There have to be ground rules; a checklist to assist Labour MPs attending media interviews. The studies and articles appended below show that, without exaggeration, #MSM is our enemy.

Look beyond the studio staff and the interviewer’s phony camaraderie to see the immovable first principle of every interview, casual or in studio: They must be treated with suspicion. Expect and prepare for an attempted ‘mugging’.

I suggest below some polite but effective methods of escaping the “victim in a trap” scenario, by brief preparation and polite assertiveness.

It’s easy to analyse unfortunate circumstances after the event, which is why it’s necessary to be conscious of a short list of do’s and don’ts beforehand.

Inspect the Scene

Would you accept this huge negative backdrop to your Labour-focussed interview? Take a look around. Try to get to see a broadcast monitor. Are you being ‘set up’ visually. What will viewer see behind you? What will you yourself be constrained to stare at during the interview?

Huge screen facing Claudia Webbe at C4News

Link to above interview with analysis, posted on YouTube by Ed Torsney

Four more recent examples of propaganda backdrops by the BBC.

Images gleaned from this outstanding tweet:

So @BBCNewsnight has now cast Jeremy Corbyn as Lenin, Trump, Don Corleone & Quirinus Quirrell. Serious meaningful, public-serving @BBC journalism is dead, totally, utterly, shamefully dead. pic.twitter.com/etmxi1lBCT

— Matt Thomas (@Trickyjabs) March 16, 2018

Close-up of the BBC’s clumsily Photoshopped Russian hat.

Link to a great 'Photoshopped-hat' tweet.

Anyone available for comment? @BBC@BBCNewsnight denies altering Corbyn photo @skwawkboxhttps://t.co/v0LBgjlOvk #BBCBias pic.twitter.com/BtH9Gg6sPH

— The Agitator (@UKDemockery) March 17, 2018

The interview is NOT compulsory

Backdrops are just images displayed on huge TV screens or green screens. They can therefore be changed in seconds. Objections, at the earliest opportunity, can be justly made and possibly reinforced with a threat of cancellation. Get your smartphone out and take photos as evidence (from nearby monitors if necessary) for later discussion.

Scene and shot visualisation applies at every location, live or studio. A trick used at recent rallies has been to shoot from a low angle to show only the first couple of rows of people and thereby stop the enormous depth and extent of Corbyn attendances from being visible. Another recent visual deception was shooting a small section of indoor attendance framed by gaps and walls to look like the whole crowd.

Corbyn rally at The Lowry, Salford, apologies to the unknown montage creator.

The reverse effect at Owen Smith (Labour leadership contender) rallies was achieved by shooting at wide-angle the short distance forward from the back of the crowd to exaggerate its size. The tumble-weed blowing across the empty space behind the photographer being, obviously, out of shot.

Move to a position of your own choice. Don’t be bullied by the “experts and technicians”. Pick your own spot. They will have to follow or lose the interview.

Stop and object firmly to insults

During the above interview Peter Taaffe is asked, by a smirking interviewer if he describes himself as a “Trot”. It’s well known that this abbreviation is an insult and the added smirk was deliberate provocation. Maybe it was thought they could provoke a ‘rant’, which is never a good look and gives the opportunity for malicious editing.

If you are a victim of this tactic call it out. Stop the interview and make a point of it firmly but calmly. Mention that insults are an obvious and vulgar tactic unworthy of a serious interview and suggest we return to the actual question.

Stop and object to statements

Claudia Webbe was subjected to a ‘question’ in the form of a long statement ending with the emphasis on Corbyn having “zero chance”. This is another trick that has to be called out. I acknowledge I personally might come across as too combative, possibly aggressive, and would hope a subtler reply than what follows could be formulated:

“I’m sure the audience is fascinated by your political views, but isn’t your job to find out what mine are ?”

More recent tweet on this topic:

..."I'll be happy to answer your question as soon as you've explained what you think is acceptable, impartial or appropriate about this derogatory backdrop"

Keep on coming back to it, even at the total expense of the interview.

This is line in the sand that must be drawn.

— Stan Attaphia ✊ 🚩 (@Attaphia) March 16, 2018

Understanding common fallacious arguments

Here is a list with examples. It’s not necessary to study them all, but here are 5 that crop up so frequently it’s absolutely essential to understand them and thus be easily able to shoot them down. Being able to name them will put your interviewer on a more cautious footing.

The Straw Man — putting words in your mouth

Ad Hominem — attacking you instead of your argument

Non Sequitur — plausible but faulty logic that proves nothing

Oversimplification — to the point where meaning is changed

Begging the Question — stuffing a unproven assumption into a question

This is a big subject area that could be rattled on about indefinitely. I assume, possibly incorrectly, that Labour retain an expert advisor/coach. No one would enter a boxing match, for example, without basic training. Please please give yourselves the best chance to put our Labour views forward effectively by refusing to be a passive victim.

It’s also very reassuring to be able to spot a chopping-block long before they politely ask you to rest your neck on it.

Academic Studies

Media@LSE Report
Media Reform Coalition

Journalism

Skwawkbox

Jonathan Cook
New Statesman
Huffington Post
Tom London
Novara Wire