This complaint was sent to Woman’s Hour on Tuesday 30 May:
We were shocked by the arrogant and nasty way in which Emma Barnett interviewed Jeremy Corbyn. The clear purpose of the interview was not to inform the audience but to demean the person that many thousands of people (in the majority women) made leader of the Labour Party. And it was disrespectful of the audience who have a right to know what’s in it for them in the Labour Manifesto.
Your interviewer usurped the platform which our commonality as women had created, for her own political motives which had nothing to do with informing the audience. Instead she gave us partisan and strident point scoring, reminiscent of Marine Le Pen. Is this your standard for political dialogue? Is WH aligned with the Daily Telegraph? You gave the impression that this is where WH stands politically.
The Labour Manifesto has a lot to offer the majority of women who are in low paid jobs, doing most of the caring (waged and unwaged), working in the NHS (80%), etc. Thanks to Emma Barnett’s blatant bias we never found out what we needed to know.
Selma James and Nina Lopez
At the Crossroads 
I absolutely ageee with this complaint. Although Emma Barnett clearly, as Jeremy Corbyn said, had a right to ask questions, her terrier -like snapping at his heels just served to just make her look frantic, if not hysterical in her pursuit of blood.
And so we learned nothing about the manifesto but a lot about her prejudices
LikeLike