Page 4, 19th July 1968

19th July 1968
Page 4
Page 4, 19th July 1968 — sTESMOND
Close

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.

Tags

Organisations: ALBROW Unpopular party
Locations: Sydney, Paris, Outer

Share


Related articles

Obsessed By New Black Magic

Page 3 from 5th June 1970

Week By Week By Michael De La Bedoyere

Page 4 from 26th April 1940

The Great May Gamble

Page 9 from 30th April 2010

Sanctions Are Hitting Hard In Rhodesia. The Business...

Page 5 from 11th February 1966

Now We Have A Picture Of You

Page 3 from 12th July 1968

sTESMOND

7,1 ALBROW

Unpopular party leaders

AND what, Sir or Madame, do you think of our Prime Minister? Not very much, thank you. And what. Sir or Madame, do you think of Mr. Heath'? Not very much either, thank you. And I agree with you, Sir and Madame, on your good judgment.

The indictment against the leaders of our two main political parties is pretty damning if the Daily Telegraph Gallup Poll is any guide. According to Gallup inquirers, Mr. Wilson is considered by average voters to be the worst Prime Minister we have had for 31 years. In case Ted Heath was about to roll in the Parliamentary aisles at this assessment of his rival Gallup also reported the average voters' opinion of Mr. Heath. They considered him the worst leader of any Opposition since Gallup began operations 31 years ago.

I should prefer not to believe the poll findings but unfortunately I consider them a fairly accurate reflection of public opinion.. Neither Mr. Wilson (13 per cent) nor Mr. Heath (14 per cent) were thought of as men of vision and it would be a brave man or a foolish man who contended other. otherwise.

The trouble with both Wilson and Heath is that they give the impression of being content to deal in the small change of government: of fearing that the fraud squad might be called in if they underwrote any vast visionary or idealistic project: of being fussy wellmeaning tenants of their present posts: of never really looking like, or behaving as, lords of the manor.

The public sense this inadequacy in their leaders and despise them for it, but being the British public they will tolerate it and even derive some masochistic pleasure from it. And this is just as well because the Gallup gurus tell us that the public see no obvious replacements for Mr. Wilson and Mr. Heath. And that last bit of information strikes me as being the worst possible feature of a macabre poll.

Last plea

REFORE Sir Hugh Greene " leaves his post as Direc

tor-General of the B.B.C. in March I hope that he will do something about two irritating techniques employed in current affairs programmes on television. The first is the use of the telephone by the anchorman in the studio allegedly to get in touch with Bloggs in Paris or Sydney.

Why can't we just hear Bloegs' voice without the telephonic pantomime?

The second stupidity, beloved by the television boys, is to broadcast the voice of Bloges in Outer Mongolia when the quality of the re production is so appalling that we can catch only the odd word in the welter of

atmospherics. All News Editors are proud to have a man on the spot but if a

newspaper office receives a grossly garbled cable from its correspondent it does not use it. A garbled voice should receive the same treatment from the B.B.C.

TV tennis

LACK of space prevented me last week from printing the verses I received from an anonymous writer in reply to my recent piece on Wimbledon and, in particular, the futility and absurdity of watching tennis on television. This week I make amends:—

Poor Mr. Albrow, unable to see The ball on the screen of his own TV.

Yet he remains quite convinced No art is evinced Because "it', not cricket"— said he.

Poor Mr. Albrow, unwilling to ,see

Th,enaestfleorryt less ease of true ball

So the finesse of a shot Leaves him cold—not hot. Because "it's not cricket" said he.

Poor Mr. Albrow, distressing to see His prejudiced "reasons" against tennis TV.

The objections he used Were completely confused, Because "it's not cricket" maybe.




blog comments powered by Disqus