Good Interviewers Are Hard To Find

Ever since the days of my youth watching Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show and Tom Snyder on The Tomorrow Show, I've been aware of the fact that there's quite an art to being a good interviewer (Carson and Snyder were both highly skilled at their craft). Part of it is listening to what the other person says and being quick enough "on your feet" to be able to respond to - and even challenge! - comments that don't make sense. By doing that, you're a more effective proxy for the viewer/reader/listener, and provide a better service than if you simply act as a glorified question-asker. As an example of that lesser breed of interviewer:

This afternoon I came across this little puff piece/advertisement in sheep's clothing, on the topic of online tutoring. I was checking it out because of my own interest in doing some math tutoring (although not of the online variety), but I couldn't help noticing two points in the interview where the person asking the questions totally dropped the ball.

First, in response to the question, "How is [online tutoring] better than an instructional DVD?", the founder of the company says, "You just need an Internet connection for Tutorgiant, but you need a DVD player and TV for a DVD." How anyone taking part in that exchange could possibly not see the disingenuous nature of the response is beyond me. Watching a DVD requires a DVD player and a TV, yes (and, I suppose, electricity could be added, as well). But then suggesting that a person, alone in a room with just an Internet connection, could somehow watch an online video, is ridiculous. The shill for the company conveniently omits the fact that, oh yeah, that's right, you actually need a computer with a display screen in order to use the Internet, don't you? And while I know that home computers are pretty ubiquitous these days, I think you'd be hard-pressed to locate a home that hasn't had a TV in it since... I don't know, 1968? (It's possible that he's imagining kids using the online tutoring outside of their homes, but then you've still got the problem of getting them a computer.)

The second bizarre answer that went unchallenged was "Private tutors cost an average of $40 to $50 per hour... [whereas] online tutoring costs an average of a few dollars per minute" which just had me shaking my head. Even if you define "a few" as being as little as 2, you're still talking about $40 - $50/hr compared to $120/hr in a way that suggests the latter is cheaper than the former! Now, the respondent goes on to quote some other pricing figures that are more supportive of his argument, but what a strange way to begin! That whole "change the units" approach to comparison isn't really anything that a member of an intelligent species would fall for, is it? "Your product costs a whopping $7.50 per kilogram, whereas ours is a steal at just pennies per gram!!" Sheesh.