She asked a lot of who, what and how questions, and with those questions are filled with snippets of research she previously investigated. I like when she asked questions, both the interviewee and audience can understand it clearly. For Example:
How important are U.S. mailman jobs?
What kind of relationships occur on route with the people?
Where does the passion of this job come from?
How did the interviewer build up to questions?
She started off with easy questions then gradually got deeper with the interviewee, making him expose some insightful information that really made the interview great.
Did the interviewer appear to have a strategy?
Strategies are almost always necessary when interviewing someone but I'm not sure her strategy was too apparent in this interview. The main message that she got across to the public was how important it’s to save the half a million jobs post office jobs, that are being threatened to be terminated soon.
How did he or she follow up to questions?
She followed up with questions by sometimes interrupting the subject so he could elaborate on the point. She did in sort of a way that sounded like a smooth transition and it was very professionally done on the air.
How were inadequate or evasive answers (if any) handled?
I heard none, it was a real intimate interview.
What was the apparent relationship between the interviewer and interviewee?
Like I said, it was like she was talking to her best friend or father. Its was a very mutual intimate home dinner type conversation.
What did you learn about interviewing from this interview?
I leaned that you have to do a lot of research on the subject you interview. If not prepared, the audience can tell, so it teaches me to do everything throughly. I also learned that having a script and asking the right questions in mandatory, if you abide by these rules you will have a great interview.
-Christian Ceaser
No comments:
Post a Comment