed by her toward the make-up mirror before this began.’ I worked in broadcasting, and I’ve never met so many shallow divas and self-publicists.
Well said, but of course we know the score – if he represents a right wing party, ie a party that stands up for their own country, it is attack attack attack and the rest of the media describe it as a takedown and humiliation for the politician and people believe it because they haven’t watched it and it seems to verify the million other attacks that any right wing party suffers every day. The truth is that the globalists know patriotism is a popular idea, so they go in hard and never let up.
This style of journalism is unfortunately becoming accepted and normal. As far as I’m concerned you can keep it. There are ways of asking questions with respect and that will elicit an engaged answer that will inform the audience. The role of the interviewer is not as the awful Cathy Newman from C4 said “to nail politicians” but to inform the audience. Unfortunately we have to put up with Ms Newman and others such as the odious Piers Morgan and the ego on legs that is K Burley. Is it any wonder politicians won’t submit themselves to this sort of gotcha journalism. Some of them approach their interviewee in a way that would get them a smack in the mouth in the pub on a Friday night.
No, we do not “have to put up with (them)”. Just don’t watch – and don’t pay the TVL poll tax either. Haven’t turned on anything from BBC, ITV or C4 for about 6 months and feel all the better for it. There are many and better alternatives both broadcast and online. Why torture yourself?
I’ve just watched this so-called interview. It was not a ” an absolute masterclass in journalism”. It was an example of the loud-mouthed, agenda sodden interviewing which characterises so much journalism today, and the effect on the national debate is very negative. I thought the “nonentity” Jamie-Lee Ross showed great restraint,patience and grace in the face of bad tempered,ill mannered questioning. If I had been him I would have done a John Nott, remember him?
I agree. There is much of this sort of thing on TV and radio both. It may be red meat to some of the viewers/listeners who want some kind of reckoning , but it stifles any debate. When the interviewee is arguably quite deserving of such treatment, the presenter should bear in mind the saying “give ’em enough rope”, but the type of egos who do these interrogations are often so busy making it about them that the guest doesn’t get the opportunity to show their true colours, which would make for a better result.
I watched the interview and JL Ross is basically a clown. You might not like that but he is a clown. And that is the only thing that matters, not the fact that the O’Brien is an aggressive journalist.
When she referred to him a “loser” she was quoting him
All I know about JL Ross is what I gleaned from the so- called interview. He may or may not be a clown. That’s not the point. I just don’t like bullies.
“I just don’t like bullies” – who does?
The issue was and is a politician that LIES, not the journalist that bullied him for 4-5 min.
Whether Ross is a liar or not is not the only issue. The interviewer made her interviewing technique,or lack of it an issue also. She constantly interrupted the guy so that he did not have a fair hearing. The problem is that some interviewers like being the star of the show and often have their own agenda to sell. As one of the correspondents has put it she was “an activist masquerading as a journalist”.
Unfortunately, your judgement being what it is, we can have no faith in your description of JL Ross.
Journalism is one word for it. Activism sounds more accurate. I wonder how the folks cheering this would react to, say, a journo going after Joe Biden for pimping his son in exchange for foreign cash. Or, say, Barack Obama for signing off on surveillance of the Trump campaign and the whole “Russians” business as former CIA boss John Brennan’s hand-written notes indicate. For some reason, I suspect the glee would be replaced by hostility, and in Obama’s case, accusations of racism.
The silly b****r had just been slaughtered in an election. There’s nothing good or admirable about kicking a man when he’s down. In fact isn’t ‘punching down’ a woke crime?
Not when you are ‘punching down’ a white man.
The NZ ‘journalist’ was as odious as some of our own. That said, you have to ask why he put his head I the noose. He must have known what would happen – or was he too dim?
Not to mention the fact that he has had some well-documented mental health issues over the last term of parliament. You could argue that he should never have tried to resurrect his career, which makes him fair game, but it is nevertheless especially inappropriate to take this tack given his recent history.
Someone sent me a video to this link praising the news interviewer. I stopped watching it after thirty seconds. This wasn’t about interviewing for facts, this was about publicly shaming someone. The powerful talking down to the little people.
Attack-dog Journalism and Bullshit Politics have been in a destructive downward spiral since Tony Blair, taking UK society with them – culminating in this suicidal-COVID19/fake-Brexit Parliament.
Harsh journalism would be good if it ever attacked the Establishment, but it never does. It always attacks the dissidents. This isn’t new. Journalists have always worked for Deepstate and aristocrats, and have always attacked threats to the elite.
Thanks for a very thoughtful , constructive and kind piece of journalism.
OK. Call me a crank but the moment I hear that someone, anyone, has been censored, my hackles go up. Just who are facebook to monitor people’s right to speak – they seem to be getting a taste for it, as do youtube and twitter. There has been so much rubbish talked about covid by governments that a little more from other parties hardly matters. And the interviewer talked over him. the lack of basic manners these days is out of control; if you ask a question, have the courtesy to listen to the answer; you might just learn something. I am in complete agreement with you that this attack dog journalism is a travesty of the profession; what is lacking, it seems, is the desire to investigate in depth and the courage to publish against the dictate of the ‘established’ dialogue.
That is the Tova O’B style. Never one to listen or actually use an interview as a vehicle for understanding/information.
As an NZ news watcher you can see when she’s got her ‘Indignation Hackles’ up (95%) of the time, and that’s the time to turn of your TV.
Over the last few years I’ve been drawn to watching some of the old 70s and 😯 Thames TV and BBC Panorama interviews on YouTube with the various political bigwigs of the age.
The ones leading up to the first European referendum are particularly worth a watch.
Also find American William F Buckley’s Firing Line interviews really interesting and probing. Occasionally a wee bit irreverent and tetchy, but never rude or dismissive.
Maybe it’s the increasing monetary, competition and time pressures of the modern age on today’s media, but the long form, truly informative, engaging interviews, at least on MSM where more people would get to see them, seem to be a thing of the past sadly.
I see a journalist deciding what is fact and what is not and my sympathies are immediately with the interviewee.
This man needed dropping in history’s bin and she seems to have given him his due respect. The key word is responsibility and respect. A big trend I’ve seen is the interviewer and Station Logo being on screen more than the person who apparently we need to hear from- we’re observing a clash rather than the host asking the questions The People need answering. Krishnan Guru Murthy on UK Channel 4 is particularly good at coming in and only wanting one answer he knows the interviewee can’t give and it is often quite pathetic and pretty much a waste of time.
Ms. O’Brien has not been professionally trained.
Has she never been taught that the correct response is, “So what you’re saying is…”?
.
I’m considered well to the left in the UK but, watching this, all my power was with the guy in the suit. The so-called interviewer’s style was disgraceful and anyone who liked it should ask themselves if they believe in free speech or whether they just like the opposite view shut down???
Some years ago (possibly 2015 General Election in the UK) Andrew Neil was interviewing the leader of a fringe Christian Party – I forget his name or the name of the Party – but suffice it to say, the would-be politician was nervous and inexperienced. Andrew Neil knew this and conducted the interview politely, giving the chap plenty of time to have his say, even helping him along a bit I seem to remember. It was all done with dignity and class leaving the chap to walk out of the studio with his head held high.
I gave Andrew Neil a lot of respect for that.
If, like most people, you have never heard of either Ross or O’Brien then it doesn’t look like a masterclass of attack journalism at all. Watch the full length interview: it’s a smarmy, but composed, politician and a cold, curt and angry interviewer. In the long run her career has less upside than his.
It wouldn’t work in Britain. If anyone tried it here, you’d get the same thing as what Jeremy Paxman, also noted for his *abrasive interviewing style, kept getting on Newsnight; “We tried to get someone from the relevant department to answer these concerns but no one was available.”
* He once said that when he was conducting an interview, he’d have the thought in his mind; “Why is this lying b*****d lying to me?”
She sounds like another activist masquerading as a journalist…
Here in New Zealand, Tova O’Brien is disliked by both left and right, as is Jami Lee Ross. That should have made that interview must see TV, but the opposite is true. Despite what the Elite (which is where Tova finds herself) say JLR was not wrong about Covid, even such a compulsive stretcher of the truth as he is, isn’t wrong all the time.
Actually it is the job of the media (4th estate) to hold politicians to account. The real problem is
a) Most of the media has a left wing biased so conservatives (in this board) have good reasons to be displeased. However (at least US Experience) Fox News is just bat sh*t crazy. And the “conservative” British press (DT/DM/Sun/Express) are just as crazy.
b) voters vote for politicians that make empty promises and never take responsibility for their vote. Instead the voters (aka The People) blame everyone else.
c) (tied to a and b) we don’t have citizens we have fans. People that will support their party no matter what it does. And they will turn on the media if it dares to point out the idiocies of their home team. Think of Jordan Peterson and C4 interview car crash. Did his supporters really care about the interviewer being “hard”? Of course not because Petersen WON the day!
Pointting out that Boris is a pathological liar should make the voters (aka The People) furious that the country’s PM is a pathological liar – not the media for pointing that out!
But (sadly!) fandom always wins!
You’re projecting a little. I doubt many here are Boris Johnson fans. People voted for him, not because he was a good candidate, but because the other side was certifiably insane.
The problem being that Boris is now certifiably insane, certainly when it comes to Covid.
Much the same appears to be true of c.90% of the political class, a class that is now more numerous than at any time in British history.
In democracy people get the government they deserve. As the people say we want politicians like us.
Indeed. He’s been one big disappointment.
A pathological liar, a serial cheat, a man that pays no attention to details, a failed foreign minister….what were you expecting…cake?
Damn right. No Boris fan I, but the counter-factual, Corbyn and his Marxist clowns in power, is truly terrifying.
Tory MPs and Tory voters (aka The People) voted for BJ over Hunt. Let’s not pretend that they had no choice. That is just dishonest!
….said a devoted Grauniad reader who could not understand why The People are too stupid to believe anything that paper or the BBC cares to assert, with or without evidence.
People are stupid because they are stupid.
https://www.brandsreviews.c…
It seems that Jamie-Lee Ross tried to tap into and give political respectability to the “maddest bits from the carcass of Facebook ” a reclaimed slurry of 5G alarmism, anti-vax propaganda and scaremongering about electromagnets” not because any of it was true but because he thought he would win votes. This was a breathtakingly cynical move and O’Brien’s scorn was justified in the circumstances.
I agree with one of the comments here that Evan Davies was one of best exponents of good political interviewing. He was persistent but polite – and actually interested in the responses and had a good understanding of the issues! There are far too few like him.
I used to think Andrew Neil was good as well but in his 2019 election interviews he spent too much time interrupting and talking over people.
I believe Jeremy Paxman was one of the instigators of such aggressive and hostile interviewing. He has a lot to answer for with his stated assumption of
‘why is this lying b*****d lying to me?’
Do you call that womansplaining? LOL. What hypocrites.