How often have you heard an interview with a politician where, despite repeatedly being presented with a straightforward line of questioning, they manage to avoid giving a single relevant answer?

Instead of a sincere reply, somehow there emerges a saccharine slew of pre-packaged promises and carefully planned diversions. It's not quite lying, but it certainly doesn't ring true, leaving the listener in a kind of linguistic purgatory where the question serves only as a platform to discuss what a politician wants to talk about, completely avoiding what they don't. It can be excruciating to hear someone locked in a cyclical conversation with an interviewer, one refusing to budge until they are satisfied with the answer, the other adamantly refusing to offer anything other than irrelevant waffle reeking of propaganda and an inability to think on their feet.

Robust media training used to be the hallmark of a great politician, now it often just rings false. In an era where interviews can be clipped, posted and viewed by just about anyone, contact with the press has become more frequent, and important than ever. One misstep through a field of wheat and you're a laughing stock, one out of touch interview and the people you rely on to vote for you feel alienated and ignored.

Nobody can identify media training like those working in the media, and it can be incredibly entertaining, albeit morbidly, to see a tenacious interviewer refusing to relent while their subject squirms. An ability to sit in the tension is a very difficult skill to learn, and people might not want to risk upsetting or alienating a high profile interview subject, so there is often not room to dig deeply enough for the truth. When, however, the interviewer doesn't mind making their subject uncomfortable, the results can be excruciating.

Sir Keir Starmer refused........

© Herald Scotland