I'm a great believer in the direct quote in quotation marks and the hard fact.

My kids wouldn't dream of buying a newspaper - and we are a newspaper household.

Rude interviewers are ten a penny, and politicians have long since learned how to cope.

Unlike the general public, I rather like most politicians.

Verbally, I'm quite fast on my feet. I could embarrass or anger most people if I wanted to.

Clearly the human story is one of acceleration. There has been a Moore curve in terms of the number of people alive on the planet, our technological ability, and our ability to understand ourselves. We have had this extraordinary, explosive growth in our ingenuity.

In the end, does it really matter if newspapers physically disappear? Probably not: the world is always changing. But does it matter if organisations independent enough and rich enough to employ journalists to do their job disappear? Yes, that matters hugely; it affects the whole of life and society.

Interviews, and hence interviewers, are there to help shed light, and to let viewers judge for themselves. We are not judges, juries, commentators or torturers - nor friends, either.

The business of funding digging journalists is important to encourage. It cannot be replaced by bloggers who don't have access to politicians, who don't have easy access to official documents, who aren't able to buttonhole people in power.