This satire of QT was in the Yorker May 2012 http://www.theyorker.co.uk/comment/politics/thecolumn/11322
About to appear on QT? Worried, nervous, and scared of the baying
hordes of democracy mocking you're every word? Not sure how to respond
to Dimbelby? Fear no more, this guide will explain exactly how to
survive the most contrived and tired formate for a political debate show
on TV, so long as you follow these simple rules;
-The 'sit back' manoeuvre. Any question or retort on QT can be
answered using this method of delivery. Lean forward when speaking,
point and raise your arms at the peak of the answer and then sit back to
finish. Regardless of what is said, sheer fear of awkwardness will lead
many members to clap even the most bland, meaningless answers. Take
this example from one of the great doyens in this field, Yvette Cooper;
"We need to stand up for them, we didn’t do enough to stand up for
them in Bradford at that particular election but we will do so and are
doing so at the moment across the country."
By using this technique she has managed to get anyway with saying
absolutely nothing. She has masterfully spoken a sentence devoid of all
meaning, a candidate for the most vacuous statement of the 3rd
millennium, on any sane show this would be pointed out and she would
sent to fight the rancor. Yet still she gets clapped by simply sitting
back at the end. For some inexpiable reason sitting back on the magical
QT chairs generates applause, no matter how spurious the response.
Vaguely democratic noises like “stand up for them” will always succeed.
-Quote Churchill, always quote him, all the time. Because Churchill
is God, Allah, Vishnu, Zeus and Flying Spaghetti Monster, rolled into
one. Never forget that. In fact quote him regardless of context. Make up
quotes- “As we all know Churchill liked to say “quantitative easing is
wrong”, quote casual phrases; “as Churchill once said 'I disagree'”, “in
the words of Churchill 'no'”. Just make sure that you appear to be to
somehow be related to him. No scrap that, actually be Churchill, dress
like him, talk like him, smoke and drink like him (probably see your
doctor first) but above all remember Coogan's law; YOU+CHURCHILL=GOOD.
-Be funny. It is vital that in a serious panel show that you must
appear funny at all times. This is best achieved by joking with
Dimbelby. However it is a scientific fact that the only possible joke
that can be made with him is when he mentions twitter at the start of
the show; “do you even know what trending is David?” Although this is
done EVERY DAMN TIME it never ceases to be funny because mildly being
ageist and accusing all elderly people of technophobia is infinitely
hilarious to the extent that it defies the fundamental principles of
chronology. Alternatively you can use the famous Farage tactic of
laughing excessively at any pro-UKIP (or whomever you support) joke from
the crowd.
-Assume that the audience is full of complete idiots with no
understanding of basic political notions and a desperation to make a
certain point or case regardless of context. Roughly every audience will
have the following members;
-Random royalist. “I’m very much in favour of having a royal yacht
and very uneasy of private funding...how naff is that, poor queen”
(19/01/2012). This is easily defeated by pointing out the obvious fact
that anyone who has sympathy for an unelected monarch who lives a life
of luxury off millions of tax pounds and who is still technically
capable of upending British democracy, on the grounds that her free
mega-yacht might be funded partly by the private sector, should be
immediately executed for crimes against every logical notion of justice
ever conceived.
-The 'lets clap at everything' gang. 26/04/12- Farage “We need cuts
and deregulation” (Mass applause). Audience member “I support TUSC, we
need to stop cuts now!” (Mass Applause). As you can see QT has evolved
beyond logic. It is apparently possible for the audience to support two
opposing positions at once without any hint of irony or confusion. Use
this to your advantage. Do not fear extolling views completely the
opposite to those just applauded. Someone wants us to get rid of
trident? Demand we nuke France! Another gets applause for praising
democracy? Demand a Platonic state ruled by philosopher kings! In QT the
extent of applause is directly proportional to the illogical nature of
what was said.
-And a bunch of baby-faced young libertarians in suits who've just
fapped off to their first Milton Friedman video. “You know people should
really leave the innocent bankers alone...” (03/05/2012) The advantage
here is that only the 0.0000000001% of the population who find
libertarian economics sexually arousing and for whom the “invisible
hand” is a form of hands-free masturbation, will ever agree with these
sentiments.
Generally these rules if followed will at least help you survive a QT
appearance. However, the big potential slip up is the wild-card panel
member. This person is apparently meant to represent “civil society” but
this is used to justify putting anyone and everyone on. The latter part
of this guide will deal with how to tackle these modern Ciceros.
-Galloway. Easily defeated by making unsubstantiated links to “Arab
dicktators”. It does not matter whether these are true or whether you
are committing a gross act of hypocrisy as a golden rule of QT is that
any negative point will always be lapped up by the crowd because “all
politicians is liars, innit?” Unless of course, like David Aaronvitch,
you are a former communist, in which case it means someone is actually
more left wing than Galloway and the universe collapses under the weight
of such a paradox.
-The Taxpayer's alliance (TPA). By calling itself the TPA these guys
can claim to know exactly what taxpayers want and what they are thinking
on every issue. No doubt they have chips in all our brains or
something, how else would they know what everyone wants and how it just
happens to be the interests of their organisation's tax-dodging owners.
Also, their frequent appearances must be due to some forgotten
referendum where they won a massive majority of everyone declaring that
they should represent our views on every issue. I mean why else would
they be on every other week? Only by doing exactly what these infallible
arbiters of public opinion want you to, do you, the humble elected
politician, have a chance of survival. In fact apply the Dacre formula
here; Unelected, obnoxious, unrepresentative right wing organisation
funded by millionaires=public opinion.
-Julie Meyer. Although only appearing once on QT (16/02/2012) Julie
Meyer was easily the best panel member ever. In what, for the purposes
of my sanity and general faith in humanity, must have been a brilliant
satire, this random US businesswomen was deemed acceptable as the
representative of British civil society. Constantly answering questions
with words like “Digitisation! Entrepreneurship!”, she pulled off the
greatest coup in QT history, doing what Cooper and Miliband could only
dream of, by not even trying to answer the question. When asked her
views on police commissioners she simply said “I don’t know much about
this issue”. That's it. Having been asked to go on a UK political debate
show where we would hope that one would prepare for by researching
current affairs, she simply refused to answer the question. Avoid her at
all costs. Until then I did not think it would be possible to actually
defeat Question Time itself....
With this guide you should now be well on your way to upholding the
illusion of British democracy via its most popular televisual outlet.
Never again shall you fear the cries of Galloway or the sneers of the
TPA. Never again shall you forget not to sit back in your chair or fail
to quote Churchill. But above all remember this; the more implausible
your answer sounds, the less like it seems you've answered the question,
the more likely it is you will get applause.
