HARDtalk made guests squirm, viewers happy

I predict the BBC will come to regret the scrapping of HARDtalk. More importantly, it will leave its loyal viewers poorly informed

The news that HARDtalk on the BBC, one of my favourite programmes, is to be scrapped in March has disappointed, dismayed and, yes, depressed me. I can’t help but feel it’s definitely a foolish decision. But for now, it seems irreversible.

HARDtalk is the BBC’s long-form one-to-one interview, where a single person and often a single issue is addressed. The conversation is rigorous but not aggressive, focused but not narrow, and extremely well-researched without becoming pedantic or abstruse (Wikimedia Commons)

It’s part of a cost-cutting exercise by the Corporation to save 700 million pounds. I don’t know what the programme itself costs but it’s certainly only a fraction of that amount. I fear it’ll be a case of cutting your nose to spite your face. I predict the BBC will come to regret it. More importantly, it will leave its loyal viewers poorly informed. The broader picture, the fuller understanding, and the emotional depth HARDtalk offers are not easily found elsewhere on the channel. In fact, very few other channels have it at all.

So why is HARDtalk so special? It’s the BBC’s long-form one-to-one interview, where a single person and often a single issue is addressed. The conversation is rigorous but not aggressive, focused but not narrow, and extremely well-researched without becoming pedantic or abstruse. What emerges at the end of the half-hour is understanding and insight. You’ll either understand the subject far better than any news bulletin can enable or get insights into the guest more revealing, even intimate than most profiles can portray. In short, it’s not just a useful adjunct to a news channel but an invaluable part of its service.

The deeper explanation for this is simple but, sadly, one the BBC seems to have lost sight of. In-depth conversations, with the time to question, explore, pursue and persist, reach depths and, thus, tap reserves brief news interviews cannot reach. They may not be everyone’s cup of tea but they certainly are the icing on the cake for those who crave more.

If you think I’m exaggerating, ask yourself why have HARDtalk presenters become some of the biggest names on the BBC? First, there was Tim Sebastian. In his time he was renowned, even admired, for the tough time he gave his guests. No doubt they didn’t like it. They squirmed. But for the audience, it was a welcome grilling.

Then, since 2005, there’s been Stephen Sackur. He’s very different from Tim though no less admired. Tim went for the jugular. He interrupted and aggressively questioned. Stephen is more thoughtful, reflective, and even, professorial. But Stephen brings the weight of a probing and inquiring mind. Where Tim bludgeoned, Stephen creeps under the skin. Either way, the “discomfort” the guest feels reveals “truths” you otherwise might not have got.

I fear the BBC could be dumbing down. Not so long ago it defenestrated another of its brilliant programmes, Newsnight. It used to be the channel’s flagship in-depth news programme. It only covered the top two or three stories of the day but with the time and journalistic resources to do so meaningfully.

Its most famous presenter, Jeremy Paxman, became one of the best-known journalists in the English-speaking world. Emily Maitlis did the famous interview of Prince Andrew on Newsnight.

All of that’s gone. The programme survives but only in name. To make it cheaper, it’s lost its muscle and depth and, therefore, what made it special. Now it’s just a simple extended news bulletin. From being compulsory viewing every weekday at 10 pm, it’s become something you can miss without loss. Most people do.

The irony of it all is that the BBC’s director general, Tim Davie, is simultaneously battling the British government for additional money for the World Service. As Sackur tweeted when the demise of HARDtalk was announced: “A brilliant team of producers and researchers is being disbanded just as Tim Davie is trying to persuade the British government that the journalism of the BBC World Service is such a vital expression of democratic soft power that the taxpayer must fund it.”

I wonder if Mr Davie realises HARDtalk is a significant explanation of why so many watch BBC World? Soon there’ll be one less reason to do so.

Karan Thapar is the author of Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story.The views expressed are personal