Getting off the Xarabank

As far as I can make out, there are three topics of discussion which crop up most frequently on, or after, Xarabank programmes.

There's the perennial fav-ourite about Satan and possessed individuals. I have a friend who swears that this rounding up of exorcists takes place when the surveys about viewer numbers are being carried out.

That may be so, but it doesn't reflect badly on the producers of the show. If we're a nation obsessed with the horned and hooved one, then the producers are just giving us what we want.

Another person who features regularly - or at least in those programmes which I have chanced upon - is Angelik Caruana - the man from Birżebbuġa who claims to see the Madonna.

With Angelik come a gaggle of psychologists, spiritual advisers, forensic, and other experts - apparently all necessary to give us their informed opinion as to whether the sightings are real or not. I don't see why all this expertise has to be reined in to rule about a plaster statue which weeps kitchen oil, but then again, no serious discussion programme would be so without its panel of experts.

The third topic which elicits most interest has never been the subject of a Xarabank programme as such, but it has probably given rise to the most furious of debates. I'm referring, of course, to that burning question: "Is Peppi biased? Are Where's Everybody programmes life-savers for muddling Nationalist politicians? Won't anybody who is not pro-Nationalist ever get a fair deal on this show?"

I write in the aftermath of the edition of Xarabank which featured the former PN party president Victor Scerri. Ostensibly, the topic to be discussed was that of political resignations, but it turned out to be more about his Baħrija development.

The environmental NGOs invited to take part in the programme declined, citing the fact that their non-political status precluded them from doing so. This is one valid reason for not entering the Xarabank scrum, but I wonder whether suspicions about the inbuilt 'bias' of the programme has anything to do with it.

Now the Xarabank team will counter with the argument that the fact that the NGOs were invited to have their say negates the criticism that the programme is biased. The programme is presented as the ultimate democratic forum - the place where everybody gets to have his say (and gets a couple of freebie gifts thrown in to boot).

During the Scerri programme, much was made of the fact that the NGOs had refused to be present - implying that their absence had a detrimental effect on their credibility. I don't agree with this interpretation.

Being present in the Xarabank hall does not necessarily mean that guests are able to make their pitch clearly or consistently.

An argument may be too complex to be compressed in a 30-second soundbite, which seems to be the most favoured form of communication on this programme.

The microphone may continue to elude a potential speaker or an argument may be have to be cut short by an inconvenient ad break. The circus atmosphere of the programme may be rather daunting for people who are not good public speakers.

The choice of other guests, the position of the guests on the panel (or buried in the audience) may all affect the way a speaker is perceived by the audience. Being asked to sit on the panel, in a position which is guaranteed to attract the cameraman's eye and which is set apart from the studio audience, is far better than being in the audience or being filmed for a short clip which may be edited according to the producers' fancy.

Even the order in which a clip is shown, or in which an intervention is permitted, may influence things. This may account for some people's reluctance to get onto the Xarabank stage.

They feel discomfited and ill at ease appearing on a programme which they suspect may be subtly slanted against them. Xarabank may be as widely-viewed as the Jerry Springer show and it may be as long-running, but that doesn't make it the best place for calm and intelligent debate.

President George Abela deserves to have praise heaped upon him for his fun run initiative. He has proved to be a unifying force, bringing together Maltese people of all political persuasions, beliefs, and abilities.

As participants in the run trooped into Valletta last Sunday there was a festive air - onlookers cheering them on, bands playing upbeat tunes, farmers giving out free fruit, and the organisers and sponsors, all contributed to an extremely enjoyable event (and managed to raise a considerable sum of money for charity).

But the best thing about it was the feeling of camaraderie between all those who were involved. What impressed me most was that for the duration of that seven-kilometre run, there were no divisions, no petty hatred - but a stream of people running for a common cause.

Hopefully, the event will be repeated next year, and be equally or even more successful.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt