Hi J1,
So sorry for this late post.
For this week, watch one or two clips from Hollywood Reporting with Mike Wallace (60 minutes) as well as one interview interview with Katie Couric (Palin and/or Lil Wayne); they are short clips, less than 10 minutes each. Compare these interview tactics with those of Terry Gross (Fresh Air). As reporters, we must try to remain unbiased, so make sure to include some things that may be worth while in entertainment "news." If you truly believe that news for entertainment should not exist, please back yourself up and explain why. We will discuss in class on Tuesday.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/mike-wallace-interviews-cbs-60-minutes-309617
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxAO7cH-xrE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UJh44OJEnA
Entertainment news is exactly that, "entertainment." My sentiment was reinforced by watching Mike Wallace interviews with singer/actress Barbra Streisand & an influential leader of the black Muslim movement in America, Louis Farrakhan. In the former he labeled Streisand self absorbed for not releasing enough hits, which in his eyes was a sign of being content with her current fame. Streisand was offended but continued to respond to his questions. Mr Wallace is the complete opposite of Terry Gross, he is not trying to be his guests friend, he is going to ask you the questions that hurt or no...rather make a controversial statement about you, an act you did, something you feel strongly about and its up to you to defend yourself. Sometimes I felt that the guests were on trial but it was entertaining as you wouldn't know how guests would react. When Mr Wallace called Nigeria the most corrupt nation in the world, Mr Farrakhan vehemently defended the most populace nation in Africa and repeatedly told Mr Wallace to be quite, however he did not seem to be fazed by his guests outbursts and after the rant, the two men shared a laugh. I also noticed that Wallace is not afraid to use certain gestures such as pointing which looks like he is accusing his guests sometimes. It looks like his "questions" are not planned out he just goes with the flow, a true veteran of the interviewing art but in the Farrakhan interview he was mostly accusing and bringing up accusations of Farrakhan's detractors.Katie Couric introduced a lighter type of entertainment news with her interview with Lil Wayne. Her goal was to present the human side of Wayne that we didn't know. (Who knew that he loved bowling!) She was very friendly with her guest and kept a relaxed posture throughout the interview (chin resting in hand) the relaxed nature was reinforced by Couric inviting Lil Wayne to the CBS studios to anchor, which he did quite well! Though she still asked him sensitive questions such as his addiction to cough syrup and drug possession. The interview also featured parts where Couric was narrating some talking points such as the beginning of Wayne's career and his jail time which were also present in Mike's interviews. All in All entertainment news is important because it gives us an insight into the actors and singers millions follow without knowing the person behind the act. It is also intriguing when the interviewer and guests have exchanges on touchy subjects. You really have to have a good temperament if you are working in this domain.
ReplyDeleteDuring her interview with Lil’ Wayne, Katie Couric voice over took more of a professional approach as did her interview in the studio. Her tone seemed very serious and dry and her questions appeared to be prewritten. Since the video is edited and cut with many clips, it doesn’t flow and doesn’t have a conversational feel to it, as did Terry Gross’ interview with Joan Rivers. It has a very Q and A format. As for her posture in the studio, she seems very relaxed, leaning on her arm and then crossing them. I feel that her body language does not match her voice and tone. The interview does involve clips of her doing other activities with Lil’ Wayne, making this segment more entertaining an appealing to the audience. This piece is a background on a celebrity, sharing information about a well-recognized person so they know more about who he actually is. Terry Gross used her conversational tone to expose background information and “fluff” while Katie Couric did this through the additional clips.
ReplyDeleteMike Wallace is very dry with his interviews, as well, contrasting Terry Gross’ style. His questions are genuine but he isn’t recording a conversation for entertainment purposes. He doesn’t cater to Barbra Streisand while he interviews her; he is very honest and even admits that he didn’t like her in prior years. His interview with Roger Clemens is informative based and its purpose is to expose the truth about the rumors that Clemens was using steroids. Wallace’s questions are raw and he doesn’t sugar coat his conversation with Roger. He even challenges his guest, causing him to get defensive. It isn’t a relaxed environment, as Gross presented in her interviews. Although these interviews aren’t crucial to the everyday public life, Mike Wallace presents the interview in a serious way.
It is my opinion that though entertainment news should not be depended on for hard-hitting, factual information, it is beneficial for amusement and as a stress reliever. There are obvious differences in, the styles of reporting and interviewing, between the two genres; it is the job of the listener to know the difference so as to not be misinformed.
ReplyDeleteThe first program I listened to was Mike Wallace’s interview with Barbra Streisand on Hollywood Reporting’s 60 Minutes. From the very start of the interview where Wallace used the word “hootspa” one could be positive that this was not hard news. As an interviewer he doesn’t seem to care about being offensive or insulting his subject. I was very surprised when he told Streisand that he didn’t like her 30 years ago and expressed his opinion that she is “self absorbed.” Streisand was appalled and spoke up for herself regarding the fact she was invited to be in an interview where she was torn apart. This is an obvious contrast to Terry Gross who seemed to genuinely care about her conversation partners. To me Wallace’s objective in his interview was more to stir up drama then actually provide content for viewers and listeners, very unlike NPR.
The second piece I listened to was Katie Couric’s interview with Sarah Palin. In my opinion, this interview was more informative then Mike Wallace’s but still lacks the focus of Terry Gross’s. While there is much important and relevant information regarding terrorism, Couric still plays to a more entertainment focused audience bringing up content such as why Palin didn’t obtain a US passport until the previous year (2007). Another, almost humorous bit of information she included was Palin’s quote about Alaska’s close proximity to Russia giving her experience with foreign policy, and how it was mocked by the public. Couric also, whether intentionally or unintentionally, managed to confuse her subject more then once, causing her to stumble over her words. This news segment seemed to serve as information about certain political affairs as well as provide an entertainment aspect.
I think that at the end of the day, news is news and people watch it for entertainment whether that is it's purpose or not. However, hard news stories and entertainment stories should be delivered in different ways. When people are seeking to hear stories about worldly events, a more informative and factual approach should be taken to deliver these stories. On the other hand, entertainment stories have more leeway and can be crafted in order to entertain the audience.
ReplyDeleteIn the first interview I watched, Mike Wallace interviewed Barbara Streisand. He approaches the interview with what seems to be a honost, but attacking tone. He tells Barbara what he used to think of her (that she was self absorbed) and seems to do this for an interesting interview. Instead of talking about facts on her life, he gets personal with her, almost invading her privacy. At the end of the interview though, he concludes with saying how he has grown to really like her. In the second interview, Katie Couric interviews Lil Wayne. Katie takes more of a friendly approach to the interview than Mike Wallace did, but her content seems less organic. She asks Lil Wayne the questions in almost a robotic way, which makes the interview less entertaining.
Katie Couric, Mike Wallace and Terry Gross all have different approaches to their interviewing techniques. Mike's approach seems to be more like Terry's in the sense that his interviews are entertaining and flow more like a conversation. Katie's tone of voice is more serious and her questions seem planned out. I guess it depends on the audience, but I feel like most people would prefer entertainment over a boring and informative interview.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think there are definitely numerous differences between Katie Couric and Terry Gross’ interviews. With the interview I saw between Gross and Joan Rivers, I noticed a very conversational form of questions and responses. Between Couric and Palin however, it seemed as though Couric’s questions were much more structured and thought out. When speaking to Lil’ Wayne, Couric’s questions again seemed more structured and the footage of the interview itself was also edited. As a result of the structured questions, Palin’s responses seemed more caught off guard and not quite as flowing as Rivers’ responses. Each of the two interviews with Couric seemed to be edited. Mike Wallace’s interview with Clemens was clearly edited. The interview opens with an introduction and is then edited with transitions and narrations. I think this is a different form of interviewing that is similar to a feature style of writing. I think anything that can inform a reader or an audience of anything should be considered news. It is something powerful enough to reveal things about various people and can help the audience to see beyond appearances and rumors. Interviews with celebrities for entertainment like the ones with Rivers, Clemens and Wayne allow audiences to choose for themselves how they feel about specific figures through the gathering of information directly from their mouths. While I do consider other news to be more significant than certain entertainment, I think it is important to keep in mind that we have an unlimited amount of resources to learn about international news and opportunity to find such news is not always emphasized or popularized. However, it is within our grasp and due to a lack of any direct consequence, we commonly dismiss its significance. Despite this, I do think any sort of entertainment can be news and I do not think of it as a waste of time. It is important for people to have moderation and not only consume their news intake with entertainment, but maybe also try and inform themselves of the more worldly news that is actually available regardless of the lack of emphasis that is put on it.
ReplyDeleteIn comparison to Terry Gross, Mike Wallace has a much more offensive tone. While Gross worked to make her interviewee feel comfortable in order to get them to freely answer questions, Wallace is not afraid to press the buttons of the people he is interviewing in order to get real emotions and important stories. Wallace pushes the envelope in his interviews in search of the truth; he does not care how upset he makes his guest as long as they are giving him a real story. He is after the truth of the story, and the truth of the emotions behind the people telling those stories.
ReplyDeleteKatie Couric, on the other hand, has more of a straight-to-the-point tone while she interviews her guests. She does not seem interested in getting emotional responses from her interviewees, she simply wants to get the facts and make sure her audience understands what is the most important aspects of what her guest is saying and not be distracted by emotions.
Gross is the medium between Couric and Wallace; while she does try to get some emotional response from her interviewees, she does not push them to the point where they are uncomfortable, which usually allows them to be more trusting and truthful with their responses. She is able to get honest answers with some emotional ties, while Wallace gets honest answers by raising his guests’ tempers, and Couric gets honest answers by maintaining a professional atmosphere. Personally, I believe Wallace has the best and most interesting interviewing style.
I personally think that entertainment news still counts as news, just that it may not be as pressing to people as say a local crime or tragedy would be. Just because some things may not be as relevant to everyday life as other things does not mean that they are still not important to some people. For example, back in my high school days when I would be obsessed with celebrities or different bands I would want to know everything about them. I guess what I am trying to say is that different types of news is important to different types of people.
ReplyDeleteCompared to Terry Gross’ interviews, Mike Wallace’s questions were a lot more honest as though he was not concerned with whether or not the person who he was interviewing actually liked him. However, despite this in the interviews that I watched I felt as though he was able to maintain a good flowing conversation with those who he was interviewing similar to how Gross was able to. Whereas Katie Couric’s interviews were less like a conversation and choppier making it obvious that her questions were pre written. That is partially due to the use of extra clips that she used. I personally found that Katie’s interview was less entertaining because of this. Overall I preferred Gross’ conversational friendly style of interviewing.
First and foremost, journalistic news is to entertainment news as The Inferno is to Twilight. Let's not confuse pap for prose.
ReplyDeleteWith that out of the way, watching the two interview styles lead me to two conclusions about their respective skills. Wallace always seemed like an old-school news man to me, so his interview skills seem wasted on someone like Barbara Streisand. Conversely, Katie Couric ripped into Sarah Palin like a good journalist should, but Palin could make my son look like Edward R. Murrow. She seemed more at home in the Lil' Wayne interview. She comes across as someone who's good at puffing and then gently reminding the audience that, hey, not all is sunshine and roses. She has a matronly style of interview, if that makes any sense.
Compared to Gross, both Wallace and Couric don't measure up. Couric lacks the grit and tenacity needed, and Wallace seems too combative. Gross is the Reese's Peanut Butter Cup of interviewers.
Entertainment news is news, although it is not traditional it still has information to offer. The type of news a person enjoys and watches is completely up to them, entertainment news is more of a 'soft' news alternative.
ReplyDeleteIn watching both interviews from Mike Wallace and Katie Couric there are many noticable differences than Terry Gross's style. While interviewing Barbara Streisand, Mike Wallace was very straightforward and blunt in his statements. During his interview there were few questions, but there were many accusatory statements as well as outside footage. In Katie Couric's interview with Lil Wayne she posed more questions than did Mike Wallace, but most of the interview consisted of background videos with her voice over talking about him rather than talking to him. Her interview seemed very thought out, and standard as well as invasive. She touched on certain topics that clearly brought about discomfort for Lil Wayne, and in my opinion crossed the line.
I enjoyed Terry Gross's interview more than both of the two that we viewed today. Gross had a much better flow of conversation, and definitely made the interviewee feel more at ease.
Before listening to the interviews, I felt like entertainment is news. If it interests people to know what celebrity is cheating on their significant other, than why not report it. Yes it is their personal life, however they chose to be in the entertainment industry and to live under a microscope. That is just the nature of our current society. After watching Mike Wallace interview Barbara Streisand and Katie Couric interview Lil’ Wayne I still feel the same way. There is a reason why millions have bought their albums so why wouldn’t they want to know more about these celebrities’ lives? To me it makes sense for people to want to watch entertainment news as well as hard hitting news. It’s both curiosity and knowledge that drives the news industry.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the style of each reporter, all had a very different approach. I loved Mike Wallace’s style the most. He made his interviews so incredibly entertaining because he wasn’t scared to ask the hard hitting questions that set off his guests. It made me want to keep listening to see if his guests walked off or anything controversial like that. He wasn’t trying to be his guests friends. He just wanted to get answers out of them and I appreciated that because at the end of the day his job is to get answers. His interview with Louis Farrakhan was incredible in my opinion. On the other side of the spectrum is Katie Couric. Unlike Wallace who had most of his guests in a formal setting, Couric conducted her interview with Wayne in a bowling alley because it is his favorite sport. They even bowled together. It was obvious that she wanted him to be as comfortable as possible. She did ask hard hitting questions after pretty much building up his ego through her questions. He gave her answers but I still felt like he wasn’t being as honest as he could have been and she accepted what he said. I think when you compare both these reporters to Terry Gross, Terry Gross falls in the middle. She uses her guests answers to continue her interviews which makes them feel like she is really interested in them and not just trying to get answers out of them. I do appreciate all three reporters’ styles.
The interviews from Mike Wallace and Katie Couric are very different than the one from Terry Gross. Terry Gross tries to keep her interviews light and upbeat, putting her interviewee at ease. Couric and Wallace address more uncomfortable issues and use more serious tones. In Gross's interview with Joan Rivers she changes the subject when the subject of Rivers's eating disorder arises, however Couric addresses the subject of Lil Wayne's drug use and Wallace calls Barbara Streishand self absorbed. This makes their interviews more awkward. THey are not looking for light hearted interviews but something more controversial and dramatic.
ReplyDeleteEntertainment news should be considered news because it reports what is relevant to current society. The lives of celebrities may not be as pressing as politics or current events but it still holds interest for the public.
Katie Couric, the late Mike Wallace, and Terry Gross both have different interview styles from Terry Gross. It also depends on the kind of interview that are conducting.
ReplyDeleteThe Mike Wallace interview with the Shah of Islam was more professional than his interview with Barbara Streisand. Mike Wallace's interview skills are more straight forward which looks to uncover the truth. In Mike Wallace's interview with Roger Clemens each questioned that he asked dug deeper into the story he was trying to unfold.
Terry Gross's style is more caring and her questions are more well thought out as if she has them written down already on paper. I think Terry Gross aims to establish a comforting environment when she is interviewing people and i could sense that in the way she speaks to the person she is interviewing.
Katie Couric interview style was more inviting even when speaking with Lil' Wayne and Sarah Palin. I can tell from watching her videos she is a really sincere person who trys to uncover the truth but not as straight forward as Mike Wallace. One thing I noticed about Katie Couric is that during the interview she always smiles to show that she is not always serious and she has a fun side.
I think entertainment news is relevant because it gives the public a break from all the hard breaking news that's going on. I also think there is nothing wrong with hearing about who, what, where, when, and why of a public figure because it is what interests us the most at that time. And as fans of them (or something of that sort) I would like to believe we would like to know what is going on because we as a public needs to decide how that public figure will affect us.
Personally, I liked Katie Couric interview style the most because she shows that you do not have to be tough to get information out of people.
Terry Gross, Katie Couric, and Mike Wallace are 3 different reporters that have different personalities and different ways of interviewing people for different occasions. All three interviewers speak to the people as if they are having a normal conversation. The interview tactics are very natural and they show no emotions when they ask personal questions, which make the interviewer unbiased. All three interviewers demonstrate un biased ways of interviewing because they do not agree or disagree on someone’s opinion.
ReplyDeleteBoth of the Katie Couric articles were extremely entertaining for me. Although neither seemed to be overly sensitive to the interviewee, and both interviews seemed to want to show some kind of preconceived perspective, they both seemed to play with the sensational egoism of the interviewees. Couric subtly asks just the right questions to make them seem almost like fictional characters out of touch with reality. Her body language in the Lil Wayne interview is amazing she completely caters to his confidence/ego/swag what have you. She almost mimics his posture (leaning towards him elbow on the table hand under her chin) acting as if she is interested in him like teenage fan or groupie might be at a concert. Even though Couric's interviews are very planned out and manipulative (a recipe for bias) I think they are very revealing of some true things (The superficial nondescript nature of Palin's foreign policy and most other policies).
ReplyDeleteThe Mike Wallace interview with the Ayatollah is extremely pressing. Its amazing how fearless Wallace is pressing a man in charge of around 60 American hostages with questions about his intentions. I think that this kind of journalism is rare these days. Unlike most other interviewers, Mike Wallace does not ease into tough or deep questions, he initiates a battle like interview right away.
Katie Couric had a very proffessional approach to her interviews. You could tell she did not intentionally mean to hurt Palin's intelligence yet she did anyway just by asking tough questions and calling Palin out when she failed to make sense. For instance after Palin made a comment that completely contridicted an earlier statement she had made Couric didnt let it slide and immediately told Palin "but didnt you say..." prompting her to try to correct her mistake and leading her to look even more confused then she had previously. Mike Wallace also had a very tough approach to interviewing people. While his interviews were slightly less interesting in my opinion, they still got to the heart of the interviewee and got in depth in the topic of discussion. Both had their questions ready but would still go off on thier own questions if the interview was heading down an interesting path. The interviewing style of Terry Gross was more laid back then both Wallace and Couric. The tone of voice she choose to use was more sympathetic to the interviewee as opposed to slightly accusatory. The entertainment value of all of the interviewers varied based on their interviewee and on the tone they choose to take on for the interview.
ReplyDeleteMike Wallace's interviewing style greatly contrasts that of Terry Gross and Katie Couric; he did not care to make his guests feel comfortable, often offending them. Wallace never shied away from the "hard-hitting" questions, which make up the bulk of his interviews.
ReplyDeleteKatie Couric, in seeing her interact with her interviewees, generally maintained and even tone, and was even playful at times. Her interviewing style seemed more entertainment based. Although Wallace's approach entertained in a different sense.
Terry Gross still stands out as the most respectable to me. Her intention isn't to rouse any conflict, but rather to simply have a conversation with her guest, and wring out information by making them feel comfortable and at ease.
It must be hard for Katie Couric to deal with Sarah Palin. It's not like Katie's an idiot; she's interviewed legions of people who make world policy and have changed the political landscape. Hell, she's one of the most important news anchors in America. Granted, that doesn't mean as much as it used to, but the point remains: when creating entertainment news, you have to remove some of the poignancy, some of the sting, from the questions you ask. The interviewer, in this case, is simply trying to introduce the interviewee and elaborate on their persona for a public that may not have much of an understanding of the interviewee. So Katie asks Palin some lay up questions that she answers by prattling on patriotically. Thing is, Palin's been drilled on most of these questions already - if Terry Gross were conducting this interview, using her style of letting the interviewee run the interview, Palin would be in a hole. That said, Couric did come at Palin with a little bit of heat. Just not that much.
ReplyDeleteSo Couric's interview with Palin was done just before the election. High time, probably, to ask questions with a little more mustard. Couric had a chance to put Palin in the corner and she didn't. She just boxed her close to the edge of the ring. Mike Wallace, on the other hand, is a bona fide ass kicker. Always has been, always will be. His style, as an interviewer, was more often that not intense. Sometimes it came off as abrasive, especially when he blitzed people who weren't prepared or had nothing particularly controversial to discuss. But when he interviewed people like Louis Farrakhan, the racist leader of the Nation of Islam who's interview with Wallace I watched, the intensity on either side was palpable and it created a riveting interview environment. Farrakhan gets lathered up and indignant when Wallace comes at him with evidence of his more severely anti-white, anti-Semitic past, and Farrakhan feeds off of this. Could Terry Gross ever pull off an interview like that? Probably definitely not. It's not her style. She's more about good vibes.
So we see three different styles of interview here. We see the breezy, open windows, spring breeze and fresh coffee tactics of Terry Gross, we see the informative but tired tactics of Katie Couric, and we see the hardnosed, old school reporting style of Mike Wallace. I prefer Wallace. I think he's capable of getting the most pertinent information out of his interviewees. But all of these styles are in different situations.
In watching these interviews, I have decided that entertainment reporting is in fact news, however it should be made obviously clear to the viewer that there is a underling motive behind the interview. After watching the Wallace interview with Roger Clemens, it became clear that the goal of his interview seemed to be to cause confrontation and emotion by strongly confronting Clemens, instead of letting the Clemens really feel comfortable in answering the questions.
ReplyDeleteThe Couric interview with Lil Wayne, on the other hand, used much warmer tactics. She allowed Wayne to engage her in conversation and even make jokes. However, even though she allowed fluid conversation into the interview, she clearly maintained control of the conversation topic throughout the interview. This is in contrast to Gross who allowed the conversation to envelop the interview and responded accordingly with her questions. She never tried to control the direction of the conversation, but insead invited the change of direction.
For my clips I watched, Mike Wallace interviewing Barbra Streisand and Katie Couric interviewing Sara Palin. Gross, Wallace and Couric have very different; one may even say polar opposite approaches to interviewing. Gross makes her guest speaker very at ease with her personable approach. Wallace is sarcastic and blunt to a fault and could be considered offensive with his forthright approach. In contrast Couric is very much rehearsed, serious and most of all professional. Although Gross is gentle and Wallace abrasive both take a light almost comedic approach to interacting with their guest speakers where Couric remains emotion and expressionless for the most part causing her to retain a more serious style of interviewing.
ReplyDeleteAlthough news for entertainment is not necessary, it is indefinitely a rapidly growing market. It is a market that brings in a lot of revenue that our country needs right now. Considering that we are in midst of an economic crisis. Money that is spent on news entertainment will better our economy and job stimuli. After all the people needed to report, interview, film and direct news entertainment all creates a demand for more employment, employment that our country needs right now. With that being said, I do find it a bit pathetic that people are so disinterested in their own lives that they resort to finding entertainment within the media making the lives of entertainers miserable.