Twitter was all of a flutter, hopes were high of a record audience, and BBC execs had everything crossed except their eyes. And all because a woman presented a television show.
Not just any show, mind. After the first woman prime minister and the first female Doctor Who, the permanent host slot on Question Time was the third citadel on the “to be stormed” list.
So how did Fiona Bruce do? She was not openly combative, like the show’s first host, Robin Day; there was no Peter Sissons-style edginess or Dimbleby clubbability.
Cool, informed, and in command, Bruce was the Daily Mail where her predecessors had been the Telegraph. There was never any danger of her having to take the advice of her kingly namesake and try, try and try again to get this right. She has, after all, been doing this broadcasting lark for almost 30 years.
That said, she has yet to settle on a QT tone of her own. At times, head cocked and smiling broadly, she could have been admiring a Victorian teapot on the Antiques Roadshow rather than extracting answers from politicians on a no deal Brexit.
She was at her best when she adopted a mix of Paxman and pussycat, as with James Cleverly MP, deputy chair of the Conservative party. “James,” she purred, “if this is being in control of the Brexit process, what does not being in control look like?” The Islington audience liked that.
After reminding Melanie Phillips that she had once touted Nigel Farage as PM, Bruce asked the columnist sweetly if that had been “a moment of madness”. Oo-er. When Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry tried to argue that Labour’s EU policy was coherent, Bruce butted in. “Look at the reaction you are getting, Emily. People are laughing.”
Occasionally, when trying to impose control, Bruce tipped over into head girl territory. She will have to watch that. What plays well in Middle England is likely to grate elsewhere.
The test passed, Bruce signed off. Next up was Andrew Neil with This Week. Normal white male service was resumed.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel