Political Interviewers

It seems to me that most of them are now more interested in their own questions than in the interviewees' (pardon the Americanism) answers.

I'm aware that, for years, politicians have dodged questions and answered the one they'd have preferred to be asked - or not answered at all (Remember Michael Howard with J. Paxman?) but I find the pendulum has now swung too far.

Many times, over the recent election campaign, I've been interested in what politicians of various hues and creeds were saying, only to find the interviewer interrupting and talking over them. I could forgive John Humphries yesterday for vainly attempting to get an answer on Tory policy out of Boris Johnson that didn't begin "Jeremy Corbin..." and I have some sympathy with those who persevere in asking a question, which is being evaded, by talking over a politician who is simply using the time available to get over a point that is entirely unrelated to the question.

But, surely, many of these interviewers now seem to have an exalted idea of their own importance. Paxo can be just plain nasty. Humphries is almost as bad. I used to regard Laura Kuensberg as a rottweiller but she seems to have mellowed a little. I think Evan Davies is possibly the best of the bunch but I've been really disappointed with the standards of interviews recently.