Total agreeance. While I don't think Oprah is a deep interviewer -- she tends to go for the easy touchy-feely stuff in my experience -- she's light years ahead of Rose, who spends half his show answering the superficial questions he asks.
While all of the things he mentions are worthy fodder for the eventual Letterman biography, I don't think we needed them in this context. Dave always seems very open and forthcoming on those occasions when he does a serious interview (I'm discounting his appearances with Regis or Kimmel), and I thought he had the right amount of candor for this forum. --Dave Sikula On Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:28:49 PM UTC-8, PGage wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Karen Owen <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Review of the interview from Buffalo News Jeff Simon >> http://www.buffalonews.com/**Article/20130107/LIFE/**130109449<http://www.buffalonews.com/Article/20130107/LIFE/130109449> > > > I am not familiar with Mr. Simon, and am not a regular reader of the > Buffalo News. I find myself disagreeing with almost everything he wrote. I > wonder if perhaps part of my difference with him is that I had such low > expectations for how good a job Oprah would do, and so > was pleasantly surprised, while he may have come in expecting her to do a > halfway decent job, and so was disappointed? > > OTOH, I am not inclined to be nearly that charitable, when I note that Mr. > Simon repeatedly seems to imply that somehow Charlie Rose is an example of > a good interviewer - or that Gale King (who I learned in recent months is > one of the anchors of the CBS Morning Show with Rose) is somehow a quality > journalist. Both of these suggestions almost disqualify him in my eyes from > having a credible opinion. > > Also, as I mention above, despite the flaws in the interview (and they > were there), I found it to be one of the best I have ever seen of Dave. > Some of the follow up questions Simon suggests might be interesting, and > nice in an ideal world, but I am not sure I have seen many if any > interviews conducted in that way on television, certainly not with someone > as reticent as Dave or as superficial as Oprah. It seems like an odd and > unrealistic standard to use to judge this interview. Others of his > suggested questions seem more appropriate for the yellow pad of a > prosecuting attorney preparing for a cross examination. Under the > circumstances, I don't really think one can expect Dave to name Stephanie > Birkitt and then start talking about how her female coworkers felt about > her. Dave obviously includes Birkitt among the people he has harmed in this > affair, and dragging her through the public mud is clearly not something he > would want, or should want to do. > > > On Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:28:49 PM UTC-8, PGage wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Karen Owen <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Review of the interview from Buffalo News Jeff Simon >> http://www.buffalonews.com/**Article/20130107/LIFE/**130109449<http://www.buffalonews.com/Article/20130107/LIFE/130109449> > > > I am not familiar with Mr. Simon, and am not a regular reader of the > Buffalo News. I find myself disagreeing with almost everything he wrote. I > wonder if perhaps part of my difference with him is that I had such low > expectations for how good a job Oprah would do, and so > was pleasantly surprised, while he may have come in expecting her to do a > halfway decent job, and so was disappointed? > > OTOH, I am not inclined to be nearly that charitable, when I note that Mr. > Simon repeatedly seems to imply that somehow Charlie Rose is an example of > a good interviewer - or that Gale King (who I learned in recent months is > one of the anchors of the CBS Morning Show with Rose) is somehow a quality > journalist. Both of these suggestions almost disqualify him in my eyes from > having a credible opinion. > > Also, as I mention above, despite the flaws in the interview (and they > were there), I found it to be one of the best I have ever seen of Dave. > Some of the follow up questions Simon suggests might be interesting, and > nice in an ideal world, but I am not sure I have seen many if any > interviews conducted in that way on television, certainly not with someone > as reticent as Dave or as superficial as Oprah. It seems like an odd and > unrealistic standard to use to judge this interview. Others of his > suggested questions seem more appropriate for the yellow pad of a > prosecuting attorney preparing for a cross examination. Under the > circumstances, I don't really think one can expect Dave to name Stephanie > Birkitt and then start talking about how her female coworkers felt about > her. Dave obviously includes Birkitt among the people he has harmed in this > affair, and dragging her through the public mud is clearly not something he > would want, or should want to do. > > > -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
