This 800 word analysis will consist of a dissection and analysis of an interview between Charlie Stayt and David

Cameron, broadcast during BBC Breakfast on BBC One. The interview covered various areas in a short amount of
time, the interview lasting about eight minutes with numerous topics, its main purpose being a reaction to the TV
debates between Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage.
The interview was introduced very quickly, possibly due to tight scheduling of TV shows like this that have many
areas to address and interviews that must take place to fulfil its own agenda. The show is typically hosted by a male
and female presenter, in this instance it is Charlie Stayt and Louise Minchin, they share the script and some of the
interviews. This interview was introduced by Minchin and conducted solely by Stayt.
Before the interview began, both presenters face the audience directly, sharing the screen space and script.
However, upon its introduction, the camera changes and Stayt instantly shifts his body language to address the
interviewee in this case, Cameron and conducts the interview alone. The camera interchanges between
Cameron, Stayt and a shared two-shot. Throughout the entire interview Stayt is side-on to the audience, as if it is not
there; the dynamic changes slightly to provide a slightly more relaxed feeling although it is still formal and
informative, the lack of audience proves to give a more conversational feel between the two individuals.
Noticeably, the questions are mostly open, rarely suggestive, with others being more direct in nature however, as
it is a political interview, it does feel somewhat scripted from Cameron (possibly as he would be advised on what to
include when given the opportunity to speak freely; his responses always staying formal and relevant). Stayt begins
with an off-topic question, probably to ease Cameron into the interview; this can relax the atmosphere and begin to
build rapport as if it is simply a conversation. This off-topic question involves everybody the Saharan sand clouds
which could possibly be Stayts attempt at connecting the audience and interviewee via a subject that has affected
everybody equally.
However, the topic quickly changes to the main agenda; after Stayt asks the first question, although it is quite closed
did your man win? Cameron is able to answer openly; Stayts tone, language and body language offer Cameron
the opportunity to answer as openly or closed as feels appropriate. The discussion points are led by Camerons
responses Stayt first asks about who won and then later follows his response with does this concern you?
showing a good example of active listening. This leaves Stayt with little to do but respond to this building rapport
with the already chosen questions as he has no need to interrupt or redirect the conversation to stay topical.
Although Stayt only has to provide questions to gain justified responses, there is still a connection between the
interviewer and interviewee due to the amount of eye contact, nodding, gestures and leaning into the conversation.
Some of his questions are quite direct, although open due to the way he addresses the question by providing some
back story - are you aware... is followed with because some people... This continuous use of open questions
prevents the interview from becoming stagnant or uncomfortable for anybody involved (Cameron, Stayt or the
audience). Furthermore, some of Stayts questions are suggestive, allowing Cameron to either agree or disagree with
a leading statement; this is another way to prevent the conversation from running its cause too soon. Another
approach by Stayt is to simply state the facts that have revealed and challenge them; although a question has not
been given for Cameron to respond to, the interview continues on a basis of agreements and disagreements which
further means that the interviewee will continue to converse with the interviewer.
By prolonging the interview for this amount of time (besides to fill a designated timeslot), more information can be
extracted from the interviewee without the need to rush them or be blunt about it; if the interview feels rushed,
Stayt may look impatient or appear to be disregarding his interviewee for the sake of having to ask the questions
however, this is not the case.
The interview comes to a quick conclusion - Stayt bridges the gap between the questions and the wind-up by stating
our time, as you know is very short. This simple sentence merges the stages of interview, defuses any tension and
slows the pace that had developed with each answer given by Cameron. Rather than simply thanking him and ending
the interview there, like Stayt did at the beginning he asks Cameron some light-hearted finalising questions to secure
that same feeling of a relaxed conversation that they began with. The final phrase from Stayt is thank you very
much, prime minister possibly to reinstate the level of respect between the two individuals and highlighting the
importance and informative nature of the interview.