In an exclusive interview with the CIPR’s Influence magazine, the former Chancellor George Osborne discusses his current role as editor of the Evening Standard, reflects on the differences between politics and journalism and reveals he does not rule out a return to Parliament in the future.
Below is an extract from the interview, conducted by John Higginson, founder of Higginson PR and former political editor of Metro. The full interview will be published in Influence in September.
What is the role of the modern newspaper editor?
The basic role remains the same: to inform and entertain. If you are only informing and everything you are producing is worthy and serious, then it’s human nature that people don’t want that. What I am trying to do to the Evening Standard – and I don’t think this is a contradiction in terms – is to take it both upmarket and downmarket. I want it to have the very best political commentary, and I want it to inform readers about the best theatre show in London or the latest art exhibition, but I also think we are perfectly entitled to entertain people with the latest pictures of ‘it girls’ or whatever Kendall Jenner is up to at the moment. A lot of our readers will be interested in Brexit, but they also want to know what is happening on Love Island, and you don’t need to separate the two.
What are the differences you have found between the worlds of journalism and politics?
In some respects you are handling similar subject matter: what’s going on in the world.
When you’re a politician, you’re advancing your own cause; newspapers are better when they provide a mix of opinions. I reject the classic view that politicians ‘do’ and journalists ‘write’ and ‘criticise’. We are all part of the same discussion among the people of Britain about how we want to lead our lives and govern our country. Newspapers can play a part in informing that. I never took the view that they were as influential as they were credited with being, nor do I take the view that they have lost their influence.
There has been a lot of criticism of you being too Conservative. What do you say to that?
Unlike many papers, our readers are split down the middle as to how they voted in the general election, and I think that is a great opportunity for the newspaper. We are not just for one party or another – we approach all the political issues with a certain set of values, which are true to the newspaper, and, I believe, true to the city. We are pro-business, socially liberal, internationalist – we care about our whole society. We are not talking for one party or one class or one group. We will criticise a Conservative government if it is not living up to those values and we will criticise a Labour opposition if it isn’t either. I’ve had complaints from readers that I am too tough on Jeremy Corbyn and from others that I am too tough on Theresa May. To me, that means we are getting it right.
There is a real gap in the middle of politics at the moment between the Corbynistas and the hard Brexiteers, and I think that is where the Evening Standard is and where London is and where our readers are. This was a paper that was already espousing a political philosophy that I shared.
What makes a great communicator?
The key thing in communication is to take complex ideas and make them simple. Great communicators are able to do that. Any time you hear anyone say it’s too complicated an idea to get across, they are just not trying hard enough or they are not good enough. Even the most complicated ideas can be communicated to people in clear and simple ways.
You have faced criticism for holding a number of different posts. How do you make sure there’s no conflict of interest?
Because it’s at a newspaper, it is so transparent what job I am doing. Unlike any other newspaper editor in Britain, people know what my various financial interests are: they are not opaque. They are perfectly transparent for all to see. People would be quick to jump on any perceived conflict. I certainly don’t have a problem. When I am here doing this job, I am here doing it as the Evening Standard editor, committed to delivering the best news for my readers.
You have been accused of using the Standard to get revenge on the person who sacked you as chancellor. Is that the case?
I treat this job as living up to my readers as the Evening Standard editor, and I will call it as I see it. When I think there are weaknesses in the government or the prime minister, I have an obligation to say that. I was, or rather we as a newspaper were, ahead of some of the rest of the media in spotting some of these deficiencies. The job of the newspaper is to be the sceptical, questioning voice.
Do you see yourself ever going back into politics?
I don’t rule it out. I never say never but I am really enjoying this life. I find it very challenging. It is great, having had a career at the top of British politics, to have this new challenging career, so I feel no huge rush to get back into politics.
Do you think Britain’s influence has been reduced as a result of the Brexit vote?
I campaigned against Brexit because I thought it would diminish Britain’s influence in the world. I think it has diminished Britain’s influence in the world. But I now want to make sure that the loss of influence is kept to a minimum, rather than projected to the maximum, and that is about the kind of departure that we make from the EU. Londoners and businesses in London do not want a hard Brexit that takes us out of the meaningful relationships we have with our neighbours.