And
that
clip showcases perfectly why I have not bothered watching GMB while Piers is in the hot seat for over a year now. It's a cacophony of "can I speak now?", "stop talking", "let me finish", and personal comments back and forth. The only thing I learned from that interview is that Piers and Shola disagree. This is the antithesis of high quality insightful interviewing.
Piers was incapable of leaving his own feelings to one side and interviewing guests fairly. For a good comparison, compare Piers' treatment of Shola above (with whom he
disagrees
), and his treatment of Megyn Kelly (with whom he
agrees
) below.
There's a section of this video where Megyn (who
shares
Piers' view) is allowed to speak for two minutes, completely uninterrupted and unchallenged. I don't think Shola (who
opposes
Piers' view) managed to get two
sentences
out, let alone two minutes.
As a presenter of a national morning news programme, it is imperative that you are able to interview people on both sides of a debate and do so fairly and without your own biases showing through. Piers just
could not
do this, and that's just not good enough.
There is no place for glorified slanging matches masquerading as news on national television, and I have my fingers crossed that we can look forward to a much better standard of interviewing - where the viewer may actually come away feeling
better
informed than they did at the start - going forward.