Tags

Related Posts

Share This

Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox

In which we look at the making of a new Bondiplus programme tonight… and answer a few of last week’s questions.

And we’re back again. Just in case we needed to make a point about the anomalous lowering of standards on the by now infamous Bondiplus a week ago we have a little “scoop” for you. It would appear that Bondiplus will be shorn of its GWU and MUT panel members this evening since both unions have refused to participate on the show. Here’s Lou Bondi’s take on the issue on facebook (where else? how long till J’accuse gets unfriended?) (my underlining):

Lou: Flash News: The GWU and MUT or any of the other unions have refused to take part in Bondiplus this evening. Neither did they accept to give us a prerecorded interview. On Saturday and Sunday they went on Super One twice within a span of 12 hours.

A lady named Sue asked whether they gave a reason for this late defection and here is Lou’s answer (again, my underlining):

Lou: Susan, no they did not give a reason. They only wanted us to send them questions by email, which is unacceptable for two reason – we are a TV programme (not a newspaper) and followup questions are necessary in such an interview.

Bingo! First of all how dare the GWU and MUT (and other insignificant unions that number only a couple of hundred members – pace Bondi) participate on Super One and NOT on awardwinning Bondiplus? Is Bondi aspiring for a sort of par condicio of some sort? Are the GWU & MUT going to be obliged to balance out their appearances on Labour’s TV by appearing on Bondiplus (aired on national television)?

Better still is the answer given to Susan. Lou finds the the GWU and MUT requests unacceptable. They did not settle for the prerecorded interview. Worse still they insisted on being told what questions will be asked and would thus be avoiding follow up questions.

Well Lou. How about you take all the declarations of the GWU and MUT made in the press AND on Super One as the source of their position? After all only a week ago you were quite prepared to take the contents of a blog being “all that she has to say, (if not more snigger snigger)”. The bumbling unions have been quite active and reported in the media (presumably via the long winded press releases) so judging by Lou’s standards of investigation last week he could go ahead and take all that was reported as read.

Follow up questions? Since when? Last week they did not seem to be necessary – what’s the big deal now?

You see Lou. I tend to agree that follow up questions are necessary in your kind of programme. I agree that sending people a set of prepared questions would defeat the spirit of a talk show- – particularly one that seeks answers and clarification. You’re right Lou, you are not a newspaper and the best scenario for tonight’s programme would have Zarb and Bencini sitting at the table answering the questions you pose legitimately in the interests of journalistic investigation. What I fail to see is how come you suddenly feel this way with regard to Zarb and Bencini but had no problem with Musumeci or Caruana Galizia.

By the way, congrats for the Malta TV Award. I’m sure you feel you deserved it.

Facebook Comments Box