Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
Oh please, Andrew.
Farage brought off a major coup for GB News. A gripping 2 hours. BBC et al cannot compete with his style of objective journalism.
So what Farage didn't challenge Trump's claims of a rigged election? Farage is the interviewer not the Democrat candidate.
How do you justify "... in most people's eyes"?
|
A good political interviewer would challenge any politicians claims, even if just to point out they are disputed. That's his job. Before you say it isn't, he was interviewing a politician on a channel that proudly tells everyone it is a news channel.
Political interviewers have to be tougher on their interviewees than celebrity interviewers because the things a politician says *may* have an impact on a lot of people, and whether Trump was lying or not, most politicians will lie given a fraction of a chance to do so.
A good interviewer needs to try and find the truth in an interviewee's answers. That does include challenging what the interviewee says. The trouble with Trump is that (and he has this in common with a lot of right wingers) as soon as you disagree with him, you are wrong and fake news.
So, while I didn't see the interview, I'd argue that while it may or may not have been a gripping 2 hours, it does not sound like what I would consider a good interview.
---------- Post added at 17:11 ---------- Previous post was at 17:01 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
If you were to believe every word of him. I think his ego was his downfall, he’s trying to make out GBNews can’t succeed without him. He’s been very disrespectful to the hires of Mark Dolan (Remainer btw) Patrick Christy and you’ve already got Dan Wootan, he proclaimed, referring them as “shock jocks”. All from talkRadio.
He lost me when he started complaining that he was offered £4 Million contract, after just 5 shows he’d decided he’d had enough, “his drivers”, he was “on a plane by 10pm sipping champagne”.
My heart friggin bleeds, not. Just awful, awful man of self importance.
|
The big stars (of which Neil appears to consider himself one) attract big salaries because they are expected to attract a lot of viewers. I remember the Producer of Superman: The Movie defending Marlon Brando being paid millions for essentially 2 weeks work because they thought he would bring in a lot of viewers (and he did).
The problem is, Brando had already worked on several blockbusters, and it could be argued he did bring in a lot of ticket sales. Neil has a couple of mildly successful TV and Radio shows, and a career as an editor (with seemingly a lifetime pass to be pictured in Private Eye) and a few appearances on other TV shows. This probably gave him a massive ego. Entirely unjustified, IMO.