I watched the Brand-Paxman interview again, and it is actually extraordinary. By refusing to be silenced by Paxman's continued and odious insinuations that he 'shouldn't' be talking about politics, and his suggestions that stating simple, correct truths is somehow naive and unsophisticated, Russell Brand shows Paxman up as the ridiculous bully and defender of the status quo that he is. And I've never seen anyone else achieve that so clearly.
The closing of ranks that Paxman attempts and fails, is reflected in the way John Snow interviews Brand: Tbh, I'm struggling to think of anyone else who has been treated with such contempt from the outset by supposedly 'objective' news interviewers.
But then, my general experience of news journalists is that they are heavily invested in reducing a political arena to a purely technical one, where they can endlessly speculate about the minutiae of what X or Y has said (which means little in a framework in which lying goes unpenalised, and spin is ubiquitous). As soon as someone suggests that the bigger problem is that politics as a whole has been captured by a specific class, overwhelmingly in thrall to the interests of big business, they go into attack dog mode...
Non-voting may not make sense, but it looks a whole lot less stupid when the current political system is a corrupt absurdity. Obviously what the UK needs is a grassroots-bursting-into-the-mainstream politics revolution of the kind Spain experienced (albeit sadly now stalled) - unfortunately the very history that seemingly insulates Spain against the far right doesn't exist in the UK, so the revolution can come from either side. It's hard to avoid the conclusion that things will need to get worse before any significant change happens. May not need to wait long, obviously.