Blog Archives - The Media Coach

How to Avoid Podfade: Five reasons why podcasts fail (and how to stop yours being one of them!)

December 10, 2025/0 Comments/by Eric Dixon

Podcasts are everywhere. Estimates vary, but it’s thought that there are about 4.25 million podcasts worldwide, with activity levels at a record high. It often seems as if anyone with a microphone, a digital recorder and something to say has started one. For the listener, this represents a dazzling – not to mention slightly overwhelming – choice of subject matter, styles and formats. Very few will reach the reported 11 million regular listeners to The Joe Rogan Experience, probably the most listened to podcast in the world.

However, most of those podcasts are no longer active, with some sources suggesting that only around 500,000 remain. There’s even an industry word for this: “podfaded”.

The truth is, despite the low barriers to entry, the majority of podcasts stall before hitting ten episodes. From our experience of working in the industry, here’s why we think this is – and how you can stop yours following suit:

No Clear Sense of Purpose

Simply wanting to do a podcast – because everyone seems to be doing one and therefore you think you should do one too – is not enough. You need to decide what your podcast is for. What are you offering that other podcasts don’t? What angle or perspective are you taking? Or how can you offer what you have to say in a different way? Clarity about your value proposition will keep you on track and help listeners make that all-important connection, which keeps them listening.

Over-ambition

In the heady days of setting up a podcast, it’s easy to imagine a future far beyond what is realistically possible in practice. Imagined guests talking at ease and at length about a series of as-yet undecided topics makes the process seem straightforward. But the harsh reality of two people in an empty room trying to get a conversation underway after the fifth retake feels very different. So, limit the frequency and duration of your first podcasts carefully. It’s much better to go from one podcast a month to two (if there’s a call for it and you can manage the work involved), rather than the other way around. Similarly, you can always extend episode length – perhaps for a one-off ‘special’, or as the needs of the podcast demand – rather than be seen to be cutting back. Otherwise, what feels like a fun day out of the office on episode 1 can become serious amounts of out-of-hours stress by episode 3.

Poor Structure

What differentiates podcasts from many radio programmes – and what attracts people to them – is often how ‘loose’ and chatty they sound. And it’s true, podcasts should sound conversational, as if friends are chatting in a coffee shop together. For this reason, take care about how much ‘scripting’ goes on. Not only does it take a huge amount of time to prepare, but it’s hard to write for the ear rather than the eye (although that is something we teach). Nevertheless, it’s worth keeping some sort of structure in mind: a clear opening, a midpoint reset, a final thought. Plus, what we call ‘teases’ to identify what’s “coming up…” or “still to come…”. These tiny signposts help listeners stay with you.

Lack of Editorial Discipline

This is where lots of podcasts come unstuck. They run far too long. They leave in the dull bits. They forget that listeners can — and will — drift off. If conversation meanders off-topic (we’re back to that sense of purpose again), listeners will struggle to stay on board. Tight editing is one of the clearest signs of quality, whether it’s done in the studio afterwards or “live” by a host who knows when to move things along. And the selection of host (or hosts) is crucial. It’s often not the most senior individual in the organisation who is the best choice for presenter. Someone who sounds friendly, confident, relaxed, and who can ask simple and concise questions that encourage intelligent discussion is precisely the person you are looking for.

Troublesome Tech

Those low barriers to entry probably don’t help here. These days, with the right apps, it’s possible to produce a podcast on a single mobile phone. But listeners are used to top-quality presentations from the very best broadcasters, so will notice the difference immediately. Volume levels which vary, unexpected drop-outs, a weird echo, or interviewees who sound off-mic are all very good reasons for the listener to switch off. Buying the proper kit or hiring a studio where people can do the technical part on your behalf is often a valuable investment and will reap dividends. Such an approach also leaves you free to focus on the content, which will no doubt be improved as a result.

Ultimately, podcasting remains one of the most intimate and enjoyable formats out there. But success requires more than a microphone and an idea. Importantly, what’s needed can be taught. Our courses will help define the purpose of your pod. We can teach people how to write and read scripts, ask good questions, as well as interrupt politely and start and end with impact.

Addressing these five failure points will not only help you avoid ‘podfade’ but also set you up to build a loyal audience that grows year over year.

Find out more about our Podcast Training here.

Images: Canva

A Behind-the-Scenes TV Cheat… and Why It Works

November 26, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

At the end of last week, I caught a tiny “behind the scenes” moment on television that made me laugh out loud — and reminded me of the many small ways professionals quietly “cheat” on TV.

Right at the end of the cricket coverage, guest commentator Glenn McGrath turns to presenter Alex Hartley and asks, “Why are you so tall?” She laughs and replies, “Because I’m standing on a box!” We never see the box, but when she steps off it the reason becomes obvious: she’s a much shorter woman standing next to a very tall man, and as she puts it, “we wouldn’t be able to do this interview” without it.

It made me laugh because I used to do exactly the same thing! I carried a red box in the back of my car when I was reporting for TV. At 5’3″, I often found myself interviewing people much taller than me. Yes, a good camera operator can compensate, but it’s a faff — and it often leaves the guest looking down to the bottom corner of the frame, which always looks just a bit… odd.

My trusty red box solved the problem instantly and usually made everyone laugh in the process. In fact, I discovered it was an excellent icebreaker with nervous interviewees. Clearly, I’m not the only one:

Lorenda Reddekopp is a CBC reporter who sometimes stands on a box.

‘Eyeline’ is one of those small technical details that makes a surprisingly big difference in telly. It simply refers to the line of sight between two people, or a speaker and the camera. Get it wrong on camera and the whole piece feels subtly skewed: too much chin, too much nostril, or an unintended sense of power imbalance if one person visually dominates the frame. Get it right and everything feels natural — the viewer concentrates on the conversation rather than the optics.

For anyone who appears on camera — whether in a studio, on Zoom, or on a smartphone — it’s worth thinking about your eyeline. Make sure you’re level with the people you’re speaking to. Prop your laptop up. Adjust your seat height. Shift a few inches to one side if it helps the balance of the shot.

When the eyeline is right, the conversation works. And when it’s wrong, the viewer notices — even if they can’t quite tell you why.

Image from X (formerly Twitter).

What Should I Do With My Hands?

November 19, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

One of the most common questions we’re asked — whether in presentation training or on-camera coaching — is the deceptively simple: “What should I do with my hands?” The moment you start presenting, being interviewed, or recording a piece-to-camera, your hands can suddenly feel like a problem. Where do they go?

So, what should you do?

First: decide on a neutral position.

A neutral position

This is your safe home base — the place your hands can return to if you suddenly feel awkward. For some people, it’s hands lightly clasped at the waist. For others, it’s fingertips together or lightly holding a pen. Avoid behind your back, too firmly grasped or in your pockets. All can send the wrong signal.

A neutral position can be anything that feels comfortable

Once you’ve chosen that neutral position, forget about your hands. Overthinking is the enemy here. If you suddenly realise they’ve drifted and you are uncomfortable, simply return to neutral. Otherwise, let them do what they naturally do.

Second: if you struggle to feel “presenter-like,” hold a pen in your dominant hand.

All inclusive gesture with pen

This is a favourite trick from our cameraman-trainer David Gridley. A non-clicking pen (please!) can instantly shift someone who’s overly self-conscious into their professional zone. Somehow it signals to the brain: I know what I’m doing. We’ve seen this transform performances. Try it.

Pointed gesture with pen — take care it doesn’t appear accusatory

Third: let movement serve meaning.
Good speakers don’t move randomly; they move intentionally. If you say, “In the US it’s like this… but in Europe it’s like this…”, you can take a small step to one side, then the other to illustrate the geographical gap. If you’re very confident — like our trainer Eric Dixon — you might even cross the stage to make the contrast clear. Eric also moves forward when he wants to create intimacy or confidentiality, and steps back with arms spread when he wants to illustrate the big picture or convey inclusivity. The point is, movement becomes part of the message: a visual aid, it is not random.

And finally: remember that human brains are pattern-spotters.
Your audience notices repetition. If you constantly scratch your nose, tug your ear, or fiddle with your glasses case, they’ll see it. These repetitive gestures are almost always self-soothing behaviours. Once the audience spots the pattern, it starts to irritate them — and they stop listening to what you’re saying. If you know you have one of these habits, work on removing it. Here’s a 45-second video that explains this further.

The goal isn’t to control your hands; it’s to stop them competing with your message. Choose a neutral position, give yourself a small anchor if needed, use gestures intentionally, and let the message take centre stage.

Images from iStock

A Jar of Marbles and the Power of a Simple Story

November 12, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

The power of a well-told story or anecdote is one of the not-so-secret tools of leadership. Most people we train have heard this idea before — but few really know how to do it well. A short, well-crafted story can create a real wow in a presentation and be hugely effective in a media interview.

Last week, a clip of Brené Brown — research professor at the University of Houston and bestselling author of Dare to Lead — popped up on my YouTube feed. It’s a brilliant example of two things: a vivid, tangible metaphor and the power of a personal anecdote.

The story isn’t new; Brown has told it many times in her leadership talks and in Dare to Lead. But it’s worth revisiting because it’s so good.

For those who haven’t clicked the video: when Brown’s nine-year-old daughter confided a secret to a friend, she soon discovered that it had been shared with the whole class. That led to a long, tearful conversation in which Brown came up with her “jar of marbles” metaphor — an explanation for how her daughter could work out who she could trust.

Every time someone shows kindness, keeps a secret, or proves dependable, they earn a marble. Every time they gossip, break a promise, or let you down, they lose one. Over time, you can see which friendships have jars full of marbles — and which don’t.

Later, Brown realised the same principle applies to leadership. Trust is built in small moments: a commitment kept, an honest conversation handled with care, a colleague defended in their absence. Each act adds a marble to the jar. Lose your temper, take credit unfairly, or withhold information — and a handful spill out. She now uses the jar of marbles to teach leaders how to build trust.

So, what can we learn from this?

Three takeaways for better communication

Use metaphor to make ideas land
Metaphors turn abstract ideas into something people can see. Trust, culture, innovation — they all become clearer when given a physical shape. The jar of marbles works because it makes trust visible. Being able to use a metaphor isn’t an innate gift; it’s a skill. Professor Sir Jonathan Van-Tam, who became famous during the pandemic for his vivid briefings (the train arriving at the station, for example), once said he taught himself to use metaphors so people would understand science better. It’s something anyone can practise — and get good at.
Tell a story that brings it to life
A metaphor alone is clever. A metaphor inside a story is powerful. The moment Brown tells the story of her distraught, betrayed daughter, the idea becomes human.
When people share stories that are short, honest and real, listeners connect differently. It shows empathy, credibility and authenticity.
Land the message clearly
Don’t leave the audience guessing at the meaning of your story. For maximum impact, what used to be called the moral of the story should be clearly stated. In this case, it’s simple: Trust is earned one marble at a time. That phrase is short, visual and repeatable — exactly what you want when communicating an important truth.

At the Media Coach, we help leaders present more clearly and use language that is memorable and has impact. We do this through Media Training, Presentation Training, Personal Impact Training, Pitch Training and more. If you think we can help you or your team, get in touch on +44 (0)20 7099 2212 or email enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk

What Crisis Spokespeople Can Learn from the Huntingdon Train Statement

November 5, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

A short, measured police briefing after the Huntingdon train stabbings offers a textbook example of what good looks like if you are a spokesperson tasked with giving a statement after a major incident.

This video is just a few minutes long but demonstrates so many of the points covered in our standard Crisis Communications training.

From the video, we can see that the first sign of professionalism comes with the two-minute warning that the press statement is about to start. It’s given by someone who is probably a British Transport Police press officer and would have been extremely helpful for the broadcasters who were undoubtedly juggling other live feeds, waiting to switch to the statement.

Another point to note is that the spokesman, Superintendent John Loveless, is in shot for more than a minute as he walks towards the mic before he speaks. That’s a useful reminder that everything counts. Open mics, rolling video cameras and if needed even lip-readers, mean there is no space for a private throw away remark or even a grimace. Loveless handles it all well. He is calm and composed, with no unnecessary chat or fiddling while the crews set their focus.

Superintendent John Loveless

When he does speak, he keeps it short and businesslike. He checks everyone’s ready, but doesn’t overdo it, and introduces himself clearly — aware that some broadcasters are probably already live. His tone is factual, almost forensic, and he gives plenty of detail, including key numbers. I’m always reminding people to pull together relevant numbers ahead of this kind of statement. Journalists need them, and they’ll get them elsewhere if you don’t provide them. Just imagine if it were left to the train passengers to guess how long the police took to respond — getting your numbers out early helps control the narrative.

Two points from the Superintendent’s statement (which you can read here) are clearly meant to land: first, that both arrested men are British citizens from different ethnic backgrounds, but both born in the UK; and second, that armed police arrived within eight minutes. These details clearly aim to head off speculation about race or response times, but he lands them without commentary or editorialising. It’s disciplined communication: facts only, interpretation left to others.

In this example, Superintendent Loveless has chosen (or been advised) to read from a script, which makes sense given the situation, but it has drawbacks. He looks down a lot, so we rarely see his eyes — and that loss of connection can make a big difference when trust matters. Reading also flattens the natural rhythm, and it’s difficult to achieve what my colleague Eric Dixon calls natural intonation. There’s only one misplaced emphasis that I could spot, but it shows how hard it is to keep the flow when you’re tied to the page. If you can work from bullet points instead, do.

Loveless ends without taking questions. That’s understandable when there are legal implications or when absolute control is needed. But in a corporate crisis, if a seasoned spokesperson can take a few questions, it signals there’s nothing to hide.

In this case, British Transport Police provide a simple briefing. The overall impression is professional and steady, with no hint of speculation. BTP will certainly have trained for this, a small team of Press Officers will have choreographed it and Loveless has probably done it before. The professionalism shows.

Image: Superintendent John Loveless, YouTube

Waitrose Shows the Perils of Being Tone-Deaf in the Social Media Age

October 29, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

Waitrose got it seriously wrong last week — first in the way it handled an autistic volunteer, and then in how it responded when the story hit the headlines.

For several years, 28-year-old Tom Boyd, who is autistic and has limited communication skills, volunteered at Waitrose in Cheadle Hulme. He clocked up more than 600 hours of unpaid work, becoming part of the team and taking pride in his role. When his family asked if he might be given a few paid hours, Waitrose said no — and asked him not to return.

That decision might once have passed unnoticed. But in 2025, stories like this spread fast. Tom’s mother, hugely frustrated with Waitrose, shared what had happened on Facebook, and it struck a chord. Within hours, the post was shared thousands of times. The next morning, the national media had picked it up.

Tom Boyd’s mother who shared the story on Facebook

Waitrose’s initial response — that it was “investigating” — may have been technically correct, but it was emotionally tone-deaf. Any professional will notice that this statement starts with their own defence, not with sympathy for Tom Boyd or others in a similar situation. It sounded legalistic, not human:

“We work hard to be an inclusive employer. As part of this, we partner with a number of charities … and are well experienced in making reasonable adjustments to help people succeed at work. We are sorry to hear of Tom’s story and whilst we cannot comment on individual cases, we are investigating as a priority.”

I am sure the author meant well and was following an internal playbook, but in communications terms, it left a vacuum. Asda stepped in and managed to make a corporate statement sound genuine.

“We know that finding meaningful work can be especially challenging for individuals with learning disabilities or difficulties. … So, when we heard about Tom and his desire to find meaningful work, we knew he’d be a fantastic fit and we are delighted to offer him a role at his local store.”

The contrast couldn’t have been clearer. Waitrose looked heartless; Asda looked sensible and friendly.

To its credit, Waitrose did quite quickly then offer Tom a paid job and expressed regret for its decision. But by then, the damage was done. The story had become one of corporate misjudgement.

The lesson is simple. In the age of instant outrage, brands don’t have hours, let alone days, to “investigate” before showing empathy. The first move probably shouldn’t be to protect the company, but to sound human. A single line such as “We got this wrong — we’re sorry, and we’ll put it right” might well have stopped the backlash in its tracks.

Waitrose didn’t lose this week because it made a mistake. It lost because it failed to own the mistake quickly enough.

Image: Still from video posted on Facebook

A New Dawn (Again): Why Clichés Still Make Great Headlines

October 22, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

Within minutes of the start of President Trump’s address to the Israeli Knesset last week, every major news outlet flashed headlines quoting the same line: “the historic dawn of a new Middle East.”

Serious analysis came later — about foreign policy, tone, and intent — but in that first wave of headlines, every journalist reached for the same familiar image of renewal and hope.

It’s hardly new. From Tony Blair’s “a new dawn has broken” in 1997 to Nelson Mandela’s “a new dawn is upon us” in 1994, leaders have long turned to this kind of imagery when they want to signal change. Trump’s “historic dawn of a new Middle East” is the same rhetorical move — simple and instantly quotable.

That consistency of reporting across newsfeeds — from the Manchester Evening News and New Indian Express to CBS — highlights the symbiotic relationship between speechwriters and journalists. Speechwriters craft lines built to be quoted; journalists, under pressure to file fast, recognise those ready-made headlines and grab them. The result is a global echo chamber in which a few words can define a whole event.

Sometimes that line is a metaphor, like “a new dawn.” Other times it’s an idiom such as “a perfect storm,” “the tide has turned,” or, in a technical briefing last week rather than a political speech, IMF MD Kristalina Georgieva’s recent confession that the loose regulation of private credit markets “keeps me awake at night.” None of these is wildly creative. In fact, they’re well-worn — but that’s what makes them useful.

Familiar phrases work because they’re easy to quote, easy to understand, and they sound natural. They don’t require explanation. They fit neatly into headlines, soundbites, and social posts.

It’s tempting to think a truly memorable line must be clever or poetic. And it can be. But the phrases that travel fastest are often the simplest — a few short words that tap into shared language and emotion. “New dawn,” “perfect storm,” “keeps me awake at night” — all are instantly understood and instantly repeatable.

For those of us who occasionally speak to journalists or stand on conference platforms, the lesson is clear: you don’t need to reinvent the wheel to be quotable. You just need to find a line that feels authentic and quote-ready. It has to be something you’re genuinely comfortable saying — and you certainly don’t need to resort to hyperbole or outright invention. A touch of flair is enough.

Teaching new spokespeople how important it is to give journalists a quote, is one of the major takeaways from our Media Training. If you would like to understand the range of communications training we offer either email enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk or call 020 7099 2212 and if I am not training, I’ll be there to see if we can help.

Image of Trump: Source The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Media Interview Prep Must Include Checking Social Media

October 15, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

BBC One’s Have I Got News for You — a favourite watch for many old hacks (like us) — became the story itself this week. During the show, presenter Victoria Coren Mitchell repeated a claim made on social media that Euan Blair’s company, Multiverse, had won a government contract to run the new digital ID system. The comment was made flippantly, but the claim was false. The BBC later issued an apology, and the episode was withdrawn from iPlayer. You can read The Guardian’s write-up of the story here.

This was just a throwaway line in a comedy programme, not a hard-news interview. But it highlights an important truth: misinformation is now everywhere and often has a life of its own. The post about Blair, which is still on X, has been viewed almost three million times. It is almost inevitable that, from time to time, completely false information will seep into journalists’ questions.

The untrue post that is still on X

At The Media Coach, we always say that good preparation means rehearsing the answers to predictable negative questions. A spokesperson should always know these reactive lines.

Many of the questions that catch people out are of the “While I’ve got you, can I just ask…” variety — often prompted by something a journalist or presenter has just seen, maybe on socials. But if the journalist can see it, you can too.

And if you’ve done your prep, these questions are usually easy to handle.

So, before any major interview, you or your PR support should:

Do a quick social-media / ChatGPT / Google search on your name, your organisation, and the topic of the interview.
Check X (Twitter), LinkedIn, Reddit, and comment threads — not just the news pages.
If you find misinformation, you may choose to correct it online or not — but you’ll have a neat response ready and won’t be blindsided if it comes up in the interview.

Many people come to us ahead of media interviews for exactly this reason — to get help preparing for difficult questions and to rehearse how to deal with them under pressure. In the future, AI may do this for you, but for now, we’re very happy to oblige.

Images:
Victoria Coren Mitchell, YouTube
Post on X

Less is More: What Presenters Can Learn from TV Graphics

October 8, 2025/1 Comment/by Lindsay Williams

If you present regularly but want to get better, you can learn a lot from TV news. When you watch the news, notice how presenters use graphics. The visuals have just a handful of words, one chart or image. Clean design, few words. The rest is left to the presenter — to explain, to interpret, to make sense of what the viewer is seeing.

When we are coaching presenters, it is something that many or even most get wrong. In corporate presentations, people often try to make the slide do all the talking. The result? Slides crammed with text, complex charts that only the author can read, or bullet points that compete with the speaker’s voice. Having coached many senior medics, for example (KOLs or Key Opinion Leaders in particular), they seem to delight in putting four charts on one slide. This sample, offered as a template from Slidetem.net, is, in my view, a perfect example of how not to do it.

The problem is simple: when the audience is reading, they’re not listening. Their brains can’t do both at once. So, if your slide is full of words, you’ve effectively told your audience, “Don’t listen to me — puzzle this lot out instead.”

Television journalists understand something different. They use graphics to reinforce the message, not deliver it. Sky News recently gave us a great example: the graphic shows a series of simple lines charting changes in disposable income, while journalist Gurpreet Narwan provides the meaning — why it matters, what’s changed, and how it compares.

If you want to be an effective presenter, that’s how you should work too. The slide should be a visual cue, no more. It’s there to help people see what you’re saying, not read what you’re thinking.

A few practical ideas:

Strip back every slide to its essence. For further reading I recommend Garr Reynolds who writes books and blogs about this.
Stick to one idea per slide, and one graphic or chart. If you want people to compare charts, introduce them separately, explain, then show them side by side.
Remove words. The more words on the slide, the more distracting — and the more you’ll be tempted to read them yourself.
When you put up a slide, it can help to give the audience time to absorb the details, but you might also briefly explain the basics, something like: “The X axis is time in 24-hour increments, the Y axis is average calories consumed.”
Use modern tools to highlight or animate as you speak — as in the Sky News example.

The test is simple: if someone could understand your presentation without you in the room, you’ve gone too far.

Good slides make the audience look at you, not away from you. They prompt curiosity, not silence. And when you strike that balance — less information, more explanation — you move from being a presenter with slides to being a communicator with impact.

If you or your team need help to be a better presenter, call us on tel: 7099 2212 or email equiries@themediacoach.co.uk.

My Verdict on the PM’s Kuenssberg Interview

October 1, 2025/0 Comments/by Lindsay Williams

Keir Starmer’s interview with Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday was in many ways more important than his set-piece conference speech. At conference, he speaks to his party; from the studio, he was speaking to the electorate — and a combative, barely respectful interviewer.

Against this tough brief, the Prime Minister delivered a workmanlike rather than commanding performance. He was understandably determined to list achievements and stress the “strong start” he believes his government has already made. Time and again, when Kuenssberg put a pointed question to him — whether about tax, or migration or questions about his leadership — he began not by addressing her question, but by returning to a set of prepared talking points. Clearly, he was determined to get those points out, even if it meant not answering directly. The danger with this technique is that the listener hears only evasiveness.

Our advice – answer the questions

We always advise people to answer the question before shoehorning in prepared messages, but it is clear why this might not work with Kuenssberg. Once she gets an answer, she rushes on to the next tough question. Neither strategy would be entirely satisfactory, but we would advise more direct answers.

Perhaps more damaging was the Prime Minister’s lack of authority. Kuenssberg at times looked like a bully, while the man running the country sounded evasive and defensive. It is hard to deal with this interviewing style, but David Lammy and James Cleverly do better, to name but two. Both manage to maintain more authority.

Donkey-field answer was well prepared

In one area, the preparation really shone through – that was on the donkey-field question. For those who have missed this, Starmer, 20 years ago, bought a field adjacent to his parents’ home so his dying mother could see and touch her donkeys. Some sections of the press have had scent of another property/trust/tax avoidance scandal. But when Kuenssberg asked whether a Trust was set up to dodge inheritance tax on the donkey field, the answer was clear: there was no Trust. And the story told had plenty of human detail. I also noticed that the Prime Minister slowed down on this point, and he did sound dismissive and more in control.

One of the stand-out quotes from the interview was that Starmer believes Reform’s proposal to end the right to remain for settled immigrants was ‘immoral and racist’. Watching the video carefully, it’s clear this was a quote constructed by Kuenssberg rather than prepared ahead of time. Although Starmer agreed and repeated the words, they were introduced by the interviewer, not by him. This is the strongest line from the interview and grabbed all the follow-up publicity.

But Starmer’s team did come up with their own prepared quotes – always important in any interview.

On mumblings about a leadership challenge, the line was: ‘it always happens, it’s in the job description.’ And also, ‘now is not the time for navel gazing.’ On the possibility of raising VAT, the answer was: ‘The manifesto stands’ – more of a reactive line than a prepared quote, but it will be quoted ad nauseam anyway.

The one that got away

But the one quote I think he would have wanted to see as a headline was about what he is calling ‘patriotic renewal’ and the fight for a tolerant country. He said, ‘It’s a fight we must begin, a fight we must win.’ (For those who have been through The Media Coach message-building process, this is ‘sizzle’, that is, a rhyming contrasting pair.) The spin doctors will be disappointed that this did not make the write-ups or the follow-up discussions.

At The Media Coach, we coach people likely to face hostile interviews (as well as any other sort of interview). If it’s something we might be able to help you with, email us at enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk or phone 020 7099 2212.

Donkey Image – Alex Armstrong @alexharmstrong, X