Interview with Mr Wellington

Press, 29 June 1983, Page 12

Interview with Mr Wellington

Sir,—ln reference to Mr Wellington’s interview on “Press Conference,” (TVI June 12), in my opinion the programme appeared somewhat contrived and lacking of any spontaneity though I add, not the fault of the panel. The feeling that one got was that Mr Wellington knew what questions were going to be asked, hence any element of “surprise questioning” was lacking from the interview. Through your column, I would like to ask Mr Wellington and Sharon Crosbie (TVNZ) several questions. Did Mr Wellington before the interview: (1) have knowledge of what questions would be asked? (2) View the film clips which were presented at the start of the programme? If I am justified in assuming that the above is correct could I ask Mr Wellington and Sharon Crosbie what their feelings are about such interviews where the person being interviewed has “vetted” and knows exactly what is going to be asked and can hence almost dictate the interview accordingly.—Yours, etc., DARRELL LATHAM, Jun. June 15, 1983.

[Mr Wellington replies: “After I had accepted the invitation to appear on ‘Press Conference’ the programme’s producer indicated to my office six areas of questioning. They were broad and without detail: Staffing, primary and Secondary ratios; training, numbers — future reductions, crystal ball; funding, priorities in allocating; my philosphy on education; future, changes I see, most likely directions. These were again raised with me personally just before going into the studio. The 10 second film clip was run through moments before the programme was recorded, again at the offer of the producer. There were absolutely no surprises, in the sorts of things education pressure groups say about our education system. Their comments are recorded almost daily in the media. I am required on many occasions in the course of my duties to respond off the cuff to pressure group questioning. I find little new in what any of them ask or say. Any suggestions that I dictated the

terms of the interview are surely more a comment on the calibre of the panel and their questions.”] [Mr Paul Hawker, producer of “Press Conference’’ for TVNZ, replies: “In reply to your correspondent, it is normal policy that questions to be asked are not shown or discussed with the interviewee before the recording of a programme. The subject areas are outlined to the interviewee when issued with the original invitation to appear, and before entering the studio. In Mr Wellington’s case I spent five minutes discussing the areas that we would be covering in the interview. The only people with prior knowledge of the questions were myself and the panel of journalists. Mr Wellington was allowed to view the headline film clips. He did so in the studio, immediately before recording. He was unaware of their content until this time, but, as he pointed out in the programme, he was very familiar with their arguments. There is no ‘vetting’ of questions in ‘Press Conference.’ No prior collusion between panelists and interviewee takes place in any form.”