Quote:
Originally Posted by STinLA
Not that it matters, because Adam doesn't claim to be a journalist, but allowing the subject to be changed is what good journalists *don't* do, and from what I've seen few of the good ones are from the Americas. I absolutely love it when BBC reporters call out foreign ministers who give some BS answer to a question that is either non-responsive or at odds with the cold, hard facts.
As the host of an entertainment show, however, you do want your guests to be comfortable.
Ok, you do want guests to be comfortable but Phil's 'dispute' with BFP is an interesting topic.
An interview across any media platform should have the structure
-(interviewer asks difficult question)
-(interviewee doesn't want to discuss. In this case, if I remember correctly Phil says he can't talk about it)
-(interviewer SHOULD ask 'you can't talk about it for legal reasons or you don't want to talk about it?')
Conversation can then continue on another topic. There has to be closure.
I would like to know how the BFP situation finished. There's no other opportunity for me to ever find out. I have to blame the interviewer for not doing as good of a job as he possibly could have done.
(I suppose by extension you could say the same about his discussion with stars representatives but that's not a topic that interests me)