Investigative Interview

This video shows a piece by Sky News from 2011, in the immediate aftermath of the London riots which had involved widespread looting and violence. The video primarily consists of Tom Parmenter, the Sky News correspondent, interviewing a group of ‘gang members’ about their involvement with the rioting. The video is interspersed with footage of rioters and close ups of the gang members, who are heavily concealed behind hoods, hats and bandanas. I believe that the type of interview conducted in the video is an investigative one. The interviewer is asking the rioters about why they decided to partake in the looting and uses a lot of closed questions, as well as open questions, to establish the reasons why. As the riots were widespread and resulted in a lot of damage and violence, people were left wondering why so many took part. This interview gives people the answers they want to hear. The interview enhances people’s understanding of the reasons why rioters did what they did, as well as allowing the interviewee’s to explain their actions. It allows for a detailed first-hand account of events.

The interview is done in an urban location, possibly to display the grittiness of the lives of the people involved in the riot. It appears to be a stony embankment by a river, most likely the Thames. In the background you can see high rise skyscrapers in London’s financial district, which provides a contrasting shot to the rundown area that the interview is being conducted. The background is also brought into it when they discuss about the opportunities for people in London, despite their argument that there are none for young people.  The interviewer is not seen to be greeting or thanking the rioters during the interview, possibly to show that they are not on the best of terms due to the circumstances. The body language of the interviewer is quite relaxed, while the interviewees seem somewhat agitated and move on the spot frequently, crossing their arms and fidgeting repeatedly. This was most likely due to the huge risk they were taking appearing on television, as it could possibly increase their chances of arrest.

The interviewer is generally not very sympathetic towards the subjects of the interview and does not seem to appreciate nor care for their beliefs or concerns. Like I previously stated, he dos not act particularly welcoming or hostile but, rather in a cold manner. This is because he wants to remain unbiased and not show remorse or disapproval. Though he acts like this, he does lean slightly more to being disapproving as his questions can come across as attacking the group. However, he doesn't act particularly nasty towards them.

The interview is structured in the way that the questions are asked in a somewhat order of importance and interest. He begins by asking questions about what the stole and why followed by how they felt about doing what they did. He finishes by asking questions about what they think the underlying problems of the riots are and what they think the government could do to help. The interviewer is not relaxed and laid back during the interview but, he is not actively hostile either.  He asks plainly blunt questions such as “What did you get then?” and “You’re 16 years old but you were getting things for your son?” which are closed questions and require specific answers. The former means the person will have to say what they specifically stole while looting, while the latter only needs a one word answer. The question “you’re 16 years old but you were getting things for your son?” is reiterating the fact that the interviewee responded to the previous question stating that he had stolen some things to help provide for his family and son. This is almost a confirmation question and displays active listening on the part of the interviewer. It is also as if the interviewer is shocked by the fact that the 16 year old had a son. Another blunt question is where the interviewee says that he looted a shop that he had applied for a job at. The interviewer then asks him “What shop was that?” which only requires a very minimal answer and did indeed receive one in the form of “Comet”. The interviewer shows a lot of active listening during his interviews as well as responding to the interviewee’s answers with more questions. Examples include when one of the interviewee’s says that he may make up to £2000 from his stolen products. The interviewer then asks “What’s that like, what can that do for you?”. One of the interviewee’s also mentions that he had a friend with a van who helped him to move around stolen equipment. The interviewer then responds with “so you had a van?”.

The interviewer goes on to ask ethical questions towards the group of people such as “Any bad feelings at all, ever any bad feelings at night when you’re sleeping in your bed?” and “…the government says it is utterly unacceptable, do you think there is any reason behind it?”. The latter question is a leading question as he suggests that the majority of people disapprove with their actions before asking them their opinion, before they are then given the opportunity to put across their personal reasoning for their actions. This helps to give an insight into how the rioters feel about the riots and why they chose it. Following the interview, there is a shot of the group running off ad climbing over a fence, while Tom Parmenter provides a brief summary of their feelings and actions.