I'd like to know more about this.
Was that Spielberg? Or a look-a-like?
Was it cut between different sources (guy interviewing recorded interviewee in response to some DVD extra dialog from the director)?

RE: "All the people I met at Dreamworks were, and still are, AWESOME!"
-> It is rarely the people that work at a company, rather than the people who manage the company, that are absolute shitheads.

So, if the interviewee knows Spielberg and the CEO of DWS, I could see it being a case of attempted pro-nepotism, sure. That shouldn't get a ban for life, especially since the video seems to be tongue in cheek.

Even if he paid these people to say these lines without their knowledge of the use... Not really a ban for life. Maybe 20% ingenuity and 80% stupidity on the guys part.

Regardless of all of the above, it takes imagination, creativity and openly thinking outside of the usual formula to create something like this as an introductory video for application to a specific company. That kind of outside thinking and (most importantly), the ability to conceive, produce and complete such a project, is exactly the kind of people companies, any company should be looking for.

But that's all pending on the full story, and based on what I see here. If he held Spielberg in a small storage unit at gunpoint and forced him to say these lines: definitely a ban for life from the organization.

Also: the Jurassic Park theme is shit.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Yo-Yo-Master-Kenny-Strasser-Worst-Interviewee-Ever-2

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by ant. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

http://videosift.com/video/Yo-Yo-Master-Kenny-Strasser-Worst-Interviewee-Ever-2

wasn't there something at the Air Force Academy too where some cadets were singled out because they weren't christian or something to that effect?

anyway. Maher pissed me off in this segment because he did all the shit we accuse Fox news of doing. Talking over the interviewee and etc. Why have the guy on if you're doing all the talking?

We get it Bill, you don't like religion, many of us don't either. But shut the fuck up Bill and let your guest speak.

Indeed. It's the difference between allowing the guest (person with information and knowledge beyond that of the novice or aficionado, or layman) the floor in a forum friendly to his cause or of the defining of it.

Fox, MSNBC, (insert corporate news organization here), all have formulas to promote not the free exchange of ideas but the molding of a worldview of her steady patrons using all the wonderful tools in the arsenal of linguistic cybernetics, crowd-psychology, labels and branding....how many can you name??!

The format I gather is the host and co-host, one as devil's advocate with the interviewee free to roam-A well-configured framework for a discussion. No one interrupts on another either, you won't see this on the Telescreens...refreshing.

Also, note the lack of smarmy or smug tone or affectation of the hosts....Is this Canadian??

A subtle thing I like in this, is that the Interviewee has a bigger window than the hosts - he's the important one in the discussion. On fox news, the host would be in the big window, while they would have two small windows with people of two different points of view - one that's the same as the host, so that they can overpower the other point of view.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm not to upset disagreeing over interview protocol. I am just of the opinion that interviews shouldn't always be conducted without challenging the interviewee's positions and statements. I believe on egregious enough statements it is in fact the interviewers job to push, and in proportion to the statements. That's where I feel this interview was weak.

That said, I 100% believe that interviews that completely accept and just hear out the subject's positions have their place. It's one of the things the VICE guys do best and what makes them, IMHO one of the singular best news sources out there today.

I, for one, agree with you Cho...chingalera, as I believe investigative reporting is largely dead in the states. Dan Carlin has an episode of his podcast Common Sense dedicated to this issue titled "This is DNN" wherein he highlights actual news being dug up outside the States. This would be when a reporter asks an interviewee a question and won't let go until a definitive answer is rendered, or admission that it will not be answered ("secret-memo" style).

It seems that for the most part, not only are the questions being asked either already talking-points-sanctioned and/or soft, but the responses are accepted at face value. The bulk of what is called news is really just opinion set-pieces of the network hosting them. This is worse than a waste of time; this is damaging!

*quality
I recall now why persephone's interview of choggie wasn't included-I seem to remember an aloof, slightly knackered interviewee..

"Christ of Waltz." Subtle.

Not so funny when the interviewees are too obviously in on the joke.

SORRY friends, Please, The man in this video is suffering an injustice in Argentina. The contents i about this: Raul Belmont and William Chaplain, in an interview on Channel 7 of Salta, Argentina. The report shocked all the marginal people and popular Lerma Valley. Belmont, host of Words and Facts visibly impacted had to interrupt the meeting to embrace his guest sharing the excitement. His audience could see for the first time "The Caravan of the Poor in support of Chaplain William" from which they had participated. The Caravan of the Poor People. ever widespread censorship by a decade ago, is now known. A high ranking retired police handed the video to Chaplain who made the presentation pompadour but had not seen it in its entirety. When this happened in the studios of Channel 7, the interviewee burst into tears and visibly shocked driver stopped to embrace his program interviewed.

Have you ever interviewed someone? Have you ever had a set of guidelines given to you as to the prospective content of an interview you must do with a celebrity? I didn't find his questions to be idiotic in terms of content. You can't assume that "everyone" has heard Tarantino's opinion or stance on the violence issue, I hadn't and still haven't. The interviewer has an audience that he was trying to get information for and encountered a hostile interviewee. There isn't anything wrong with him pushing the issue. Whether or not YOU think the issue is a dead horse doesn't mean that others aren't interested in it.

Your video, Aubrey Plaza: The Champion Interviewee, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Yet another fox interview where the interviewee never gets a chance to talk without being interrupted.

@PoweredBySoy is right. This is fake. BillO is a paid troll. He's not a believer, but they pay him enough money to be an on-air hit man.

That said though, I dunno why Silverman took the bait and lowered himself and got into the shouting match. We've seen him be far more eloquent and not take the bait before.