What do you think of Stephen Colbert's interviewing style?

[Nobody]

Frankly, it's getting hard to listen to his interviews. He frequently asks questions and then cuts people off before they get a chance to answer. They might say three or four words and then he's immediately asking another question.

He seemed really bad tonight (Feb 7). If I was famous or did something worthy of getting on his show, I don't know if I'd go. Or if I did I'd try to limit all of my answers to one word, or as few words as possible, because sometimes it seems almost impossible to just get a sentence in.

But that's my opinion. Does anybody else share it? Or are you OK with the way he interviews people?

[don't ask]

Well they aren't really interviews are they? The other person is just a prop in a comedy routine. Sometimes the interruptions are the highlight.

[panache45]

Colbert is not a journalist giving serious interviews. He is a comedian. And that's his "shtick."

[Nobody]

I didn't realize that. I mean, Jon Stewart isn't a journalist either but he gives real interviews, so I thought that Colbert was giving them too.

Ignorance fought I guess.

[DianaG]

Well they aren't really interviews are they? The other person is just a prop in a comedy routine. Sometimes the interruptions are the highlight.
Colbert is not a journalist giving serious interviews. He is a comedian. And that's his "shtick."
I get that. Really I do. But it's still fucking annoying. I love the rest of the show, but the thing is, he gets people on there that I really do want to hear, and then he doesn't let them talk. The interruptions can be a highlight, if they arise naturally from the conversation, but the O'Reilly-mocking pointless, obnoxious interruptions got old for me after the first season. If you're gonna do that, you might as well stick to interviewing buffoons. Why waste Doris Kearns Goodwin's or Atul Gawande's time? (Yeah, I know, they're there to sell books, I get that too. Still annoying.)

[devilsknew]

So, what's different from Colbert and O'Reilly or any Fox interview? Equivalence is annoying?

[singular1]

I''m curious, who was he interviewing? It had to be a repeat, since he's off this week, so I wonder what interview you saw that seemed especially egregious?

I have seen film of him prepping his guest so they know what's coming and that they must be prepared for his interview style. I wonder if he spends as much time prepping those with whom he disagrees? I'm petty enough that I'd really want to "nail" a blowhard like O'Reilly if he were on my show...

[Marley23]

Frankly, it's getting hard to listen to his interviews. He frequently asks questions and then cuts people off before they get a chance to answer. They might say three or four words and then he's immediately asking another question.
He's parodying other pundits (mostly Fox News guys) who do the same kind of thing - talk over their guests and try to badger them into saying what they want to hear.

The show is in repeats this week. The guest last Monday was Dr. Paul Offit, a physician and vaccination expert. He recently wrote a book called "Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All," and that's what they were talking about. It was not an easy subject to handle in a Colbert-style interview because the anti-vaccination points are simple and Offit's pro-vaccination points were more complicated.

[Simplicio]

I get that. Really I do. But it's still fucking annoying. I love the rest of the show, but the thing is, he gets people on there that I really do want to hear, and then he doesn't let them talk. The interruptions can be a highlight, if they arise naturally from the conversation, but the O'Reilly-mocking pointless, obnoxious interruptions got old for me after the first season. If you're gonna do that, you might as well stick to interviewing buffoons. Why waste Doris Kearns Goodwin's or Atul Gawande's time? (Yeah, I know, they're there to sell books, I get that too. Still annoying.)

Its not really a format for any sort of meaningful interview even if Colbert wanted to. The whole interviews are like 5 minutes, and its a comedy show so Colbert has to make at least a few jokes during that time. That leaves a two or three minutes for the guest to talk, which is basically enough time to basically give a verbal version of the summary thats on the book jacket of whatever book they're trying to sell. Which is more or less what they do now.

Stewart doesn't really do better. Its just less noticable since he books more actors/comedians then academics, and because when he has someone on to discuss politics, he extends the interview to ~10 minutes. But when he has an academic discussing a book, his interviews suffer from the same problems as Colberts.

[What Exit?]

It's a joke but it does get tiring. When he first came on I watched the show as often as I watched the Daily Show. now I only watch Colbert occasionally as his shtick has gotten old for me. He is still occasionally brilliant but too often he is not.

[Darth Panda]

I love Colbert - his show has surpassed the Daily Show for me. I understand why his interviews are the way they are - I get it - I just don't find it that entertaining (usually). I still much prefer watching Stewart's interviews. Oh well.

[amanset]

He's parodying other pundits (mostly Fox News guys) who do the same kind of thing - talk over their guests and try to badger them into saying what they want to hear.


I disagree. That may have been how he started out but now, a few years down the line, he interrupts continually just to get a joke in and it has got really, really irritating.

He also didn't always do it either, he occasionally used to do decent interviews, so I can't really see it as being part of the act. I think he's just crossed the line getting carried away with himself. Pity really, as the first two sections of his show are generally excellent.

[astorian]

Colbert has his schtick, and people either find it funny or they don't. I think he's a smug jerk, you may think he's a genius. To each, his own.

But what I DON'T get is why anyone (a conservative in particular) would bother to appear on his show. There's absolutely no way to win. You CAN'T argue with a fictional character. If Colbert makes a stupid, dishonest joke (as I believe he regularly does), a guest CAN'T argue with him seriously. HE has a stack of jokes ready for the occasion. A guest is forced either to "be a good sport" by letting Colbert mock him, or risk looking like a sourpuss who's taking a joke too seriously.

[madmonk28]

I think he is a genius and his interviews in character tell us more about the subject than the serious interviews you see elsewhere. Think about most interviews you see: often, you can pretty much script out the entire thing, from the questions asked to the talking points used in the answers. Then Colbert turns the whole thing upside down in a subversive interview that mocks not the interviewee, but the entire medium. It's a parody.

[Marley23]

But what I DON'T get is why anyone (a conservative in particular) would bother to appear on his show. There's absolutely no way to win.
So you don't try to win. You play along, get to make your case after a fashion and perhaps raise your profile, and people appreciate you being a good sport. It worked pretty well for Mike Huckabee.

[fumster]

I didn't realize that. I mean, Jon Stewart isn't a journalist either but he gives real interviews, so I thought that Colbert was giving them too.

Ignorance fought I guess.The Colbert Report is a parody.

p.s. The Simpsons is animated; they could not get real yellow people because of the cost.

[Brandus]

If that was the least annoying think about Colbert I might be able to stand him. Has anyone noticed the way he REALLY REALLY loudly sucks in air through his teeth when he talks? Annoys the hell out of me.

[kelly5078]

I am continually amazed at how Colbert interrupts guests who might have interesting things to say, but fawns all over musicians.

[hogarth]

I usually skip the interviews on the Colbert Report (they're usually too short to get both the schtick and intelligent discussion in), but I always skip the interviews on the Daily Show. I think Jon Stewart is a terrible interviewer.

[Voyager]

The interviews are by far the weakest part of Colbert's show. The problem is fundamental. His character has to act like a blowhard, but the real Colbert wants many of his guests to get the message out. A very few guests can play along. Some he steps out of character for in order to let speak. But for most a lot of time is taken by the character and the guest's message is all chopped up.

The character has no particular position about musicians, so those interviews go a lot better.

The best interview was with Oliver Stone about his Bush movie. Stone came on, and said that after making the movie he thought Bush was a great guy and he really respected him - and Colbert's whole script instantly became useless. Only time I remember seeing him more or less speechless.

[Nobody]

The Colbert Report is a parody.

p.s. The Simpsons is animated; they could not get real yellow people because of the cost.
What?

[Nobody]

Anyway, I don't remember Colbert's interviews always being this way.

Last night he had on Amy Chua, author of "Battle Hymns of the Tiger Mother"

Googling, I found a video of the interview on the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/27/stephen-colbert-tiger-mother_n_814373.html)

ETA: OK, re-watching it, it's not quiet as bad as I remember.

[WarmNPrickly]

I'm definitely in the camp that prefers Stephen's interviews to Jon's. There are exceptions, but Stephens interviews are way more entertaining.

[Vinyl Turnip]

p.s. The Simpsons is animated; they could not get real yellow people because of the cost.

Sure they could. They're the ones doing the animation.

[zoog]

I saw an interview with Colbert a few years ago, and he said that he basically apologizes to his guests ahead of time - says something like "You understand that I'm a professional idiot, right?". I watch the show pretty regularly, and it seems like pretty much all of the guests are good sports about it.

[Marley23]

Anyway, I don't remember Colbert's interviews always being this way.

Last night he had on Amy Chua, author of "Battle Hymns of the Tiger Mother"
Just pointing out here: the show is in reruns this week. These episodes aired last week, so you can see all of them (Offit, Chua, whoever else) at the show's website.

[Kyla]

I am continually amazed at how Colbert interrupts guests who might have interesting things to say, but fawns all over musicians.

I always get the feeling that Colbert just really loves music and thinks musicians are awesome. Whereas he thinks politicians and media figures deserve mocking. I enjoy his interviews, even though they're not really a good place to learn anything new.

I like Jon Stewart's interviews of writers and politicians, because he often asks biting questions that you'll rarely hear from other interviewers. But his interviews with entertainment figures are just painful, and I never bother.

[Dewey Finn]

I liked the interview/discussion (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/367854/december-08-2010/steve-martin-pt--2) Colbert did with Steve Martin about art. He showed a painting of himself and then invited Andres Serrano and Shepard Fairey to alter it. (He also brought out Frank Stella, but he didn't modify the painting at all.) He's going to auction the painting in a few weeks for a charity.

[Sampiro]

His interviews are by far my least favorite part of his show and I often tune them out. I realize it's a comedy sketch but it's annoying when it's a guest you'd actually like to hear a straight interview with. With Jon Stewart if the guest is a Nobel laureate who wrote a great book on the Middle East you're going to hear some good questions on the Middle East, and with Colbert you're going to get jokes on how they need the Jews and Muslims need to accept Jesus or whatever.

I love Colbert's monologues and The Word segment and he's got two or more of the biggest balls in politainment, but in general I'd be happy with them scrapping the interview segments. ALTHOUGH, exceptions to everything. His handing Laura Ingraham her ass during the Obama Diaries interview (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/04/colbert-slams-laura-ingra_n_670351.html) rivaled the Daily Show's best and one of the few times when his faux persona served him greatly. If he'd called her a racist partisan hack outright it wouldn't have worked as comedy or journalism but it worked beautifully as both, especially with his parry of the banshee comment. That is an exception though.

[What Exit?]

I like Jon Stewart's interviews of writers and politicians, because he often asks biting questions that you'll rarely hear from other interviewers. But his interviews with entertainment figures are just painful, and I never bother.
This is nearly always true. I wish he would drop the entertainers at this point. His political, pundit, author and scientist interviews are usually great but most of the actors he interviews are duds.

[Cyberhwk]

ALTHOUGH, exceptions to everything. His handing Laura Ingraham her ass during the Obama Diaries interview (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/04/colbert-slams-laura-ingra_n_670351.html) rivaled the Daily Show's best and one of the few times when his faux persona served him greatly.
That's my favorite interview. You're absoutely correct, his persona absolutely teed this interview up for him.

Ingram states she doesn't think Obama is dumb...
...but this writing is TERRIBLE!
Look on her face is, "Holy shit this is going to be a long interview." :D

[madmonk28]

I saw an interview with Colbert a few years ago, and he said that he basically apologizes to his guests ahead of time - says something like "You understand that I'm a professional idiot, right?". I watch the show pretty regularly, and it seems like pretty much all of the guests are good sports about it. Yeah, I saw a clip of him briefing Kerry before an interview where Colbert said something like "you know the deal, right? My character is an idot, so just enjoy the ride." My favorite interview was one he did with a prof. who had written a book and Colbert couldn't get her to say what the book was about, so he said, "I'll just read the book, it will be quicker than getting an answer from you," and then he started reading the book in front of her.

[Voyager]

I love Colbert's monologues and The Word segment and he's got two or more of the biggest balls in politainment, but in general I'd be happy with them scrapping the interview segments. ALTHOUGH, exceptions to everything. His handing Laura Ingraham her ass during the Obama Diaries interview (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/04/colbert-slams-laura-ingra_n_670351.html) rivaled the Daily Show's best and one of the few times when his faux persona served him greatly. If he'd called her a racist partisan hack outright it wouldn't have worked as comedy or journalism but it worked beautifully as both, especially with his parry of the banshee comment. That is an exception though.

Yes. The ones that really work are the ones where the character agrees with the guest, and then just extends the guest's ideas that one small step into obvious absurdity.

The reason Neil deGrasse Tyson does so well is that he has learned how to outtalk Colbert. Not easy to do, but he gets the point across better than almost anyone.

[carlb]

I go hot and cold on his interviews. I'll watch the first 30-45 seconds, and I can usually get a feel for how the rest of it is going to go, and decide whether to watch or not. If the subject is smart, quick-witted, and "gets" the Colbert character, the interviews can be a lot of fun. Otherwise, they can be quite painful.

I thought Brian Greene fared well recently. As mentioned above, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has figured out the rhythm of a Colbert interview and just rolls with it. Cory Booker holds his own, and Kevin Kline and Kevin Spacey have been great.

I, too, prefer to watch Jon Stewart's interviews, but I'll watch Colbert's if it looks like there will be some good back-and-forth. Or if I sense that there's the potential for another Laura Ingraham (although I'm not sure he's ever going to top that one).

[Marley23]

Yeah, I saw a clip of him briefing Kerry before an interview where Colbert said something like "you know the deal, right? My character is an idot, so just enjoy the ride." My favorite interview was one he did with a prof. who had written a book and Colbert couldn't get her to say what the book was about, so he said, "I'll just read the book, it will be quicker than getting an answer from you," and then he started reading the book in front of her.
I think that might have been Nell Irvin Painter. Her book was "The History of White People."

[Captain Amazing]

I think that might have been Nell Irvin Painter. Her book was "The History of White People."

Her interview is here:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/267561/march-17-2010/nell-irvin-painter

It's. . .not a good interview.

[madmonk28]

I can't watch it because I'm in Afghanistan, but that is the interview. I disagree, it is awesome. I love watching how fast Colbert's brain is working compared to people still trying to shift out of first gear. I also love when he is interviewing a liberal who knows Colbert is playing a character and the interviewee still gets upset.

[astorian]

So you don't try to win. You play along, get to make your case after a fashion and perhaps raise your profile, and people appreciate you being a good sport. It worked pretty well for Mike Huckabee.

I don't see the upsde for a conservative.

I have little use for Jon Stewart, but at least a guest of his can argue his point with a REAL person. He may argue his position well and score points, he may do horribly and let Stewart mop the floor with him. Either way, it's a fair fight. If Jon Stewart says something that's totally wrong, you can call him on it, and he'll be forced to defend himself.

But Steven Col-BAIR is untouchable. Which means that liberal Steven Col-BURT can mock his guest, insult his guest, do whatever he damn well pleases, and the guest has to "be a good sport" and take it with a smile.

I don't see anything to be gained by playing Col-BURT's chickenbleep games.

[Marley23]

I don't see the upsde for a conservative.
I'm not sure what the measureable impact was for Huckabee, if there was one. But he did come off very well in his appearances on the show and Colbert did not attack him. In fact he asked to be Huckabee's VP candidate.

[ZipperJJ]

I'll chime in as someone who watched both TDS and Colbert every night, and I don't like either host's interviewing style. I think they both interrupt too much.

Yeah sure they are comedy shows but why have authors of interesting and thought-provoking books on if you're just going to use them as a straight man? Seems like they are both bad interviewers and the "well, we're just a comedy show" thing is wearing thin. If they want to just be a comedy show, only have actors and politicians on as guests, so you can mock them. That would be fine with me.

[Sampiro]

I think Jon Stewart is one of the best interviewers on TV, especially with politicians and intellectuals. The only thing I dislike- and this is spoken as someone who's closer to liberal than conservative- is that if he has a conservative on the audience is going to boo and hiss the conservative and cheer Jon whenever he makes a point (and admittedly he can be a good debater, but...). I sometimes wish the more serious interviews were filmed without an audience.


As for how he interviews entertainers, one of the more startling moments was when Dennis Leary was the guest on the first episode after Gaby Giffords was shot. Jon said in an opening segment (I'm paraphrasing) "I'm going to bring out Dennis Leary, he and I will insult each other playfully and talk about his upcoming project and not mention Giffords". He was basically saying "Tonight's interview is fluff, but we need fluff".

[singular1]

I love Stewart's interviews, and I disagree that he doesn't give authors a chance to really discuss their books. There's a whole shelf in the singular household full of books I only heard about through the Daily Show, and a couple from Colbert as well.
I did love the interview with Ashley - it reminds me of when he attacked Sarah Palin while in character (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgn8dd_stephen-colbert-rants-about-sarah-palin-s-media-whoring_fun). Brilliant!


:p I love that Firefox doesn't recognize the word Palin, and one of the suggestions for an alternate word is "pain".:D