|
We want to hear your comments, opinions, thoughts and ideas on the programme or the website.
Let the HARDtalk team know what you think about our presenters; tell us what you thought about a particular guest, or let us know who you'd like to see on the programme. The comments published on this page reflect the balance of views we receive. Please note that we regret we do not have the resources to provide transcripts of our programmes! To make a formal complaint about HARDtalk or any other BBC programme or service, please visit the BBC's complaints website.
One person who can make it difficult for Mr. Sackur is President Saakashvili. I have been watching Hardtalk everyday for the last 4 years, but this is the first time i see the guest having some notes and using it for his response. This particular programme was a treat, Steven - you need to work hard, it is not always easy! Bala, UK I watched the Hardtalk interview with Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency Ali Asghar Soltanieh. Despite the fact that it was Iran which revealed the existence of the site at Qom, and agrees to open it fully to inspection, the interviewer adopted an accusatory stance, insinuating that Iran had hidden the site and had other hidden sites in the country. Iran's nuclear energy programme is subject to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the ambassador confirmed that Iran is cooperating fully with the agency. Iran is also entitled to withdraw from the NPT, but, despite the two wars waged on its borders -Iraq and Afghanistan - and the threats from the US and Israel to bomb its nuclear facilities, it has continued its membership. I suggest, in the interests of balance, that Hardtalk now interview an Israeli representative on that country's secret and illegal nuclear capacity, which is in complete disregard of international treaties. Israel has not signed the Non Proliferation Treaty and has developed its nuclear weapons illegally, and its sites are not open to IAEA inspection. It would be interesting to hear similar questions being put to Israel on Hardtalk. Dorothy, Ireland I suggest you invite Madam Fu Ying, the Chinese Ambassador to the UK as a guest on Hardtalk. A very articulate, interesting and timely guest. Kish Hahn I wish to place on record my profound appreciation and approbation of Hard Talk on the BBC. I have been watching this programme for a long time now and immensely like the well-researched and informative format of this programme. I would also like to commend the wonderful job the host Mr Stephen Sackur is doing as its presenter. His pointed questions and his efforts to conduct the interviews in a friendly manner and lead them to their logical and thought-provoking conclusion, are a joy to watch. Keep up the good work !! L.K. Malick, Canada Sarah Montague's interview of Colonel Richard Kemp, former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan (29 Sep 09) was a superb piece of journalism. She is fabulous. I do wish we could see more of her in HARDtalk. Alvin J Martinez, Puerto Rico Steve Forbes - What a garrulous conceited bumptious idiot ! Ugh ! You need a Hardtalk gag Stephen ! Well done ! Kish Hahn Hardtalk's interview of Steve Forbes was rude, dogmatic and unfortunate. I will no longer choose to watch your program. J Edell, Canada I just came back from watching this afternoon's episode of HARDTALK with Steve Forbes and I have to say it was probably one of the most amazing interviews I have seen conducted on television. It reminded me of the Nixon interviews in various ways. Firstly, I'd like to thank the network and the interviewer particularly for conducting this programme. Without you, we'd be completely lost. No other news broadcasting agency has had the courage to actually sit down with those who are in power, those who are responsible, who have the knowledge and ability for change, and ask them these direct, awkward, grilling questions. Forbes himself may not be in the reigns, but his massive influence and reader base - was. He shifts the blame from private enterprise and free market to government, for failures in the past and present, as well as administration. Throughout the interview, you could actually feel the tension - and the gears grinding away in his mind. This is what the tenet of Free ! Speech actually entails; if not demands it. If we do not practice our right to ask difficult questions, to challenge those in power - then we will simply lose it. A big thank you goes to you all, and I wish you only the best in your continuation of these interviews. I will keep watching the BBC network as long as you follow your rigorous standards of truthful, accurate, and unbiased news. I wish there was even one American news station that came this close to your quality, but I am afraid that there isn't. Even CNN doesn't dare to question with such ferocity and truth. You guys make me proud. "Never stop asking." Michael Kirichenko, re: Steve Forbes: saw the interview and found that as usual he either misrepresented the truth or evaded the question. Unemployment was over ten percent under his God, Ronald Reagan. The interviewer did not know that and Forbes would not disclose that. Reagan also acted to devalue the US Dollar in 1985. Mostly we have had Republican presidents who watched for years US jobs to to Mexico, India, China, Japan,S. Korea, Vietnam and said NOTHING. Forbes lives in an estate in Conn. and he found out if he bought a calf and put him on the grounds of the estate, he could get the place re-certified as agricultural and avoid thousands of dollars in real estate taxes. Also, he got rich the old fashioned way....he inherited it. Did you know that? The basic thesis of the Republican party is :the poor have too much and the rich don't have enough. I thought you knew
phil, usa Thank you for your persistent questioning of Steve Forbes. Mr Forbes repeatedly asserted that the US government was responsible for the expansion of monetary aggregates that led up to the 2008 crisis. Was this expansion not in large part due to China's export success, which suddenly mad them large holders of US Treasuries, essentially pushing back US dollars into the US economy in a way that the Fed could not control with its standard measures? No one seems to have addressed the fact that China's return to the world economy is having economic effects on a scale of say Spain introducing New World gold and silver into Europe 500 years ago. Bruce Richardson, China I watched Hardtalk last night and it was the most disingenuous interview I've seen on Hardtalk. It was filled with catch phrases and clichés by the ex Lehman's VP Mr Mc Donald that Stephen Sackur seemed to be taken in by. Stephen appeared to be trying to hard to be "Tough guy" when in fact this guy got off unchallenged. Avid viewer Brian Keegan, UK I understand the "Hardtalk" model, but it really is let down in interviews with people such as Larry McDonald when the interviewer has little knowledge and even less understanding about the subject matter. This seems to happen whenever there's any discussion about the economy. The interviewee relates his experience, then Sackur says "but don't you see how my naive interpretation of what happened is right!", repost, "But I'm right! Can't you see that!". Very poor and enough to stop me watching the show in the future. Chris Andrews, UK I would like to congratulate Mr. Sackur on his excellent interviews with James Lovelock and Dr. Leipold concerning climate change. They were excellent and challenging discussions and it is clear Mr. Sackur has developed an open mind on this topic. We need more robust challenges to these promoters of the ideology of climate change. I would urge HardTalk and Mr. Sackur to dig deeper and continue to challenge the current orthodoxy. Taking a lead on exposing the thin ice of the so called 'consensus' on man made global warming will position the BBC well as the truth is only now beginning to unfold. It will be a lead worth having.
John Church, Brunei Good Day. I am a subscriber to WHYS. If Stephen Suckur could always behave to old MR Lovelock, he would to my mind be perfect. I agree however and regret having to do so, with the majority of commentators that he should treat his interviewes especially interrupting them with his usual authoritative almost rude manner.Too often against his own objective. Take the case of the great modern french philosopher just as he was beginning to expound his cyclical vision of western world history. It was so untimely as to make think about Stephen's adequacy. It was an enormous mistake. And then shaking hands he remained seated as the elderly gentleman had to stand up.
Karl Mülnier, Mauritius In your interview with Gerd Leipold, you made the claim that GreenPeace had stated that the Greenland ice sheet would melt by 2030. That is a false accusation as anyone can confirm by reading the press release that you mentioned as being the source for your claim, where they just mention the sea ice: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/urgent-action-needed-as-arctic I think that you owe your audience a public correction about this words you mistakenly put on GreenPeace's mouth.
Jesus, Spain Great interview,she (Thandie Modise) makes me proud. A good and confident speaker,tackled all the questions politely and was very precise. Let's not forget Stephen Sackur an intelligent interviwer and a great asset to the BBC. That's what seperates the BBC from other stations across the world.
Dola, UK In a recent interview Stephen Sackur accused Greenpeace of releasing "misleading information". You claimed that that their press release said that the Greenland ice cap could melt by 2030. But their press release said no such thing. They started with comments about Greenland, but then switched to Arctic sea ice: "Bad news is coming from other sources as well. A recent NASA study has shown that the ice cap is not only getting smaller, it's getting thinner and younger. Sea ice has dramatically thinned between 2004 and 2008. Old ice (over 2 years old) takes longer to melt, and is also much harder to replace. As permanent ice decreases, we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030. "They say you can't be too thin or too young, but this unfortunately doesn't apply to the Arctic sea ice. Polar bears are the first to suffer from it, but many other species could be affected as well." How did you manage to miss the repeated references to sea ice in this passage? Will HARDtalk make a correction?
Tim Lambert Am a South-East Asian by birth. In the interview on Hard Talk the former president of Nigeria, Obasanjo, was unfairly embarassed with no necessity to quote an allegation made against his daughter. What is BBC trying to do? Imitate the Yankee loud mouth? Come on, the BBC need not stoop so low to gain fame. We listen to learn not to gather gossip. If the BBC dishes out such trash you will certainly not hear from many of us who are used to ''fair play'' in BBC.
Benza, Australia I recently had the pleasure of hearing James Lovelock interviewed on CBC Radio Ideas for about 35 mins. The interviewer brought out Lovelock's views in detail. It was a pleasure to be informed. Last night I was fed up with Mr Sackur's constant combative interruptions which seemed to border on an angry contempt for Lovelock's views. As a result any person new to Lovelock's ideas would only have received a fragmented 'disapproved' view. Perhaps Mr Sackur should listen into CBC Radio Ideas and learn how to bring out rather than suppress another person's views.
Charles McGrory, United Kingdom James Lovelock. Just heard this flannelling sky pilot talk about climate change etc. Mr. Sackur understandably exasperated. Lovelock totally oblivious to his many contradictions & his preposterous suggestion that man may have been causing climate change 10,000 years ago. He's not even coherent by his own preposterous lights since if that was true the climate would have been much more altered by now than it clearly has been . His deluded certainty reminds me of those who claim the moon landings were faked. Will watch this again when my head stops spinning.
C Yates, UK Dearest BBC! Please carry on with Hard Talk! It's The most exciting program. Mr Stephen, you are doing a brilliant job. Incredible combination of pragmatism and dreaming; the maximum possible aspiration of the human. It inspired my spirit. I believe that you are a good man with a great show that helps people see what's going on in the world with more then one point of view. Congratulations on your excellent "HARDtalk in Greenland" miniseries. Very well done. I record your show each day. You are wonderful man and a great journalist. It is indeed an honor for me to write a few words on the great journalist. I enjoy the fantastic interviews, keep up the good work and discussing the worlds current affairs! I salute you. Hardtalk is a very colourful program, you discuss politics, economics, arts, psychology... everything. I would just like to say it was a pleasure watching the hardtalk.
Stanislaus, Poland I have just watched a very disappointing interview with Amartya Sen with Zeinab Badawi. I strongly feel that the presenter was probably the worst interviewer on your hardtalk show. The facts she presented was not completely accurate and her ability to interrupt the noble prize winner was also unacceptable.
Eva, UK Dear Mr.Sackur Today by chance I saw the of Ms. Jasvinder Sanghera on BBC world service's programme; Hard Talk. I must say that she was brilliant in her answers in avoiding the traps you wanted to set up. As a media monitoring person, I often find BBC and other western media outlets very prejudicial when it comes to covering important issues relating to non-European ethnic and religious minorities living in the West. I totally agree with Ms Sanghera that forced marriages, honour related violence and crime are not culturally and religiously based but have their roots in some traditions and family circumstances. That is why, I did not like when you constantly referred to issues in the programme to Muslim countries, Islam and Pakistan. As far as honour killing is concerned, it also happens in the west but no one connects such crimes to Christian culture or Western traditions. Countries in the South of Europe such as Italy, Greece and Portugal and many societies in Latin America are famous for murder and killing on the name of family honour and code. To me killing is a serious crime and there is no honour in it. I do hope that you Mr Stephen Sackur would be in future less anti-Islam and more a professional journalist.
Bashy Quraishy, Denmark I often feel that Stephen's style of interviewing is a bit too domineering and bombastic, however his recent interview of Matthew Hayden (former opening test batsmen for Australia) was spot on. I think you should have nailed Hayden to the wall over his sledging which is barbaric and hypocritical when he (they )criticised India about using the term 'monkey'. Also Hayden's claptrap about playing for the "baggy green" is elitist hype, he, like many others at that time, decided to throw their baggy green in the rubbish bin and prostitute themselves for the IPL "fist full of dollars". I hope you have a follow up interview on him and grill him even harder. Good work on this occasion Stephen.
Gordon Smith, Australia Having just watched the interview with Ken Livingstone on 'Hard talk' I think you should change the title of the show to 'Can't Talk'. For three quarters of the questions he was asked the interviewer interrupted him in mid answer not allowing him to even start his reply let alone finish it. No sooner had Livingstone begun to speak the interviewer began contradicting him and quoting some ready prepared facts that would contradict his position before he was even allowed to out line what it was. Each time he tried to clarify his point he was forced to address a second one. By the end I felt that he had been treated with a large measure of disrespect by a journalist setting out to belittle him rather than allowing him to explain himself and then sensible question his argument. Livingstone remains one of the few people in left wing politics prepared to offer an alternative to the Blaire/Brown philosophy and as such desrves the opportunity to clarify exactly what he believes and explain his actions in the past. Too often he is met with thinly disguised derision and disrespect by journalists unprepared to even allow him the right to speak. It has the effect of censoring his answers and is therefore not what we expect of the BBC. I look forward to an interview in which Livingstone is allowed to talk. Hard Talk should mean intelligent questioning not simply smug interruptions.
Paul Moses, GB For me, Stephen Sackur is the No.1 interviewer on television. Intelligent, informed and incisive he is respectful as well. He has the ability to engage with a wide cross-section of people over a longer interview time so we are spared soundbites and superficial analysis. He was great with the Australian batsman, Matthew Hayden, last night. Pity our cricketers didn't deal so well with the current Aussie team today!
George Irving, U.K. I must, I must, I must say that Hardtalk with Gerd Leipold was one of the worst bits of 'journalism' I've seen in a long time from the BBC. Sackur was terrible. His tone was derogatory, he kept interrupting Leipold, didn't let him finish most of his points, Sackur was throwing red herrings around like confetti, even his line of questioning was skewed in the negative. And his research was appalling. Kevin Rudd doing the best he can? Get the facts right. There is so much more Rudd and his environment minister could be doing. Australians are the highest CO2 producers per capita in the developed world. They must do more. To say that at least they are trying is pathetic. And what about the harping on about the Greenland ice sheet. Does Sackur have some crystal ball to say that he'll be right? The whole point is that no one knows, so why try to score a point by insisting that you are right? All we can do is base our future predictions on what we know now. Sackur is less qualified to push that Greenland point than the head of Greenpeace International, I would have thought. And how inflammatory to imply that Leipold was suggesting that the Indians and Chinese shouldn't have cars like the people in the UK. That's cheap and nasty journalism. Sorry, you've lost me. The BBC is reputedly fair and informed. Not in this case. Really terrible journalism. Send Sackur back to basic interviewing 101.
Jane Colhoun, Italy I followed the interview with Martin Indyk on achieving peace in the middle east, whom I respect very much for his ability to remain optimistic and realistic at the same time, which in opinion reflects the way to any solution. Therefore I was quite surprised that Mr. Sakkur, whom I also respect and honor for his excellent program, following mainstream type of insistence that is the opposite of what is needed to achieve peace. One particular example was the critical view on the part of Mr. Sakkur regarding the engagement of the Obama administration with the Iranian govt. and not standing back to "wait & see" What's the point here, it's not the US or else business to interfere in internal affairs of other countries, something that has led to more problems than solutions in the past. I see the Obama approach much more mature and respectful, according to international law of the sovereignty of states. There will always be states less valued by one or another, but in any case you have to deal with them as long as they are in charge. Likewise with the ones that come into charge sooner or later. The US and the UK will have to demonstrate with serious commitment that the so called "imperialistic" approach to dealing with others, which has led to much of the current problems to solve, has come to an end. The stake of actively or passively siding is far to high. Should the outcome not be as promised, which is likely (according to black swan principle) you have to deal with the next problem, a justified distrusted relationship, and that is much harder to overcome than most pragmatic problems.
Daniel Handschuhmacher, Italy I appreciate Mr. Sackur's asking the hard questions to Mr. David Cutler, former Obama Health Care consultant. There is much concern around this issue in rural USA where I reside. William Rogers, USA I salute you all. By virtue of your exceptionally special programmes I made my way successfully towards the miscellaneous pieces of news provided on your website. It inspired my spirit. Bettaibi Riadh, Tunisia Could Mr Sackur who is an incredibly capable and popular journalist please try to desist from interrupting his guests so much ; he is there to ask the questions, even if it is hard talk ; otherwise it just becomes the "I must I must I must" Stephen Sackur show. Gareth Watts, Saudi Just saw part three of your program and had to run to my computer to investigate more. Fascinating report and now sharing it with my friends on Facebook. Most informative. Emmanuel Touhey, United States Congratulations on your excellent "HARDtalk in Greenland" miniseries. Very well done. Stephen Sackur shined bright. I think viewers would enjoy seeing more of these "On the Road" shows. Alvin J Martinez, Puerto Rico I sent an email to you in a similar vein to that of Damien Blackwood - BUT MUCH SHORTER - about the impolite treatment of Mr Grayling. You didn't publish it even though it seems you are not actually flooded out with emails. Did you not want to display TWO critical emails, please? Terry Phillips, UK Re Zeinab Badawi's interview of Lady De Rothechild. Thought it was terrible. She talked and argued as much as the interviewee and it was supposed to be an 'interview'. The idea is that it provides the interviewee an opportunity and us the view to heard her view of various subject matter, not what the interviewer thinks. Besides, Zeinab Badawi's point of view as so stock standard and completely non-original which makes me wonder why we should be listening to her!?! And she was so aggressive in her interview style! All attitude but sadly very little substance. Definitely one of the worst interviews I have ever seen. Yen Tsai, Australia I agree with the critics by Damien Blackwood, UK over Sackurs conduct over the interview of prof. Grayling. The interviewer should contribute to deepening the watchers understand of the professor’s view, not tying only to destroy and interrupt. It is quite certainly Sackurs attitude and expression of his political understanding and point of view. So Sackur is acting as a representative just of what Grayling is criticizing! He behaves as an agent for the rulers! Grayling on the other hand should have been asked about his view on class-society. Is there a ruling class in Briton? Who are they and why do they want to control the people? Helge Ramstad, Norway Hi, I am writing to complain about the standard of the interview with Professor Grayling on Hardtalk. The professor was available for 30 mins for us all to see benefit from his understanding of the topic of discussion and the interviewer did not even allow for him to answer any of the questions. The discussion was a very important one to be had and I was very glad that it was taking place on the BBC but is there any point if you will not let the man speak? You can see I was so disappointed by the end of it and I really hope that you at the BBC give this another and soon. Get an interviewer that is ready to allow for the discussion to take place not one that will ask questions and not allow for answers before his next question. Very very disappointed to the extent that I am now have a biased opinion weighted to the side of the professor as opposed to the balanced view that I was hoping to get out of watching the interview. Damien Blackwood, UK Re Zeinab Badawi's interview with Bassam Abu Sharif & the question on Camp David: When Arafat went to Camp David to meet Barak, he was allegedly offered 95% of the West Bank and Gaza but turned it down and went to war with the 2nd intifada. A study of the maps, however, shows that it was with the exclusion of Jerusalem and its extended boundaries, with the exclusion of existing major Jewish colonies and with the inclusion of an Israeli cordon sanitaire. Arafat was offered near to 64% of the 22% of mandate Palestine that was left to him. Clinton knew what the offer entailed. That Arafat had turned down a golden opportunity offered by Israel was in effect an offer that was taking him for a ride! He was right to turn it down but people should know why. My source of info: Robert Fisk
Margaret Farrell, Italy I have just watched the interview between Stephen Sackur and the wonderful Dr. Jane Goodall. I am just wondering why Stephan Sackur got this job. He kept on interrupting and misinterpreting Dr. Goodall's statements. He should find another job. He is not a good interviewer and his questions crossed line to disrespectful. What was the aim of his questions??? Upon reading a couple of the comments left on this page i am not the only one who thinks he shows signs of incompetence.
Tony, UK I have just watched the interview between Stephen Sackur and the wonderful Dr. Jane Goodall. I am just wondering why Stephan Sackur got this job. He kept on interrupting and misinterpreting Dr. Goodall's statements. He should find another job. He is not a good interviewer and his questions crossed line to disrespectful. What was the aim of his questions??? Upon reading a couple of the comments left on this page i am not the only one who thinks he shows signs of incompetence.
Pearl ,Germany I was flabbergastered by the ineffable infallibility of Jane Goodall. Incredible combination of pragmatism and dreaming; the maximum possible aspiration of the human. Stephen Sackur has a very privileged job. Sorry about the gushing qualification of infallibility, which can stand by itself, I suppose. Add beauty to her already mentioned qualities. Now going to look in the Concise Oxford Dictionary to see what ineffable means.
John Timms, Spain I love Hardtalk, but the Rev Jackson was given free-reign to rant on about whatever he wanted. He just ignored any attempt to stop him doing so. I would say the only hard talk I heard was from the reverend . A big disappointment.
andy, England Please count the number of times that Sackur interrupted Ken Clarke's replies. I would guess at a figure in excess of 60%. What's the point of asking people to answer questions if we are not allowed to hear the answers?
john guest, UK Out of that gentle demeanor Sir Colin Davis disguises his volcanic musical talent which has been utterly infectious throughout his bounteous musical lifetime around the globe. A musical giant he has brought his masterly interpretation of the classics to us all through his innate inspiration and we are so grateful to you Sir Colin and to Stephen for opening your oyster for all of us to share. A pearl indeed !
Kish Hahn, Waterloo, Canada Piers Morgan is either incredibly intelligent or had been fully briefed on the specific questions that would be asked by BBC Hardtalk. He totally dominated that interview and ran rings round his interviewer often evading a direct answer and shifting the topic on to something else such as the BBC itself. I was extremely disappointed to see such a thing. And yes his earnings are matter of public interest! He is a celebrity now after all! Like he said he does not have to answer but I hope someone badgers him till he does much like he has to others.
Chris McGunnigle, UK Ouch!!!I had a great time watching Stephen Sackur getting nailed, and put in a corner by Piers Morgan. I laughed, seeing roles being reversed, with Stephen in the hot seat and at a loss for words and poignant questions. Looks like he bit off more than he could chew by taking on Piers Morgan. Hang in there Stephen, we are with you...
Bill, USA Dearest BBC! Please carry on with Hard Talk! It's The most exciting program. Truthfully watching.
G.Endresen, Norway I've just watched (on YouTube) excerpts (the full interview is not available) of your interview with Erik Solheim and am astonished at how little time you gave your subject to answer the questions! You pepper him with questions and then proceed to cut him off, time and time again. Here was a case of your desire to be seen as tough losing out to listener's desire to actually understand the subject.
Scott Robertson, Canada Re Stephen Sackur's interview with the Pakistani Ambassador dated 12/06/2009 was a classic example on how not to interview a prominent person. Not only was he rude beyond belief but showed he had a hidden agenda and at one point laughing at the Ambassadors reply is totally shameful, indefensible and unprofessional. What is the BBC coming too.
Jurgen Klingemann, UK I wish Stephen Sackur's interview with Pakistan's Ambassador to the US Mr. Husain Haqqani on June 11 2009 was more penetrating. Notably, I wish Stephen had probed further on the farce that Pakistan is presenting to the world that it is fighting Al Qaeda.
Vembar K Ranganathan, USA It would be very nice if Stephen Sackur could blog (or inform us if he really does already). His views are very different from the prevailing 'presentism' oriented wisdom. Also the range of subjects and countries he has such deep insights about, it would make a very interesting read for intelligent audience (presumption intended)!
Anu, China I thoroughly enjoyed Hard Talk last night as Alon Pinkas reduced Stephen Sakur to ranting and raving like a spoiled undisciplined child.Sakur's rude manner of interupting an unflappable Pinkas demonstrates his need to be better prepared when speaking to a serious diplomat. Pinkas's cool controlled responses only serve ro reinforce Israel's position as the only serious partner for peace in the region.
Deborah Gruber, United States Just saw Sackur interview the CEO of Timberland. Sackur was brillliant. Well done. Why doesn't he replace some of the deadwood at Newsnight? Esler and Wark are useless.
Ravinder, UK Today we saw hard talk on bbc world with economist Paul Krugman. The interviewer did a an impressive job. Krugman was however not at his best. He seemed defensive.
menon.nrk The so-called interview of Paul Krugman by Stephen Sackur exemplified all the qualities of a bad interview for journalism class 101. Here was a chance to hear out a Nobel Laureate economist, but Krugman never got a chance to finish a thought, thanks to Sackur's incessant interruptions, many of them coming a half sentence into Krugman's replies. Sackur should be pulled aside to be told that the guest, not the interviewer, should be given the floor. Otherwise, viewers will continue to be irritated and denied and frustrated by Sackur's tough-guy act. We tuned in for information not a fight. Obnoxiousness and the number of questions peppered at a guest do not an accomplished interviewer make. How I would like for Stephen Sackur to enjoy the experience of being interviewed by Stephen Sackur in his full self-preening mode. I will not return to HARDtalk to find out what's on the mind of the guests.
E-Jay, United States Just seen an interview with [Mohamed Omaar]. What was your journalist's aim? Does he not want to see a Somalia free of extreme ideology. Does he not want to see peace come to Somalia. The way he grilled that minister was not called for. The Government in Mogadishu needs all the international help it can get to establish a stable Somalia based on the rule of law. Extreme ideologies that are intolerant to the freedom of thought, speech and the freedom to worship should not be allowed to flourish.
Will, US You are doing a brilliant job Stephen, i record your show each day... I enjoy the fantastic interviews, keep up the good work and discussing the worlds current affairs!
Steve Reilly, Australia I have just listened to tonight's HARDtalk. To be honest with you, no one should believe any African leader be it rebel leader or head of state. They are all after their own self-interest. This man from Darfur resistant front was just talking crap. Every rebel in Africa is fighting to gain power nothing to do with the common interest of the African people. What the ICC has to do is to send a special military force to Darfur and capture all those involved in crime against humanity. This action is long over due. Africans are their own enemies and I am not sorry to say this. We have a long way to go to achieve any kind of peace and unity in the continent as a whole.
Amoro, uk Mr. Stephen Sackur is wonderful man, a great man and a great journalist. It is indeed an honor for me to write a few words on the great journalist. I do like the way in which Stephen asked questions to Alain Doss and General Paul Kagame. This is not the first time watch the Hardtalk show and I always dream speak out to this man who knows how to do his job and meet the BBC expectations. Most of people know Stephen Sackur is a respectful interviewer. I saw him hitting hard on Paul Kagame’s policy of assassinating he’s own people. At the same time, I would like to see and meet him. The problem is that I am one of those who at each daily basis, I and my fellow citizens are hammered and hammered by Paul Kagame and his Tutsi- led government repeating that Hutus are genocidaires and Interahamwe while he’s the brain behind the Rwanda genocide. To explain this doesn’t take much time if really the world wants to know the Truth about the tragic 1994 events. I am glad, that BBC has Hardtalk and congratulations to Mr Sackur for his great-unbiased interview relating to the critical Rwandan issues.
Jean-Christophe Nizeyimana, The Netherlands The interview with David Kilcullen was most insightful and educative Hardtalk exchange yet, on the complexities of anti-terror operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Hardtalk should be commended for bringing on a pseudo-military actor, who views the problems not just through the prism of a military solution, but also as a socio-political challenge.
Sriram, India Stephen Sackur's HARDtalk with Des Browne regarding Sri Lanka was just excellent. It was High Time to have focused on both sides of the story in this long long war. The entire world should be happy and grateful to the Sri Lankan armed forces to have erased off one of the most ruthless terrorist organizations in the history of the world. It is rather ironic to observe that not a single western country and specially the U.S.A. have not congratulated the Sri Lankan government of the victory.
Douglas, Norway Debbie Purdy is very right in what she is fighting for, we should be allowed to do as we please to ourselves, it is our own business what we do or dont do with our lives as long as our actions have no effects on others then we should be allowed to do as we wish with our lives. People who have decided they dont want to be on the planet any more are entitled to end it if they please, it is their business and no one elses. We should be so arrogant as to tell people what they should do with their lives. We have one chance at it and its ours to decide what we do with it.
conor ryan, Australia Just before your emission with that courageous female Afghan MP, our De Volkskrant had published a letter from me, saying that a rude but may be effective solution for that country would be to withdraw the foreign troops and give every woman, who strives at emancipation, a kalashnikov....
willem hoogendijk, holland Despite Stephen Sakur’s repeated requests to state why he would not talk to the HAMAS, Robert Serry avoided the question like the plague. As far as I am concerned, any UN Peace Envoy, including including Tony Blair, who is happy to talk (kow tow) to Israel but refuses to talk to the democratically elected HAMAS, lacks any credibility whatsoever. Serry went on to state that, “The Palestinian Government must renounce violence”. What about Israeli violence? No mention of this. Israel has ignored practically every UN resolution ever passed and, despite evidence to the contrary, totally rejects any accusations of war crimes. Why is it that when Iraq and other countries behave like this, they have sanctions imposed and/or get bombed into the Stone-age? When millions of unemployed Americans are walking the streets in search of a meal, they might start to question America’s massive financial and military support for Israel; that day is not too far off.
Maurice Horsburgh, Australia I would just like to say it was a pleasure watching the recent hardtalk episodes on the Congo and hope you stay "on the road" for a bit longer. The mix of relatively in depth political history with a high quality piece of journalism including interviews with a range of people was very informative. I hope to see more programs like this on the BBC, it's a nice visual version of the high quality foreign affairs that are normally restricted to radio 4.
Pautan, United Kingdom I congratulate Mr. Sackur on the interview of the rape victims in Eastern Congo. The questions were direct while allowing the women their dignity, and the manner was respectful. Being able to tell the story, however haltingly and with many unspoken answers is part of the healing, although one is never cured. Perhaps it is his youth but Mr Sackur didn't seem to recall that the Russians in fighting the Germans used rape as a weapon of punishment and subjugation. Not much is written about that - (white on white?) - An account can be read in "A Woman in Berlin", an account by an unamed journalist who was a victim. There was an allusion to the boy soldiers who were "abused". What about the boys and men who were raped as a way of waging war and what are their chances of survival? Do they become the rapists? I was taken by the workers (the African women and the German worker) and their work with men. Sometimes the rapists become casualties of their own violence. The program was excellent but posed many more questions.
W bowden It is very misleading to diagnose Congo's problems looking just at the reality as it is today. A speaker highlighted the gender relationship problem and another a hope that by 2020 things would be ok. But I would like to take you back 15 years when Mobutu Sese Seko ruled Congo as a dictator. Even though he wasn't a great leader, Congo was utterly peaceful and quiet. I lived in nearby Botswana at the time and knew family friends who lived there and were enjoying a good quality of life. Overthrow of the dictator and the political opening up brought about conflict between factions for power grab. Wasn't Congo better under the dictator? I think Congo's solution does not lie in myriad miniscule community initiatives but a strong central leadership. Yes solutions are possible but we have to be willing to challenge our political assumptions.
Anu, China Being an insomniac has its advantages - I always see Hard Talk at 4.30 am!! This morning with the poet laureate was very good and I shall start reading poetry again.
Frank Thompson, UK I am very pleased that Hard Talk present Mr Stephen is taking the show to the war torn Eastern D.R.C, I hope during these series we will have insight into the real issues in that part of the great region. Two thumbs up for the team of Hard Talk.
Dr. Ngayihembako Sambili Daniel, Uganda I always miss the Hardtalk in the TV due to timining which is not convenient for me. After listening to videos of William Hopper and Nandan Nilekani I realise it is a brilliant program. I will hate to miss any of the Hard Talk. I had been listening to Hardtalk many years earlier and lost interest when the presenter changed, to be honest Stephen is fantastic
SHAHUL HAMEED, OMAN Hard Talk with Nandan. My personal view point is Nandan answered the questions to the depth at the right level. I liked the way he dealt with these 3 topics in particular expecially when pressed further - Corporate Governance in India with Satyam, Elections and changes in the system and Innovations versus regional politics(NANO). he was outstanding with the big picture. The questions were very relevant eventhough I felt it was getting a little stretched especially on corporate governance - we see frauds everywhere around the world, why single out? Overall a pleasant watch...
Koushik Radhakrishnan, India Well done Matthews Phosa! I could only laugh at Stephen Sackur's completely ignorant questions about our budget! Give us some credit!
maria benade, south africa What a pleasure watching the Finance Minister of S.Africa make short work of the idiot who does the interview. His idea of an interview is to belittle, demean and harrass his subject, whom in most cases are by far his intellectual superior.
Herb McEwen, Canada I have just finished watching the Hardtalk interview of John Bruton and I have to say that I was not impressed at all! The interviewer was far too ready to interrupt Mr. Bruton with irrelevant questions and often didn't even allow him to finish. I was particularly annoyed by the way the interview finished - as the interviewer raised a "final thought" and didn't even allow Mr. Bruton to finish answering before cutting him off mid-sentence - very rude, very poor, very unprofessional - unwatchable - I won't be tuning in again!
Ronan Scanlan, London, UK Just few lines to express all my admiration and appreciation for your interviewer Stephen Sackur: his interviewing style is kind and charming but serious and direct, never undaunted by"power". The result is always an impressive interview. I love it! It's really a great delight for me to hear interviewers like him and Mrs Badawi as well, especially because I see Hard Talk from Italy where, as you probably already know, freedom of the press is slowly but inexorably dying. You never really appreciate things until you are losing it! Thanks.
Cristina, Italy My compliments to the presenter intervewing Mr Lebedev! undoubtedly Mr Lebedev is and will always be loyal to Putin! Mr Lebedev could not manage to answer a single question without sidetracking. he was carefully chosing what to say and when entering "unknown territory" talked about being a member of the opposition, trying to find at least one good reason of not being 100% pro Putin! shame!
Ella, UK Dear Sir, this comment concerns "Hard Talk"-Jackie Stewart and in particular Dimbleby. Your audience wants to listen to your guests without constant interuption with un-english impoliteness, rudeness and discourtesy. Taking lessons in "discussion" from Fox news is not the BBC's way! Surely some manners and good breeding, if not timing may be in order. His father would never have behaved in such a loutish manner. Very disillusioned with how far the BBC has fallen in terms of their idea of entertainment.Watching is like listening to someone scratching their nails on a blackboard! Even CNN is looking better value. Wake up, you can do better! An Englishman living in North America.
Adrian Miles, Canada I love hardtalk because of the tense arguments and the feeling that they are hitting a spot. However, the interviewers often push their agenda and phrase questions in manners that try to force a certain answer out of guests. When the guests try to rephrase the question, the interviewer persists and asks for a direct answer to his question. Unfortunately, one must admit that the questions are loaded in a way that a direct answer without first rephrasing the question may be misleading to viewers, putting the guest in a light that the interviewer has prepared and hoped to get him/her in. This happened in the Lebetov interview. I am afraid that this sometimes may make the guest appear to stumble or not have composure. The interviewer also finally likes to end with a direct question that cannot be answered so directly without elaboration. After the "stumbling" and if the guest does not end with a direct answer, it may look like the guest has been trying to evade the issue or has been somewhat exposed. This is unfortunate. Mainly I am referring to this same Lebedev interview since it is the most fresh one in my mind. Nonetheless, perhaps it is this that makes the arguments exciting and engaging. Relative to other talkshows and other interviewers, I must say that HARDtalk interviewers have a much higher standard and commit less play on words or logical fallacies than those which I believe are just plain journalists. Starting for a framework that the BBC should be perfect due to its great reputation, I wish HARDtalk would be better simply because it is one of the best talkshows and I would love to see it in perfection with no blame. Without starting from that point however, the style of HARDtalk is very enjoyable and engaging. Good work!
Matthew Png, Singapore, USA Honestly speaking, i really enjoy HARDtalk, especially with the Former president of Nigeria with his cool presenter..
Baba kaka, Nigeria I generally appreciate HardTalk, and understand that part of the concept is that the interviewed shouldn't get away without answering properly to the questions. Unfortunately, however, the presenters often seem to be so eager to prove that they're tough enough to ensure this that forget to let the interviewed explain themselves. Instead they constantly interrupt and speak themselves. It is VERY annoying. PLEASE stick to INTERVIEWING RATHER THAN INTERRUPTING!
Niels Ladefoged, Belgium I was in Dubai last week and watched a "lady" interview the prime Minister of Thailand. I was really embarassed to be English the interviewer was rude spoke over the gentleman and hardly gave him chance to answer anything whilst reading out parts of articles which accused him of numerous crimes obviously without any proof I would like to see the BBC give unbiased interviews especially when they are being shown abroad.
Trisha Hamilton, UK Well done to your presenter who is currently interviewing the Malay minister - promote her!
John Hogarth, Uk Thank you for a fascinating interview Jonathan ! You almost had him blushing when you pressed him on Putin ! I'm not sure on your evidence I'd trust him ! I'll bet you he could spill the beans on Polonium as a Micky Finn ! You fill Stephen's boots to perfection ! There is a hint of Richard Dimbleby in your style !!?
Kish Hahn, Canada I understand of course that a program like Hard Talk is supposed to ask confrontational questions, but to oppose its guests--as during the Alain Badiou interview recently--with asinine incredulity and often conspicuous stupidity might be taking the gimmick too far. I think Badiou is a deeply problematic thinker, but to invite him on to the program and then assail him with hearsay and rumour about what people in France and "around the world" may or may not think of dumbed-down summations of his arguments is frankly startling. I feel embarrassed for Sackur, whose line of questioning--especially towards the end of the interview where he breaks into a desperate caricature of French intellectual culture in the 1960s--was nothing more than a critique of his own limited intelligence. I don't know how anyone can take this guy seriously. Asking probing questions is one thing, pretending to discuss left wing politics with the twin neon signs "Stalin" and "Mao" flashing behind your vacuous journalistic glare is another.
Michael Kindellan, UK I am an American expat living in Stuttgart, Germany. Your program with Ms. Watkins and Mr. Moore was very informative. An investigation of the link between lobbying activities and campaign contributions to legislators would reveal a contributing cause of the current economic crisis and similar situations over the past 30 years.
Marc Spuller, Germany "The LOVE of money is the root of all evil." Excellent Hardtalk - again! How do you do it Stephen!
Kish Hahn. Waterloo. Canada I really appreciate the work of your presenter, the straight forward questions and all the team. There are more negative news coming from Nigeria than positive ones. Governor Raji Fashola of Lagos state, Nigeria is one of the few positive news. I would be much glad so will be million others if You can bring him on air for us his admirers and for the world to see at least one very good leader, who within his first 600 days has done more for the state than 8 years of others. If eventually he is brought to air, Please let me know so as not to miss the episode. More grease to your elbow.
Olakunle Kadiri, Nigeria. Hardtalk is a very colourful program (the name connotes something else though)- you discuss politics, economics, arts, psychology... everything. And the most amazing thing is Stephen Sackur's versatility - he is insightful no matter what the subject. Few episodes back he mentioned that political activism has sort of died in music and fine arts. I pondered over this comment for such a long time and thought yeah he is right you know. Apart from its name I love everything about the show!
Anu, China The interview with Burns was extraordinary. Both Burns and Stephen were at their best.
Sreenivasan Ravichandran, India Mr. Burns is so full of state-department-speak DNA, e.g. his protective statements of George Bush, that he is completely useless in his analysis of what is really happening in the Middle East, and consequently is a danger to the next generation of diplomats studying under him at Harvard's Kennedy School. Fortunately, having lived in Cambridge for ten years during my own graduate school days, and having even studied Islamic history with MIT's Philip Khoury at Harvard's Extension university, I can say I have hope that many intelligent students are already challenging Mr. Burns right in his own classroom. But in the U.S. these days, who knows?
Carl Zaisser, Vienna, Austria Fascinating complex interview with Charlize Theron, originally from Benoni in the Transvaal ! As a South African Canadian who has experienced a very similar metamorphosis in my life she touched a nerve. Wonderful work Stephen !
Kish Hahn, Waterloo, Canada I watched the Hardtalk with Mahinda Samarasinghe. First I would thank Mr. Sackur for his vociferous questions over humanitarian and media abuse. It is very explicit that the minister is well prepared to say "that is not true" for any allegation. The majority of Sri Lankans are expecting an enduring end to the conflict, but the government propaganda ploy deceives them that it can be reached through military victory.
Nandini, Italy I think it's the most popular programme ever, and that is because of Stephen himself. I have never missed it, not even one time.
Mutaz Ahmed Frieha, Sudan Stephen Sackur should get his facts right before bombarding his guest. We Malaysians know much better than you and understand what's going around in our country.. We will always and forever be proud of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed no matter what the circumstances might be. Truth prevails and he always states the fact which is true whether you like it or not .. you totally made a fool of yourself Stephen. We Malaysians, were laughing away at your questions and responses. Thanks for making it spicy and exciting. But the truth is, you can never grill our Beloved Dr. Mahathir.
Nallya, Malaysia While I do appreciate that Mr. Sackur and his Hard Talk production team manage consistently to atttract interesting and worthwhile guests, I feel compelled to inform the BBC in all seriousness that his interviewing style can drive viewers to complete distraction. He is rude, abrasive, speaks too quickly, and worst of all, he must be the single most INTERRUPTIVE interviewer I've seen on television in my entire life! .. It is usually a tremendous struggle to even find out the guest's actual point of view with Mr. Sackur-Interruptus as host! I've yet to see a guest manage to get anything resembling a quasi-complete answer to a question out of his or her own mouth before!
Todd Hill, Canada I have just watched your impressive interview with Mahinda Samarasinghe. Dear Stephen Sackur, do you believe that whatever he claims is the truth?? Will you be doing any more interviews?? Since I can remember my parents used to listen to the BBC world service on the radio, they used to tell me if you want to know the truth it is the only place, but now it seems we have to think twice about listening to BBC. Why???? I am grateful to you for the time you have dedicated to the Tamils of Sri Lanka, but Mahinda Samarasinghe was mocking you and the BBC.
Vinay, UK The HardTalk interview where Zeinab Badawi (an excellent interviewer) interviewed Dambisa Moyo and Alison Evans was one of the most inspiring events I have ever witnessed in my long life. Having led 2 aid missions and been on others I knew we are not providing assistance of value to the recipient country. Zeinab "turned the light on". Africa needs help,but not the help we have been providing. Having had my eyes opened by Dambisa I could think now of a hundred ways we could provide assistance that would empower the country instead of weakening it. For instance, to overcome the flight of young African professionals to western countries, we could provide monetary top ups to their local salary to make staying in their own country more attractive. And, of course, Europe MUST remove trade barriers to African trade. Europe gives a pittance in highly publicised assistance while causing massive damage through protectionism. Local empowerment must be the new motto. Good on you for hosting such a wonderful and important programme. It should be made available to all senior high school classes.
Dr Kelvin Duncan, New Zealand i really enjoy watching 'hardtalk', i think it's a great programme with a world class presenter in steven sackur...
abid, uk Aid to Africa is a waste of money, a waste of time and a waste of resources. Corruption and "tribe before flag" attitudes run rampant. Until that continent is willing to solve its own problems, we need to stay out. Let whining rock stars like bono and his ilk use their money to bail out that cess pool if they want. Leave my tax dollars alone.
Rose, Canada I have just watched your impressive interview with Mahinda Samarasinghe. It is evident that the Sri Lankan Government and its regime will ""Categorically" deny any human rights abuse that they are committing. There is no doubt that this interview is a full embarrassment for the Sri Lankan government. He mentioned that the Doctor from Mullaitivu who had made a statement has denied ever making this statement from this its obvious he had been interrogated by the government for making that very comment. I have to say today that your interview will be much appreciated by all who believe in Human rights and all who want to put an end to the suffering in Sri Lanka. Every question you asked he either "categorically denied" or said "that is not true".
Shamini, UK I wish to thank you for your excellent interviewing of the Minister, who kept avoiding the important questions asked by you. If they have nothing to hide why are they not allowing foreign TV stations into the areas where the Tamils are being kept by force? Once again, well done for bringing it to the attention of the World!
Vijay Thamotheram, Bermuda I saw the Hard Talk show on the 3rd Of march 2009 Steve Sackur's interview with the Sri Lankan minister Mahinda Samaraweera. After watching this I have to ask Steve Sackur You were asking about SL governemt killing Civilians . When LTTE killed so many civilians in Colombo and other part of the country is it okay. When LTTE Opened fire on Buddhist monks and people who came to pray and killed about 500 of them where were you and these so called human right groups and these other NGO and other country's. And When LTTE attack Kandy Dalada maligawa. It's okay for other country's to fight the terrorist but every one want's Sri Lanka to talk peace with terrorists. Why is USA& UK fighting the terrorists Because they do not want any attacks in their countries and they don't talk peace with terrorist and why should SL Government have to talk with the terrorists as well. In a small country like SL there is no land to divide. What do you have to say about these so called NGO's given so much of equipment to LTTE and now our army is finding these with there sticker on them saying donated by so and so. Now that LTTE in there last days some country's want to save them. How many times our president told them come for peace talk but they said they are ready to fight till the last minute in December 2008. Now there losing the game there crying for the whole world to save them. And next time when you interview some Let that person speak without interruption ever question you ask.
Indika, Canada Sri Lankan's disaster management and human rights minister Mahinda Samarasinghe states in his interview on Hardtalk that all Tamil civilians under age 60 in Sri Lanka are potential terrorists. This clearly shows how much the Sri Lankan government lacks respect for international law and the basic human rights for the Tamils there not to mention the defence minister denying to all quotations from NGOs and persons from the UN in Sri Lanka. It is clear the international community must act now and put an end to this disrespect of human rights, WAKE UP UN!
Harsh, Canada The interview with Mahinda Samarasinghe show us how much LIE the Sri Lankan Government can tell us to hide the Genocide of Tamils. The only word which came out is "that's wrong Steven"...Does that mean BBC has only wrong information??? Only this year 22 journalist have been killed in Sri Lanka, so far. Sri Lankan Soldier Rape and Kill Tamil woman every Day in the other occupied area. Is it that kind of safety the Singhalese Government is going to give for the Tamil People?? Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe is not only the Minister of disaster but he is a disaster himself. Minister Keheliya Rambukwel says that the SL army are close enough that the LTTE cant fire shells on them, But the LTTE can fire shells on the closer to them Civilians??? How is that possible? Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Darfur...and now Sri Lanka. We have to Stop these right now. NO MORE GENOCIDE.
Thomas, France I watched HARD TALK today! A Fantastic interview with Mahindra Samarasinghe by Steven...His questions were direct, realistic and instincts of Tamil people(Civilians) expectations as well! I heartily appreciate on behalf of TAMIL people!!! Many cheers to Steven!!! But I wonder, how did he missed asking the question "Being a Human rights Minister(Mahindra Samarasinghe),how could you evacuate the civilian people?" since UN Rules says that, "No people should be evacuated from the home town" as well!!! Moreover, i would like to confront my opinion... The minister says that they're fighting against terrorism and helping out the civilians(Tamil's) but if this is the real scenario, why should the people here in London and every part of the world shouldering(protest/rally)Tamil people's genocide in Sri Lanka! I expected him to ask this question as well! Many Thanks to Steven and BBC!!!
Kaviraj Shanmuganatham, London, United Kingdom. Dear Stephen Sackur On 31st Dec08 you were describing the achievements of Hardtalk through year 2008 and you said that some people mentioned that it was sometimes like "a vigorous interrogation". I agree with this opinion but still I like it though!!... specially when you showed it clearly in your interview with Rick Davis manager of John McCain's campaign. Good luck for 2009.
Mohammed Aljanabi, Iraqi citizen-Damascus I have just been watching the interview with Congressman James Clyburn, the thing that struck me most was his answer re health care. He seemed stuck on the idea that you needed a job to have health care here in Europe (and also in Australia) we have health care even though we don't have a job. I felt he wasn't pushed enough on that question .. Good interview and interesting man.
Ailsa Rodrigues, Portugal(Australian) What a privilege for Steven Sackur to interview Congressman Jim Clyburn. His depth of knowledge about black history, his candour, his lack of bitterness and his emotional response to Obama's election to the Presidency was both touching and uplifting. I hope we see more of Congressman Clyburn in the new Democratic Administration.
Caroline Kennedy, Costa Rica Stephen Sackur is a good man, asking hard questions to the Israeli side and to the Arab side. He did a great interview of Anita Tucker before the Gaza withdrawal in 2005. Now things have worsened greatly .. It would be good to see him do another interview to see how things have changed and what the israeli govt is or isn't doing about it. It's a humanitarian crisis.
Phil, Britain It would have been great this morning during the interview with Rick Davis if Stephen Sackur had shut up and listened to the answers to his questions. We might have learned something other than the fact that he appears to like the sound of his own voice. Hard Talk but no listening. Not for the first time. Rule 1 for interviewers. Ask one question, listen to answer. Any matters arising, ask another question. Listen to answer. Any matters arising, treat as above etc. If not, move on to next question and proceed as above. We, the public, want to hear what the interviewee has to say, not the views of the Beeb employee.
Nick Howells, UK I very much enjoyed the interview Stephen had with Vladimir Ashkennazy. A pure delight to watch! I was struck by his humility & kindness that was so evident as he spoke. The sheer 'joie de vivre' he feels is evident in his face. Stephen seemed to have difficulty understanding how Mr. Ashkenazy felt when he asked him, toward the end of the interview, whether he feels competitive & what he still hopes to accomplish. I can perfectly understand the answer. Not all of us are driven by a sense of competition with others. Some, like Mr. Ashkenazy & myself, would love to see everybody excel at what they love without being compared to others. I always wanted to be the best - to get top grades or win accolades even - but I sincerely wished that for others too. I wanted all to be the best. I sense Mr. Ashkenazy feels similar. Thank you for a wonderful interview & Stephen's face revealed how much he enjoyed conducting it too. I came away from this feeling so good!
Judy, Canada I have been watching several news stations covering the recent Gaza-Israeli hostilities. Tonight I witnessed one of the finest interviews I have seen in weeks. Zeinab was cool, calm, collected. She probed Saeb repeatedly, and did so in a polite manner. Unfortunately for the viewers, Mr. Erekat had several opportunities to address the American audience with some intelligent, and reasonable replies. I was disappointed in the way he did not address most of Zeinab's questions
David Friedfeld NY, USA I believe that Mr Stephen Sackur is a good man with a great show that helps people see what's going on in the world with more then one point of view. I thank him for not putting his own point of view when he is in an interview because in today's media like on Fox News they have their own point of view and they don't want anybody to ask questions.
Hamad yousif, Kuwait Your interview was the most interesting program I've watched during the course of the latest crisis in Gaza. Congratulations for having so professionally exposed at this particularly relevant time the true intentions of Hamas, with regard to both Fatah and Israel. I look forward to watching future interviews of yours.
john, thailand
Disclaimer: The BBC may edit your comments and cannot guarantee that all emails will be published.
|
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~43~RS~)
E-mail this to a friend
Printable version
© MMIX
Bookmark with:
What are these?