Paxman bashes BBC bosses in email

The <em>Newsnight</em> host celebrates the demise of the show’s promotional email with a poke at the

Jeremy Paxman is no shrinking violet. Whether he's taking on a government minister or a BBC boss, he tends to speak his mind. Paxman calls a spade a spade and a cut a c***.

His forthright opinion on the demise of the Newsnight email – a daily plug for the show, sent to a few hacks and Newsnight nerds – is below.

Paxman used the valedictory email to attack BBC bosses and be generally contemptuous of new media. It's well worth a read.

Good morning. And good afternoon. Or possibly, good evening.

Welcome to positively the last Newsnight daily email. The time has come to put this exercise in fatuousness out of its misery.

It gives me no pleasure to say that it should have happened years ago. Actually, I lie. There is more joy in heaven, etc, etc.

The reason for killing it off is pretty straightforward. It's crap.

Conscientious readers may have noticed that Monday's email this week was actually promoting a programme which went out last week. A carrier pigeon would have been quicker.

The daily email was dreamed up – like so many other utterly brilliant initiatives (anyone recall the Newsnight podcast, for people who preferred their television without pictures?) – by visionary senior management at the BBC.

For a while we even sent out a morning email, as well, detailing the mental anguish of the editor on duty that day, and soliciting suggestions as to what people would like to see on air that evening. This, too, often arrived after the show had been broadcast.

Like a dodgy plumber skulking away from a flooded bathroom, those responsible are blaming the tools of their trade. In this case, they're right. The piece of kit (the "gizmo", to give it its technical name) which sends out the email is completely useless and we can't afford to fix it.

But fear not. There are other, thrilling ways to make sure you're not pleasurably surprised when the programme goes on air. The fascinating blog on the Newsnight website is updated every day, and we're also on Twitter and Facebook.

Alternatively, you could just switch on your television to BBC Two at 10.30pm.

So, farewell daily email. And a Happy New Year, Merry Christmas, Easter and Millennium Eve to all our viewers.

Jeremy Paxman

Follow @duncanrobinson on Twitter here.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Why relations between Theresa May and Philip Hammond became tense so quickly

The political imperative of controlling immigration is clashing with the economic imperative of maintaining growth. 

There is no relationship in government more important than that between the prime minister and the chancellor. When Theresa May entered No.10, she chose Philip Hammond, a dependable technocrat and long-standing ally who she had known since Oxford University. 

But relations between the pair have proved far tenser than anticipated. On Wednesday, Hammond suggested that students could be excluded from the net migration target. "We are having conversations within government about the most appropriate way to record and address net migration," he told the Treasury select committee. The Chancellor, in common with many others, has long regarded the inclusion of students as an obstacle to growth. 

The following day Hammond was publicly rebuked by No.10. "Our position on who is included in the figures has not changed, and we are categorically not reviewing whether or not students are included," a spokesman said (as I reported in advance, May believes that the public would see this move as "a fix"). 

This is not the only clash in May's first 100 days. Hammond was aggrieved by the Prime Minister's criticisms of loose monetary policy (which forced No.10 to state that it "respects the independence of the Bank of England") and is resisting tougher controls on foreign takeovers. The Chancellor has also struck a more sceptical tone on the UK's economic prospects. "It is clear to me that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer," he declared in his conference speech, a signal that national prosperity must come before control of immigration. 

May and Hammond's relationship was never going to match the remarkable bond between David Cameron and George Osborne. But should relations worsen it risks becoming closer to that beween Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Like Hammond, Darling entered the Treasury as a calm technocrat and an ally of the PM. But the extraordinary circumstances of the financial crisis transformed him into a far more assertive figure.

In times of turmoil, there is an inevitable clash between political and economic priorities. As prime minister, Brown resisted talk of cuts for fear of the electoral consequences. But as chancellor, Darling was more concerned with the bottom line (backing a rise in VAT). By analogy, May is focused on the political imperative of controlling immigration, while Hammond is focused on the economic imperative of maintaining growth. If their relationship is to endure far tougher times they will soon need to find a middle way. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.