Grumble Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 The question is: should a reporter give something of himself in an interview, or remain seemingly aloof from the subject and completely impartial. I suggest that the answer depends on the interviewer. Some are quite irritating with questions intended to show their mastery of the subject rather than reveal anything new, others are mostly entertaining, and as long as they allow fair balance I enjoy their 'take' on something and decide whether I agree with them or their opposition. At least (IMO) that's more honest than someone who affects impartiality, but their very tone and line of questioning reveals exactly which side of the issue they stand on. I like a bit of character - there's already too much bland in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theodolite Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 That is about the blandest reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.