Louis Theroux on taking risks, causing offence, and his notorious TV interviews
TV journalist Louis Theroux has interviewed everyone from porn stars to prisoners, known for deftly encouraging even the most combative or private interviewees to open up.
Theroux, who rose to fame with his Weird Weekends series 25 years ago, was asked to deliver this year’s James MacTaggart Memorial lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival, covering the challenges facing broadcasters “in the multi-platform universe”.
He follows in the footsteps of historian David Olusoga, actress and producer Michaela Coel, and former BBC journalist Emily Maitlis – who hit out at her former employer when she gave the lecture in 2022.
In his speech, titled The Risk Of Not Taking Risks, Theroux made his case for the type of journalism he is known for, in an era when it might sometimes be easier for TV bosses to play it safe.
The documentary-maker reflected on his own career as well as the current state of the BBC, with whom he has made a large number of programmes.
“If I’m honest, I find the new world we are in troubling and exciting in roughly equal measure,” he told his audience of TV bosses and industry experts…
“I am a contrarian and I appreciate seeing a complacent old guard discomfited by a grubby insurrectionary crowd of digital sans-culottes. But I also value truth and honesty and the rule of law.”
Here are five key points from his speech to TV bosses:
Tackling tricky subjects in 2023
Louis Theroux made a film about scientology in 2015. Pic: BBC/BBCWorldwide
Dicussing changing attitudes to representation and power, Theroux said: “We are, I’m happy to say, more thoughtful about representation, about who gets to tell what story, about power and privilege, about the need not to wantonly give offence. I am fully signed up to that agenda.
“But I wonder if there is something else going on as well. That the very laudable aims of not giving offence have created an atmosphere of anxiety that sometimes leads to less confident, less morally complex filmmaking.
“And that the precepts of sensitivity have come into conflict with the words inscribed into the walls of New Broadcasting House, attributed to George Orwell: ‘If Liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.’
“And that as a result programmes about extremists and sex workers and paedophiles might be harder to get commissioned.”
‘The Tates and the Trumps’
Theroux warned of the danger of looking away from more extreme and provocative corners of the internet out of fears of platforming hate and misinformation.
“With so much madness around, it’s tempting to ignore what’s out there. To not amplify it. Hope it goes away. To not platform it. Avoid the risk… I think that’s wrong.”
Theroux went on to reference former US president Donald Trump and controversial influencer Andrew Tate.
“Much of the new world epitomised by the Trumps and the Tates is based on the idea of monetising provocation. It relies on pushing people’s buttons to get our attention,” he said. “Spreading sexism, racism, homophobia, sometimes dressing it up as irony, or comedy, while promoting a bigoted agenda. They do this both for both fun and profit.”
The debate surrounding the platforming of hate and misinformation “could be compared to debates around food and diet and the proper labelling of sugar and fat”, he said.
“As with junk food, so too with junk facts. People can consume what they like but we could all do with a little help being nudged towards healthier choices, rather than having the information equivalent of chocolate bars on a two-for-one offer stacked in our eyeline every time we turn on our phones.
“I understand all of this. I share the urge to switch off all the negativity. To turn one’s attention elsewhere. To not feed the trolls. To never go anywhere near the trolls. I understand the need to consider people’s wellbeing. To think through all the possible prejudices that may be contained in programmes. The impact of jokes and unconscious bias. All of the multiple ways in which a TV show can do harm.
“But it’s also true that there is a big difference between platforming and doing challenging journalism about controversial subjects.”
‘There was an urge to depict him in ever more lurid terms’
Theroux made two programmes about Jimmy Savile, and addressed these during the lecture. The first was in 2000, when he filmed with the DJ and TV fundraiser over 10 days, before his crimes were fully uncovered after his death in 2011. The second was made in 2016, looking at how he escaped notice as a serial sex offender for so long.
The first “did not entail huge risk on my part”, Theroux said, and at the time he was nervous mainly because he was worried Savile was “over the hill” and “past-it”.
The follow-up was very different. “I was among many examining their consciences to figure out if there was anything I could have done differently,” Theroux said. “In making a second programme, I wanted to do justice to the scale of the harm he had caused. That, in itself, felt like a lot of pressure.”
However, he said the “more worrying” issue was dealing with unconfirmed allegations, such as claims Savile had “dismembered small children” and been involved in “satanic rituals”.
“The outrage at his crimes was so convulsive, there was also an urge to depict them in ever more lurid terms,” he said. “None of this had been credibly reported, but there were many who believed it might be true, and pushing back, making the case for a judicious weighing of the evidence, laid one open to charges of ‘minimising’.”
The “high-risk approach”, he said, was actually “to take a considered and dispassionate look”, keep “a forensic and questioning attitude” – and “not ignore the fact that for 40 years he charmed an audience of millions”.
On the BBC’s ‘no-win’ situation
Theroux said he understood why traditional TV makers might be fearful of taking risks.
“From working so many years at the BBC, and still making programmes for the BBC, I see all-too-well the no-win situation it often finds itself in. Trying to anticipate the latest volleys of criticisms. Stampeded by this or that interest group. Avoiding offence.
“Often the criticisms come from its own former employees, writing for privately owned newspapers whose proprietors would be all too happy to see their competition eliminated. And so there is the temptation to lay low, to play it safe, to avoid the difficult subjects.
“But in avoiding those pinch points, the unresolved areas of culture where our anxieties and our painful dilemmas lie, we aren’t just failing to do our jobs, we are missing our greatest opportunities… and what after all is the alternative? Playing it safe. Following a formula. That may be a route to success for some. It never worked for me.”
Why he’s not scared of AI
Early in his speech, Theroux addressed deepfakes and artificial intelligence (AI), saying Hollywood writers are striking, “among other reasons, because of valid concerns over robots cannibalising their creativity”.
He expanded on this later on, saying he does not “overly worry about a takeover by AI” in the type of programmes he makes. “I say this not as an expert on AI,” he said, “but as an expert on humans.
“We’ve all seen the amazing results AI can produce. In a few years it may be able to write a passable sitcom or action movie. Or a MacTaggart. Maybe an excellent one. Maybe one better than this. But what it won’t be able to do is take risks. Because risk involves danger. And there’s no danger for machines. Risk involves real feeling. The possibility of humiliation, embarrassment, failure.
“Humans experience all those emotions and more… we connect over the frailties we have in common. We feed on the recognition of the common lot of human weakness. And when we recognise something real, there’s no substitute for it.”
Entertainment
Dance artist Moby on the destructive force of fame – and why he’s content being that ‘weird old guy’
He is the man behind the biggest-selling electronica record of all time, but the success of Moby’s album Play came with some unwanted side effects.
His fifth record, the album charted at 33 upon its release in the UK in May 1999, and fell out of the Top 40 after just a week. But despite the lacklustre initial response, Play started to pick up steam, slowly climbing the chart until it reached number one in April 2000.
It stayed there for five weeks and remained in the Top 40 until March 2001, re-entering the Top 100 several times over the next few years.
While Moby had experienced success with Go, the breakthrough 1991 single from his self-titled debut album, Play was next level. Even if you don’t know the album, you’ll know at least some of the songs – Porcelain, Why Does My Heart Feel So Bad?, Honey, and Natural Blues. The record was ubiquitous and fame hard to escape.
Pic: Adam Warzawa/EPA/Shutterstock
“I think fame and fortune are, probably, empirically two of the most destructive forces on the planet,” he says, speaking from his home in Los Angeles. “I mean, if fame and fortune fixed things, Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse would still be making records.
“I guess it’s a very easy system to buy into, especially in a place like… in New York, in Los Angeles, in these big cities that are driven by ostentation and consumption and the need for external validation. It’s hard to resist those temptations. But then… you look at the consequences of that.
“I’d rather try and live a rational life and not necessarily let other people’s concerns dictate what my concerns should be.”
Now sober and with a few years between him and those heady days of peak fame, in recent years Moby has been doing something few established stars in his position would do – giving his compositions away for free.
“I have a house, I have a car, I have some hoodies, I have food in the fridge, I don’t really need anything more,” he insists. “To live and work in a way where I’m not driven by money, why not use that as an opportunity?”
Selfless selfishness or selfish selflessness
Pic: Wael Hamzeh/EPA/Shutterstock
Over a decade ago, the musician came up with the quietly radical idea of making a free music licensing platform, MobyGratis. The idea was simple and rather exciting, he admits – to allow anyone unrestricted access to hundreds of his compositions to use them however they wish. From film scores to remixes, whatever.
“It’s either selfless selfishness or selfish selflessness, meaning I’m giving these things away but the benefit to me is I get to see what people do with it,” he says.
“There are a lot of things about the current digital media climate that are terrifying and baffling and confusing, but one of the things I love is the egalitarian nature of it.”
The idea of giving his music away for free runs somewhat contrary to the AI copyright battle many artists are currently speaking out over, with the likes of Ed Sheeran and Damon Albarn calling for greater protections in law to prevent artificial intelligence software from scraping their work to learn from it.
Remix culture and creative processes
“I completely appreciate and respect the concerns that other people have,” says Moby. “I think they’re incredibly valid… but for me personally, I don’t know. Maybe it’s naive and stupid of me, but I kind of just ignore it.
“I put this music out there and you sort of hope for the best, which probably is completely dim-witted of me. Part of remix culture is seeing how people reinterpret your work; sometimes it’s mediocre, sometimes it is bad, but sometimes it is so inspired, and I can actually learn a lot from other creative processes.”
Read more:
Giles Martin likens AI plans to giving burglars free rein
David Attenborough’s Ocean is ‘biggest message’ he’s ever told
The dance artist also takes issue with how the act of giving and compassion more generally has come to be seen, and references Elon Musk‘s comments on Joe Rogan’s podcast in April, when the billionaire said: “We’ve got civilizational suicidal empathy going on.”
Moby says that while “we live in this world of fear, selfishness, desperation and viciousness”, he supports “anything that is a rejection of the manosphere… anything that rejects Elon and the idea that empathy is a weakness and reminds people that life can be simple and decent.”
He jokes: “I’m definitely becoming like the weird old guy that you’ll see in the mountains, sort of like not making eye contact and mumbling about chemtrails or something.”
This is a man who is aware his approach to fame, fortune and giving stuff away is somewhat out-of-keeping with the times we’re living in – but the thing is, Moby doesn’t seem to care.
Entertainment
Lawyer for Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs claims there was ‘mutual violence’ between him and ex-girlfriend
A lawyer representing Sean “Diddy” Combs has told a court there was “mutual” domestic violence between him and his ex-girlfriend Casandra ‘Cassie’ Ventura.
Marc Agnifilo made the claim as he outlined some of the music star’s defence case ahead of the full opening of his trial next week.
Combs has pleaded not guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking and two counts of
transportation for prostitution. If convicted, he faces up to life in prison.
Ms Ventura is expected to testify as a star witness for the prosecution during the trial in New York. The final stage of jury selection is due to be held on Monday morning.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Why is Sean Combs on trial?
Mr Agnifilo told the court on Friday that the defence would “take the position that there was mutual violence” during the pair’s relationship and called on the judge to allow evidence related to this.
The lawyer said Combs‘s legal team intended to argue that “there was hitting on both sides, behaviour on both sides” that constituted violence.
He added: “It is relevant in terms of the coercive aspects, we are admitting domestic violence.”
A court sketch showing Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs (right) as he listens to his lawyer Marc Agnifilo addressing the court. Pic: Reuters
Ms Ventura’s lawyers declined to comment on the allegations.
US District Judge Arun Subramanian said he would rule on whether to allow the evidence on Monday.
Combs, 55, was present in the court on Friday.
He has been held in custody in Brooklyn since his arrest last September.
Prosecutors allege that Combs used his business empire for two decades to lure women with promises of romantic relationships or financial support, then violently coerced them to take part in days-long, drug-fuelled sexual performances known as “Freak Offs”.
Read more:
Diddy on trial: Everything you need to know
Sean Combs: A timeline of allegations
Combs’s lawyers say prosecutors are improperly seeking to criminalise his “swinger lifestyle”. They have suggested they will attack the credibility of alleged victims in the case by claiming their allegations are financially motivated.
The trial is expected to last around eight weeks.
Entertainment
Harvey Weinstein accuser says film mogul ‘took her soul’ during alleged sexual assault
An ex-model has tearfully told a court that being sexually assaulted by Harvey Weinstein when she was 16 was the most “horrifying thing I ever experienced” to that point.
Warning: This article contains references to sexual assault
Kaja Sokola told the film producer’s retrial that he ordered her to remove her blouse, put his hand in her underwear, and made her touch his genitals.
She said he’d stared at her in the mirror with “black and scary” eyes and told her to stay quiet about the alleged assault in a Manhattan hotel in 2002.
Ms Sokola told the New York court that Weinstein had dropped names such as Penelope Cruz and Gwyneth Paltrow, and said he could help fulfil her Hollywood dream.
“I’d never been in a situation like this,” said Polish-born Ms Sokola. “I felt stupid and ashamed and like it’s my fault for putting myself in this position.”
Weinstein denies sexually assaulting anyone and is back in court for a retrial after his conviction was overturned last year.
Read more: Weinstein is back in court – but what has happened to the #MeToo movement since 2017?
Weinstein denies the allegations. Pic: Reuters
The 73-year-old is not charged over the alleged sexual assault because it happened too long ago to bring criminal charges.
However, he is facing charges over an incident four years later when he’s said to have forced Ms Sokola to perform oral sex on him.
Prosecutors claim it happened after Weinstein arranged for her to be an extra in a film.
“My soul was removed from me,” she told the court of the alleged 2006 assault, describing how she tried to push Weinstein away but that he held her down.
Read more from Sky News:
Bargain Hunt expert charged as part of police investigation into terrorist financing
Attenborough’s Ocean film is ‘biggest message he’s ever told’
Ms Sokola – who’s waived her right to anonymity – is the second of three women to testify and the only one who wasn’t part of the first trial in 2020.
Miriam Haley testified previously in the retrial. Pic: AP
Miriam Haley last week told the court that Weinstein forced oral sex on her in 2006. The other accuser, Jessica Mann, is yet to appear.
Claims against the film mogul were a major driver for the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and abuse in 2017.
Weinstein’s lawyers allege the women consented to sexual activity in the hope of getting film and TV work and that they stayed in contact with him for a while afterwards.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway