I have spent a lot of time today on events surrounding the occupation of two lecture theatres in the Hicks Building by students protesting at impending cuts to university funding.  One of my roles has been as the media spokesman for the university, and during the day this has involved two live-to-air interviews for Radio Sheffield, and a recorded package for BBC Look North.  ITV's Calendar had booked a slot for an interview but ultimately failed to show up.  One of the Radio Sheffield interviews took place in their studios in Shoreham Street and the other was via my mobile phone in my own room in the university.

I felt reasonably happy with what I managed to say in each of these pieces. I believe I have certainly benefited from two intense episodes of media training that I have undertaken, and I am by no means a stranger to being interviewed to camera.  But it is always an experience that gets the adrenalin flowing.  Particularly with live interviews, there is the danger of choosing the wrong word or coming up with a formula that one later regrets. But on the other hand in a live interview there is the chance of talking direct to the audience. If the interviewer allows the interviewee some space it is the latter who effectively takes the bulk of editorial control - and needs to make use of that to get their message across. In an interview with Rony Robinson this morning in the studio he allowed me that time and I was grateful for it.

The later package for Look North was rather different.  Of the 7 or 8 sentences I gave them to camera they edited the piece down so that only 1 was used: they take editorial control and used what I said in ways that fitted their story-line (although it must be added that I had fed them some ideas on what that line might be when they were discussing how to approach the item).  The package they eventually came up with, which was used on both their lunchtime and early evening bulletins, was actually very sound - but if they had wanted they could have used my material in a way that would have given a very different slant to the story.

In the third item today the interviewer 'broke the rules' in certain respects by not telling me in advance that I would be interviewed directly after a live interview with one of the occupiers (by then 'former occupiers').  Actually I was happy to agree with much of what she said, although deprecating the way in which the protesters were making their points, but this could have become more confrontational.

There's a lot involved in even the shortest news item, particularly on sensitive issues such as those being dealt with today.  But it's also chastening to the academic in me to realise that those short items reached many more people than my books or research papers ever will.  During the evening a number of people from all over the country, from walks of life far removed from academia, have been in touch to say that they saw or heard me or have been told about my appearances by others who did.