The Andrew Marr Show

No right to question Boris on his private life? Michael Howard seemed to disagree which is why he sacked him isn't it? Eddir Mair's style is fantastic, as well as being extremely fruitful. We'll definitely be seeing more of him on Newsnight.

Not stupid, just not clever enough!

I find it disgusting that the general consensus here is that 'Gutter Journalism' is acceptable so long as a politician is handed his scalp.

But where do you draw the line, if it is acceptable to insult someone on national television, and dredge up old mistakes that have no relevance to current issues when interviewing one man, then surely its acceptable to do that to everyone else as well.

If this is the new benchmark for political interviews, asking questions that should not be asked in order to deliberately destroy a person's reputation. How long before Kay Burley will be fronting Newsnight?

I thought it was an excellent interview, and I found nothing objectionable about the questions or the tone of the piece. As a politician, Boris is famous for his candour and flippancy, and Eddie's enquiries seemed to mirror this well.

It was the waffling replies - the answers *not* given - that revealed Mr Johnston's character, which is the object of a long-form interview like this.

The fact that Boris came across badly speaks volumes about him - it doesn't reflect badly on Eddie at all.

Boris has had a say too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21926377

The main point is whether people agree or disagree that it is fine to respect all opinions whatever they are.

I think all this really plays out on this site every now and again; people feeling superior enough to demean others and to be too 'clever' to have to tolerate those who do not happen to agree with them merely shows arrogance because someone may not conform or agree with you.

It is basic playground stuff here - you are bullied into agreeing with the egotistical popular kids and if you do not comply you are silenced and banished to the unimportant kids corner and become easy bait.

The same could be said with that interview - Boris is easy bait and whether he is a nice man or not what purpose did his grilling serve in the end - would any Tories who supported him before abandon him and would those who disliked him before now like him - probably not. You may think I am not a nice person and I may not think you are a nice person but does it matter and do we actually know each other - no and that is the point.

However as many have mentioned will this help Eddie Mair I would say perhaps it will? If this was his way to get noticed by the big bosses and 'improve his profile' as well as bring out those who engage in personal attacks then it probably has worked.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone is apt in all of this (and that includes me as I am part of this also). My opinion will of course be rubbished yet I will respect other opinions regardless of how different they are from mine. And no, nobody is inferior or superior to me for that is always sure to be the case.

But it's not quite the same when the so-called bullied party is an accountable, elected representative of the people. Awkward questions come with the territory.

It seems like Boris had ample right to reply on each of the points Mair put to him - everything he was asked about was in the public domain already as far as I can tell.

Well I don't think insulting members in an unjustified manner bolsters your point. Claiming intellectual superiority because of your opinion is a vile attitude.

Isn't that part of the point? He basically brought up old, unimportant news, and failed to press him on more important points. All I learnt from that interview is that I didn't like the way he interviewed.

You don't find evidence of lying and unscrupulous behaviour to be an important marker in the character of a potential Prime Minister? I can't quite see why anyone would condemn the question but not the activity of
Mr Johnston.

"He may be a liar and a philanderer, but how *dare* you ask him about it!".

In any event, Eddie prefaced his questions by saying these were incidents in his life which are brought up in the documentary which airs at 9pm tonight.

It gave Boris an opportunity to repudiate the accusations before the film is shown.

But of course he couldn't, could he.

Oh yes, because he has lied in his position as Mayor, and he's committed some unscrupulous behaviour in his Mayoral role... oh, wait, these old accusations don't relate to it whatsoever.

I'd rather he be judged on what he has and hasn't done whilst in a position of governmental power.

Yes, all was in the public domain but do most people really care- I am sure Joe Bloggs is more bothered in keeping his job and a roof over his head than what Boris did many moons ago. I do see your point about Boris not answering the questions - yet he was not demeaning back to Eddie Mair and I respect him for not wanting to smack the smug out of him. Maggie would have rammed her handbag so far down his gob he would not have made it to another question.

Your point about elected representatives was already covered in one of my previous posts; elected representatives are indeed accountable yet I am sure if you scratch the surface there are issues with all these people and that is and remains my point.

I have found that most of our politicians never answer questions simple or awkward so Boris does not stand out more for this habit.

I doubt Boris would have been even considered a contender for the PM job, and that is before all this had happened.

From what I saw yesterday, I thought he was doing a good job at holding the fort for Andrew Marr. Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up with his own TV show.

Have to agree with STV Today, our Politicians don't seem to be able to answer a question. No matter how simple it is!