Rachael’s blog 15 July – Hacked off ……..

Jeremy Paxman had to work very hard the other night to get a flicker of reaction from a studio audience invited to take part in a BBC Newsnight debate on “Hackgate”.

He asked them which political leader had most impressed them by their handling of the phone-hacking scandal.

Silence

He tried again: OK, who has been the most unimpressive?

Nothing. Zippo

It was if the audience – presumably invited to represent the Great British public – had been anaesthetised by shock at the whole tawdry business, or was just not that surprised any more by the tactics and antics of people and institutions that claim time and again to be acting in the “public interest.”

I think it was both. They were shocked by the inhumanity revealed in the Milly Dowler hacking story and subsequent revelations but they were not surprised at behaviour that, while abhorrent, seems to fit rather than depart from the ethics and morals of today’s society.

This cynical, despairing shake of the head is dangerous. While commentators say that “Hackgate” will herald a new era for media and political relations, it needs to be much more than a cosmetic exercise. It has to dig deep and have meaning for a deeply cynical and worn out public. That doesn’t mean going from one extreme to another: the worlds of politicians and journalists will go on colliding, coinciding and overlapping. They have to. But what matters is how things are done – and seen to be done.

Details, as well as big gestures, count now. It’s the way journalists treat people: yes, they must hold people and politicians to account but do they, for instance, have to interview the Prime Minister or Leader of the Opposition as if they’re convicted criminals? Couldn’t they at least show and be filmed showing the courtesy these high offices are due? Not deference, just courtesy.

As for politicians, the Newsnight audience reflected a wider public feeling: that the sound and fury of Westminster signifies nothing. They can’t stomach hypocrisy. How can politicians who cosy up to media moguls like Rupert Murdoch and flog books – and secrets – for serialisation in the press, have a hope in hell of gaining the public’s respect?

And now I should declare an interest. I have been a journalist for more than 30 years. I edited three regional newspapers and worked on the Times newsdesk for two years.

I love journalism and I am proud to be a journalist.

As a regional newspaper editor, I had one indefatigable guide – the readers. They treated their local newspaper as theirs. If you moved things around, especially the Births, Marriages and Deaths columns, you knew instantly what they felt about it – and I once had to move them back to the first half of the paper because of a torrent of rage and criticism.

I remember once giving a talk in a working mens’ club in County Durham. I had twittered on about the great things the paper and its journalists had done and were doing – and then came questions. I can still see members of the audience unfurl cuttings they had brought to show me of stories with mistakes and errors they found unacceptable. And then one complimented me on my speech, saying: “That was fine lass, but when the b***** hell are you going to get the crosswords right?”

Details, basics, the practicalities of life and things close to home. That’s what matters to people – and that’s why members of the Newsnight audience, when they did speak, made it clear they wanted politicians to get back to sorting out mainstream issues like the economy and the efficient delivery of public services.

Earlier that day I had read an article in the Daily Mail article about a woman campaigning to improve the care of the elderly. She dedicates her life to exposing the failings of the British care system. She told the story of visiting one home where a Dunkirk war veteran was sick and neglected. He told her that if he had known in 1940 what he would face at the end of his life, he wouldn’t have swum out to the boat that rescued him from the beach in France.

Like many people I can’t help but think that if the same political energy and acres of media coverage that have gone into “Hackgate” could go into sorting out issues like the care of our elderly and the debt crisis, we would be in a much better place. If politicians could unite and get passionate about solving these issues, then they might forge a better connection with the public. Until then, the public remains collectively shaking its head in despair.