ranglin

Thank you, I hadn't seen The Guardian piece you wrote.

I think the thing that still bugs me is that in both the RDJ interview and the QT interview, as well as the guardian piece, you seem a little tone deaf to what you can expect to get from a 10 minute promo slot. As RDJ said to you, you were trying to do a multi hour Diane Sawyer spot in a 3 minute block at the end of an interview about a movie and it just doesn't work like that, regardless of who you are interviewing.

To give another example, go and read the RDJ vanity fair piece, it's clear from that piece that the reporter spent days with RDJ to built rapport before asking harder questions. You seem to imply in your story that RDJ was distracted before he came in (with the air conditioning story), but I think the truth is that you're pissing these stars off because you're being unreasonable about what you expect to get out of these short exchanges.

But that's just my opinion. What do you think?

Obviously you've most recently been in the news for your disastrous interview with Robert Downey Jr. We've all seen the video, and Downey's feelings are pretty clear, but did you want to share your side of the story? What were you going for with that line of questioning, what was the rationale behind it?

I suppose my question above is whether you think it's reasonable for you to try and make these leaps or if you're perhaps being a bit too opportunistic? Do you have an example where you got someone to wax lyrically about their life and their troubles in a 5 minute slot?

Disappointed this question is unanswered. I would love to know more about the morality of somebody who can do this so blatantly and still sleep at night.

So you'd be comfortable if a student who's essay you wrote, who cheated their way all through law school through bought essays, represented you on a criminal charge in court? Since you clearly believe that we aren't teaching anything to these students, then I assume your answer is yes? How about getting your taxes done by a "cheater" accountant, or driving over a bridge created by a "cheater" engineer? Ok with those too?

It's not a pissing contest, it's a learning environment. We are teaching people to be professionals in their fields and when they cheat their way through the whole thing it undermines their ability to do the job when they finish their degree. Unless your intention is to never use your degree for anything, it's got to catch up with you in the end, doesn't it? And conversely, what's the point of cheating your way through the degree if it's supposed to prepare you for the career you want to have? Don't you want to know how to be an accountant or lawyer or engineer? Isn't that why you're doing it?