Sign up for The Media Today, CJRâs daily newsletter.
Last week, amid divisive elections in Britain, Ciaran Jenkins, a reporter with Channel 4 News, interviewed Michael Gove, a senior minister in Britain’s Conservative government, on a farm in Scotland. As cows mooed loudly in the background, Jenkins pressed Gove to justify misleading claims about government policy and Brexit. At one point, Gove suggested that Jenkins might have doctored an image to embarrass him. After Jenkins accused Gove of a lie, Gove got even more annoyed. âYou use the L-word. Thatâs a very powerful word,â he said. âWhat you are attempting to do is make a polemical case⌠for a political viewpoint⌠because you have a particular outlook.â
Molotov. pic.twitter.com/AGSdbnARAM
— Armando Iannucci (@Aiannucci) November 22, 2019
Things deteriorated from there. Jenkins insisted that he was merely trying to hold Gove to account, and pressed Gove on another Conservative claim, about the number of hospitals the government planned to buildâboth a material and factual issue.Â
But Gove wasnât having it. âYouâre using this interview as an opportunityâand I completely understand itâto mount an argument,â he said. âNow, thereâs a perfectly respectable type of journalism in which you mount an argument, you use rhetoric, you interrupt, you have a series of propositions which you believe in. Thatâs perfectly fair journalism. What itâs not is objective.âÂ
Jenkins tried again: âIâm asking you: Are there going to be forty hospitals, or six? What could be more objective than that?â Gove accused him of mounting âa rigorous left-wing case.â Later, he mock-praised Jenkins for âa good speechâ that âIâm sure would go down well on any election platform.â
Compared to Donald Trumpâs puce-faced rants about âFAKE NEWSâ and âRADICAL DEMOCRATS,â Goveâs attack sounds ludicrously quaint. But there are depressing similarities. Trumpâs anti-press rhetoric doesnât rest on the theoretical dissection of news from âpolemic,â but it does involve painting fair scrutiny from reliable sources as a partisan exercise. Thatâs exactly what Gove was doing here.
Politicians snapping at journalists isnât new, and Goveâs Conservatives have particular beef (farm pun intended) with Channel 4 right nowâDorothy Byrne, the broadcasterâs head of news, recently called Goveâs boss, Boris Johnson, a âknown liarâ and compared his media strategy to that of Vladimir Putin. (A senior Conservative told Politico that the party doesnât have a conscious anti-media strategy.) Still, Goveâs polite fake-news tirade is notable because heâs a wonkish, establishment figure, not a rabble-rousing populist outsider. It hasnât gone unnoticed that Goveâand some Conservative colleaguesâare stealing the latterâs lines, even if they are reading them in a telephone voice more suitable to their alma mater, Oxford University.
Goveâlike Johnsonâused to be a journalist: he worked for the Times of London for nine years before entering Parliament, including as an editorial writer. Shamelessly, Gove returned to that experience in his exchange with Jenkins: âAs someone who was a journalist in the past and wrote polemics and then became a politician⌠youâre well on the way to going down that route,â he said. In Britain, as in the US, people who should know better are taking a dark route indeed.
Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.