What criteria do media trainers judge interviews by?

If you’re interested in humanitarian issues and foreign policy have a listen to IRC CEO, David Miliband’s BBC Radio 4 interview about the Biden administration’s announcement that it is withdrawing US support for the Saudi led offensive in Yemen.

(The segment starts at around 1:15).

From my perspective, it was a four-minute lesson in message discipline and clarity.

Here are three (non-exhaustive) observations:

1.      It contained clear messages that were full of quotable phrases:

–         ‘This is a 180-degree turn from the failed war strategy that we’ve seen for the last 4 or 5 years.

–          ‘It’s an important set of steps.’

–         He (President Biden) has ‘abandoned a failed strategy not a moment too soon.’

–         Yemen needs a ‘massive infusion of aid’.

–         ‘There’s an important role for Britain to play’ (Miliband is a former UK Foreign Secretary).

2.      He demonstrated authority through selective use of  meaningful numbers (although I would probably have used                     fractions rather than percentages):

–         24 Mn people, 80% of population are dependent on humanitarian aid

–         20 Mn have no access to clean water

–         50% of health facilities aren’t working

3.    He flagged what was important:

–         The ‘First steps’ should be a ceasefire

–         ‘It’s vital that the (Huthi terrorist) designation issue is addressed urgently’.

3.      He didn’t use much jargon:

– I counted one example when he talked about ‘rogue non-state actors such as ISIS’.

My only quibble? I would have liked a good concrete example that painted more of a picture of what life is actually like on the ground for people in Yemen.

But the numbers went some way to addressing this and this was a hybrid diplomatic/humanitarian interview so it’s not surprising the focus was split and the overall tone and illustration prioritised being forensic and structured.