Rashid Khalidi was such a bad interviewee that he distracted me from his own message. The Fifths interview with Matt Duss, and his appearance on Maher were far more effective at expressing similar ideas. And no, he wasn't ambushed by anybody but his own paranoia. I kind of don't blame him. His position is really unpopular with a rather large segment of society. However neither interviewer has a history of offering unfair interviews.
I can see why Khalidi would see it as an ambush when all those clips of him contradicting himself were edited in, but it was absolutely necessary. I almost expected someone to drag Marshall McLuhan out from behind a potted plant.
But throughout the interview, I kept thinking-- if I were a nineteen-year-old freshman who didn't know anything about this issue and took his class to become informed-- if I did only the assigned reading, and if there was no one in the class qualified to interrupt and push back, what would I end up believing? I'd probably end up being one of those people waving my degree around, telling everyone to educate themselves.
He was pretty condescending to his hosts, so can you imagine how he is in class? Even if a student wanted to challenge him, would he or she want to risk being belittled?
Agreed, but to be totally honest, I don't love Noam's style of interviewing. Just as a listener, there's too many interruptions even if I tend to agree with him.
Same here. He's a bit aggressive- Khalidis ideas are bad enough a reasonable listener can tell he's incredibly biased. I really can't take anyone in good faith who refers to Canada and USA as settler colonies repeatedly and not just once to make a proactive point
It was kind of fascinating watching the two interview styles. Noam was rebutting everything, which made Khalidi defensive, while Moynihan seemed like he was trying to draw him in to get a confession.
Yes. And then to say the Israelis live in settlements but adamantly state that he DID NOT call them “settlers.” A distinction without a difference. How could Norm or the listeners misunderstand him when he was so perfectly clear?
Yeah it's not the best, and I tend to be a big fan of the style of our hosts here at the Fifth. Let the interviewee make their case, and they'll either do good, hang themselves, or land somewhere in between. However I still feel like Khalidi would have made the same mistakes if the interview had happened on TFC. The man just seems like he came prepared to do some dirty fighting, and just didn't bother to prepare for an actual interview.
I might be alone on this, but I found the Maher interview not good. The conversation with the Fif was so much better. Duss spends half the Maher interview throat clearing to appease the rabid clapping audience.
I understand why he did it and I understand why they clap, but all the signaling gets in the way of the discussion. And Franky I think Maher is a putz with an in studio audience to match.
Well it wasn't a good interview, it was a double interview, and the other guy was pretty aggressive. He handled himself well enough to get the idea across, and not come out sounding like a loon, but it was hardly what I would consider good journalism. Everybody was still reeling from the attack by the time of that show, too. However even with being exposed to a more hostile interview, Duss conducted himself with a great deal of humility, and respect. He treated the audience, and the other parties involved like they were people worth trying to convince, and I think that it still made his appearance on Maher help others to reassess their anger.
But I agree fully. His appearance on TFC is the far better work. In fact, it's the best one I've seen out of many outlets trying to find a reasonable source for the Palestinian story. And by a large margin.
The accents have been somewhat sanitized recently; Moynihan didn’t even take the bait on my suggestion to do “John Black-enroe calling a tennis match” during a Sunday show a few months back. I could not believe he was serious.
Hell of a roundup, Matt. Condolences to all bereaved.
Stumbled on this at the Spectator. Maybe when the time is right, former guest Douglas Murray and Fifth stalwart Ben Dreyfuss could hash out the Kevin Spacey question.
Honestly Noam is so frustrating. Trust your audience, ask tough questions, push back and add important context; But don't bring on a guest to so "Did you say this? No? Well that's how I took it"
I don't need you to give me the reason why this guy is wrong. He can do that on his own if you know how to interview.
As someone who listens to every Coleman and every non-fighter Rogan episode, Coleman on Rogan was a bit disappointing. Rogan digressed to his usual talking point rants which would be fine with other guests but there’s so much more to talk about with Coleman
I’m starting to think of some other people I’d like to see get “Bump’d” (read: given wide range to speak about their stupid ideas while facing mild skeptical questions until they majestically implode) on Noam’s podcast.
The most telling part of the Comedy Cellar podcast was when Rashid Khalidi said "these are the most obnoxious questions I've been asked in 11 days." Noam responded, its because he's used to talking to people who agree with him. To which khalidi responded that no, he's been talking to the mainstream media, not understanding that he was in agreement.
Matt, you should be a writer... you’re very talented.
Rashid Khalidi was such a bad interviewee that he distracted me from his own message. The Fifths interview with Matt Duss, and his appearance on Maher were far more effective at expressing similar ideas. And no, he wasn't ambushed by anybody but his own paranoia. I kind of don't blame him. His position is really unpopular with a rather large segment of society. However neither interviewer has a history of offering unfair interviews.
Khalidi “code-switches” his beliefs based on his audience and then gets upset when the incongruence is pointed out.
I can see why Khalidi would see it as an ambush when all those clips of him contradicting himself were edited in, but it was absolutely necessary. I almost expected someone to drag Marshall McLuhan out from behind a potted plant.
But throughout the interview, I kept thinking-- if I were a nineteen-year-old freshman who didn't know anything about this issue and took his class to become informed-- if I did only the assigned reading, and if there was no one in the class qualified to interrupt and push back, what would I end up believing? I'd probably end up being one of those people waving my degree around, telling everyone to educate themselves.
He was pretty condescending to his hosts, so can you imagine how he is in class? Even if a student wanted to challenge him, would he or she want to risk being belittled?
Agreed, but to be totally honest, I don't love Noam's style of interviewing. Just as a listener, there's too many interruptions even if I tend to agree with him.
Same here. He's a bit aggressive- Khalidis ideas are bad enough a reasonable listener can tell he's incredibly biased. I really can't take anyone in good faith who refers to Canada and USA as settler colonies repeatedly and not just once to make a proactive point
It was kind of fascinating watching the two interview styles. Noam was rebutting everything, which made Khalidi defensive, while Moynihan seemed like he was trying to draw him in to get a confession.
Good cop bad cop. Who had money on Moynihan being the good cop?
(raises hand)
Yes. And then to say the Israelis live in settlements but adamantly state that he DID NOT call them “settlers.” A distinction without a difference. How could Norm or the listeners misunderstand him when he was so perfectly clear?
Yeah it's not the best, and I tend to be a big fan of the style of our hosts here at the Fifth. Let the interviewee make their case, and they'll either do good, hang themselves, or land somewhere in between. However I still feel like Khalidi would have made the same mistakes if the interview had happened on TFC. The man just seems like he came prepared to do some dirty fighting, and just didn't bother to prepare for an actual interview.
I might be alone on this, but I found the Maher interview not good. The conversation with the Fif was so much better. Duss spends half the Maher interview throat clearing to appease the rabid clapping audience.
I understand why he did it and I understand why they clap, but all the signaling gets in the way of the discussion. And Franky I think Maher is a putz with an in studio audience to match.
Well it wasn't a good interview, it was a double interview, and the other guy was pretty aggressive. He handled himself well enough to get the idea across, and not come out sounding like a loon, but it was hardly what I would consider good journalism. Everybody was still reeling from the attack by the time of that show, too. However even with being exposed to a more hostile interview, Duss conducted himself with a great deal of humility, and respect. He treated the audience, and the other parties involved like they were people worth trying to convince, and I think that it still made his appearance on Maher help others to reassess their anger.
But I agree fully. His appearance on TFC is the far better work. In fact, it's the best one I've seen out of many outlets trying to find a reasonable source for the Palestinian story. And by a large margin.
Here's the archived link to the Spectator article for those who don't subscribe: https://archive.ph/VR2zi
My favorite line, w/r/t Ask a Jew podcast: "Jess, though not Jewish, is a fan."
My sincere condolences to those who’ve suffered losses.
Powerful words from Yael and Ben.
Despairing as I am, I’m immeasurably grateful for this virtual refuge.
That was a great comment of the week. 🥰😂
Love Rashid Khalidi! Great pro-Palestinian perspective! It was nice to hear a fiery but mostly peaceful conversation!
The accents have been somewhat sanitized recently; Moynihan didn’t even take the bait on my suggestion to do “John Black-enroe calling a tennis match” during a Sunday show a few months back. I could not believe he was serious.
Ben’s piece hit close to home, too.
The Duchess bringing the heat.
Hell of a roundup, Matt. Condolences to all bereaved.
Stumbled on this at the Spectator. Maybe when the time is right, former guest Douglas Murray and Fifth stalwart Ben Dreyfuss could hash out the Kevin Spacey question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDMGV5bAulc
That Comedy Cellar interview is soooooo painful.
Honestly Noam is so frustrating. Trust your audience, ask tough questions, push back and add important context; But don't bring on a guest to so "Did you say this? No? Well that's how I took it"
I don't need you to give me the reason why this guy is wrong. He can do that on his own if you know how to interview.
Completely agree. Noam went looking for a “gotcha” moment and made a fool out of himself in the process. I won’t be listening to him again.
Shut it off after 20 minutes for the same reason. Host was just nitpicking trying for gotchas when they could have had a much better discussion.
I'm noticing a trend in people going on Noam's podcast, encountering modest pushback, then getting angry and making accusations of "ambush"
Workin for Sunday night at 11:45PM
As someone who listens to every Coleman and every non-fighter Rogan episode, Coleman on Rogan was a bit disappointing. Rogan digressed to his usual talking point rants which would be fine with other guests but there’s so much more to talk about with Coleman
I’m starting to think of some other people I’d like to see get “Bump’d” (read: given wide range to speak about their stupid ideas while facing mild skeptical questions until they majestically implode) on Noam’s podcast.
Hamilton Nolan is up there for me.
The most telling part of the Comedy Cellar podcast was when Rashid Khalidi said "these are the most obnoxious questions I've been asked in 11 days." Noam responded, its because he's used to talking to people who agree with him. To which khalidi responded that no, he's been talking to the mainstream media, not understanding that he was in agreement.
That was damn beautiful.