By Patrick Appel
A reader writes:
I think Colbert does better interviews than Stewart. Stewart’s interviews are usually, but not always, too cautious when he’s talking to someone he disagrees with, but his real weakness is with people he agrees with, where his interviews are basically boring. Colbert is most interesting with people his character disagrees with, since he’ll ask people really good questions that they should be able to answer, and which they’re usually unprepared for. From where I sit, going mano-a-mano with Colbert looks a lot harder.
Another reader makes a related point:
John Stewart is not a great interviewer because he has a double standard: Hiding behind the excuse that it’s not his job to ask hard-hitting questions when it’s a guest he wants to coddle, lobbing them nothing but softball questions. But swinging away with satire, sarcasm and tough questions for guests he and his audience oppose. He used to be more cloaked, but the Bush years and the corresponding rise in popularity of liberalism seem to have emboldened him to be openly biased.
But since Huckabee and others know the game and still do the show, who can blame him for continuing the bit?
The Dish 