
The work of the political journalist can be defined in a single question: what does she or he mean by that? The role of the hack is to push the politician to say something new, specific and revealing (and preferably unwise). The role of the politician is to remain ambiguous, to leave future options open, to snow the hell out of things. This, inevitably, creates a tension, which is resolved through the inexact science of interpretation.
The game of bait and trap has its place – think of the marvellous weekly interviews by Rachel Sylvester and Alice Thomson in The Times, which haver got all sorts of over-confident types into trouble (including Andrea Leadsom’s infamous “motherhood” comments). But too often it is little more than a game: the false premise, the slip of the tongue, the career in ruins. Is it truth? Does any of it actually make anything better? Who is it for? And if you’re now thinking I probably didn’t make much of a news reporter, you’d be right.