'Like bathing in petrol and asking for a light' - Chloe Smith limps out of the Newsnight arena

Except his name is frequently mentioned, by clients and trainers alike. And in the same way that Max Clifford skews the view of what 95 per cent of PR people do on a daily basis, Paxman’s technique looms large when discussing worst possible interview scenarios. The truth is, interviews are rarely like that.

Sometimes it’s useful to use him as a bogey man - the over confident sometimes need to see their worst nightmare in action. Most of the time his triumphs amplify the ill preparedness of his interviewees.

Paxman’s Newsnight savaging of treasury minister Chloe Smith will find its way into the armoury of many media trainers. He interrupted, mocked, badgered and stared down her attempts to defend a Government u-turn on fuel tax in a way that would have prompted the Dalai Lama to lose his cool.

But the lessons don’t come from Paxman – 95 per cent of interviewees will never be subjected to an interviewer quite that feral. Lord Jeremy operates in a world where politicians are prey, his crowd cheering as they are impaled on his repetitive wordplay.

This will never change, it is his remit and – despite a degree of sympathy being shown for Smith having been thrown into this by the Chancellor’s conspicuous absence – it is what we expect on Newsnight.

However, examine Chloe Smith’s performance and you see evidence of total lack of preparation, a misunderstanding of the media training she’s had or a solo strategy she came up with in the Green Room when time would have been better spent boning up on some actual facts and considering responses.

The Government’s youngest minister, on the back foot from Paxman’s opening personal put down – ‘as treasury minister, when were you told of this plan?’ – elects to take a stance which can best be described as the ‘You and I both know’ approach.

Chumming up to an interviewer with responses which suggest that ‘in this big job I have, the one I’m so enamoured by that I’m going to remind you that I’m a minister several times, you and I both know there are things which I can’t answer so let’s just move on’ was never going to work.

Journalists often assume that when we media train people it is to teach them how to stifle interviews. It isn’t, it’s predominantly to help the interviewee get the best out of a situation by giving the journalist actual answers, preparing themselves with facts and not looking like a goon when representing their organisation.

Dealing with difficult questions is handled by giving the best answer you can give at a moment in time and then moving on. Deflecting or ignoring them only leads to interviewers scenting blood.

Because Chloe Smith’s chosen response to Paxman’s early dig was to suggest that it ‘wasn’t appropriate’ to share certain things with him about how decisions are taken in Government, she ignores a very basic tenet.

It doesn’t matter who you are, what you or your organisation has or hasn’t done or whether you feel unfairly brow beaten during the interview, the journalist is always representing the public.

Scoff at their questions, overuse their first name or try to suggest it’s all a big game – “nice question!” – and you are patronising the public, not an adversary. This can apply to CEOs who try it just as much as politicians.

Chloe Smith can expect to be hauled in to Downing Street today for a dressing down and debrief. She’d do well to kick down George Osborne’s door and ask for a little more support with facts and preparation next time.

For, while there is no easy way to prep for a Paxman interview, not being armed with basic facts, timings and responses to legitimate questions about the policy is like bathing in petrol and asking for a light.