I HAVE to disagree with Eugene Cairns (Letters, July 13) – I think the First Minister and her team have got the balance just right in their presentation of the Scottish Government’s daily press briefings.
The favouring of the public health message (including on the lecterns and on the screen behind Nicola Sturgeon) over pushing the Scottish Government logo and brand, so to speak, is entirely consistent with Nicola Sturgeon’s exclusive focus on the health and safety of people in Scotland. At these briefings, the health message is all.
In addition, to many people watching, Nicola Sturgeon IS the Scottish Government in a sense. She is so strong, and strongly identifiable, in her way of communicating, her abilities and her personality – her gravitas as the FM of Scotland comes across clearly while her humanity shines through.
READ MORE: Presentation matters, especially when the Tories are belittling us
She and her team show the kind of focus, depth and confidence that don’t require the kind of window dressing needed by leaders of lesser ability. When it comes to empty blowhards like Johnson and Trump, let’s face it, in-yer-face flags and bombastic presentation are all they have – they’re aw mooth n nae breeks!
One of the other differences between the Scottish Government and UK Government briefings which I particularly appreciate is the presence of the British Sign Language interpreters in the former. The interpreter moves between the three podiums and stands (socially distancing!) alongside whoever is speaking.
In the UK briefings, the BSL interpreter wasn’t shown on the BBC1 broadcast of the briefings – you had to switch to the BBC News channel where you would find the sign language interpreter consigned to a separate room, standing beside a screen featuring Johnson or whoever else had drawn the short straw that day. So those relying on having a sign language interpreter communicate the content of these briefings were effectively sidelined. To me, this was entirely consistent with how the UK Government treats disabled people.
That presentation – ie the wood-panelled room and those stupidly displayed Union jacks (with the red-on-white St George’s Cross made to look particularly prominent) flanking Johnson and co in the main broadcast – took precedence over lesser considerations such as inclusion/helping people to feel included, said it all.
As someone who is not uncritical of the Scottish Government/the SNP or of Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership, I have to say that my admiration of her grows daily. She is carrying a massive weight on her shoulders and doing so with great ability, forbearance and grace. As Eugene himself said in his letter, her daily appearances are “very effective” – without the need for any in-yer-face marketing of the Scottish Government. Perhaps the more subtle presentation in this respect has actually helped? No wonder Jackson Car-Lot et al are throwing their toys out of the proverbial pram, calling the briefings a party political broadcast, etc – they know that even Unionists are impressed by the FM. Let them continue to belittle us – it just exposes how petty they are at a time like this and shows their Unionist cause/priorities in a rather unflattering light.
Mo Maclean
Glasgow
REGARDING the letter from Eugene Cairns about Nicola Sturgeon’s daily briefings perhaps being lacking. At one time I could see the advantage of props surrounding speakers, which perhaps gave them a confidence boost in their speaking. But with the passage of time I have changed my attitude and realise presentation skills are what matter in holding an audience attention. Not props.
Nicola’s briefings don’t need that boost. She and her colleagues have the requisite confidence, which shows in their verbal presentations, without emblem distractions. The Saltire support is for other occasions where the conveying of a message is perhaps necessary for that support, perhaps in a political sense. Her broadcasted briefings are not intended as political broadcasts – despite attempts by journalists to make them so with their questions.
W D Mill Irving
Kilbirnie
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel