Exposed! How The BBC Employed One Of The Oldest Media Manipulation Questions To Mislead Viewers To Believe Austerity Was A Necessity!
--
George Osborne’s justification or case for austerity was Labour ran a structural deficit “even” in the run-up the financial crisis and so, as there was a structural deficit austerity was a necessity to eliminate it by 2015/16.
Like others in the mainstream media On 30 January 2011, Andrew Marr on his show tried to get Ed Balls to concede and admit he ran a structural deficit in the run-up to the financial crises 2007, by asking the following question.
“It is true to say, is it not, that in the run-up to the financial crisis Britain was running the worst structural deficit — that’s the extra beyond the cycle — of any of the G7 countries?” — Andrew Marr Show, 30th January 2011.
Essentially, this is the classic Groucho Marx question. It is a closed rhetorical trick loaded question. It is often used by scrupulous journalists and lawyers to frame and make their interviewee or defendant come across guilty as charged. Furthermore, it is employed to make an assertion, to sidestep the issue of providing evidence and lead an audience to jump to any conclusion the interviewer wants them to conclude. Moreover, as it is a trick closed question which demands the interviewee only confirm or deny the accusation, they end up establishing their guilt whichever way they respond — yes or no.
That is unless the interviewee spots it is the old Groucho Marx question. The famous Groucho Marx’s question is:
“Have you stopped beating your wife?”
Hence, if you say no, Groucho Marx would reply: “so, you still beat up your wife”.
Alternatively, if you say yes he would respond: “ah ha! So, you used to beat up your wife.”
Either way, you unintentionally admit guilt and come across guilty as charged — a wife beater.
Hence, had Ed Balls said yes there was a structural deficit, Andrew Marr would have charged him for overspending.
However, as he said no there was not, he was labelled a deficit denier.
Either way, viewers were going to perceive him guilty as charged which conveyed the message he lost the arguement which means George Osborne won the argument that austerity is a necessity to eliminate the structural deficit. The BBC Knew the end effect of this trick Groucho Marx trick question would mislead viewers to naturally jump to this conclusion, in an instance. Watch:
Andrew Marr achieves this by sidesteps the issue of evidence. He does this by very strongly suggesting it is an already well-known proven fact by stating: “It is true to say, is it not” which is a leading loaded statement that suggests it is already a widely known fact.
Secondly, “It is true to say, is it not” is also the trick loaded closed part of the question because it gives Ed Balls the option to say either it is true or not. In other words, the question only grants him the opportunity to confirm or deny the accusation and so, either way, he is guilty as charged, hook or by crook.
Overall, as with all such media manipulative techniques, their objective is not about getting to the truth; it is about conveying the message and perception to viewers that one side won and the other lost, no matter if the arguement won, is irrelevant or utter nonsense. I leave you with this short video clip which I think explains it all.
