Why this 60 Minutes interview has NZ PM Jacinda Ardern fuming
60 Minutes by its very nature is designed to cause a bit of controversy, and last Sunday’s episode was no different after an interview with New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Arden and veteran reporter Charles Wooley left the Kiwi leader fuming.
The interview has opened a raft of controversy both here and across the pond, after Wooley’s interview with the 37-year-old was criticised as “creepy” and “sexist”.
“I’ve met a lot of prime ministers in my time,” says Wooley, during the opening, “But none so young, not too many so smart, and never one so attractive.”
Wooley’s comments continue to be eyebrow-raising as the interview progresses, with the 60 Minutes journo saying like the rest of NZ he is “smitten” with the PM, describing her as a leader “like no other”, who is “young, honest and pregnant”.
“Admittedly, although somewhat smitten just like the rest of her country, I do know, that what’s really important in politics has to be what you leave behind,” Wooley says.
“How did a nice person like you get into the sordid world of politics?” Wooley asked Ardern at one point.
“Nice people go into politics,” replied Ardern, smiling.
The questioning took an especially awkward line when Wooley asked about Arden’s pregnancy, making Arden and her partner Clarke Gayford, visibly uncomfortable.
“One really important political question that I want to ask you,” Wooley said. “And that is, what exactly is the date that the baby’s due?”
Arden said her baby was due on 17 June.
Wooley replied: “It’s interesting how many people have been counting back to the conception... as it were.”
Gayford laughed uncomfortably, responding, “Really?”
Wooley continued: “Having produced six children it doesn’t amaze me that people can have children; why shouldn’t a child be conceived during an election campaign?”
Ardern appeared to roll her eyes, responding: “The election was done. Not that we need to get into those details.”
Wooley has been widely criticised for his archaic interview style, but he defended the piece in an interview with New Zealand radio station Newstalk ZB.
“It’s a bit Orwellian, you know I think. You’ve got to be so careful now with newsspeak and thought crime and everything else. We suffer the same thing in Australia. It’s not a good time to be a journalist,” he said.
“If you say somebody is attractive, my thesaurus defines it as 50 choices from good looking to gorgeous to likeable, there is so many different meanings.”
What do you think? Did Wooley go too far with his questions?