Interruptions in Political Interviews: A Study of Margaret Thatcher and Neil Kinnock

Abstract

Eight televised interviews were selected from four different interviewers, who each interviewed both the Prime Minister (Margaret Thatcher) and the Leader of the Opposition (Neil Kinnock); the video recordings were analysed using a new interruption coding system devised by Roger, Bull & Smith (1988). No significant difference was found between Margaret Thatcher and Neil Kinnock either in the extent to which they interrupt or were interrupted by the interviewers; indeed, significant positive correlations were found between the different types of interruptions performed and received by the two politicians. The results were quite contrary to what might have been expected from the work of Beattie (1982), who claimed that Margaret Thatcher is frequently interrupted because she gives misleading turn-yielding cues. Where the politicians did differ was in the extent to which Margaret Thatcher explicitly protests at being interrupted; this gives the misleading impression that she is being excessively interrupted, although the objective evidence presented here clearly shows that this is not the case. The impression that she is badly treated is compounded by her tendency to personalise issues, to take questions and criticisms as accusations and frequently to address the interviewers formally by title and surname, as if they need to be called to account for misdemeanours. It is argued that these stylistic features have the effect of wrong-footing interviewers and putting them on the defensive.