092606
I woke up early this morning in time to see Charlie Rose’s interview with Harvey Weinstein, film maker and co-founder of Miramax, live at the MIXX conference. Hooray for press credentials!
I know of Charlie mainly by reputation. I’ve only watched a couple of his interviews on PBS. I saw his interview with Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and Melinda Gates a few months ago, and I watched his interview with Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf last night. I’m still learning the art of the interview as I go, and it was interesting to see how an old veteran like Rose operated. I wanted to see what the man was like in-person.
He used no notes, but it was also obvious that he had done a lot of research beforehand. I have no idea how Charlie kept the questions he wanted to ask, as well as all the facts he had to remember straight. But he did it, and the interview seemed professional, but also light and effortless.
He rarely asked a question that could be answered by a “yes” or “no” answer. One of the first lessons I learned through experience was that “yes” or “no” questions rarely yield a useable or interesting answer.
He never backtracked. Each question was presented forcefully, but not harshly. It was all very professional. There was never any point at which I thought Charlie felt apologetic about asking something deeply personal.
He used flattery. Charlie constantly mentioned to Harvey how powerful, influential, and creative he was. Consequently, Harvey was not stingy with his answers.
He used exposition. Charlie constantly paused to expound on some fact or another in order to clarify a question, put it into context, or present information for the audience that they probably didn’t have.
He wasn’t afraid to interrupt. There were frequent times where Charlie would interrupt Harvey’s answer in order to clarify some part of it, or ask another question that built off of the answer.
He used questions that weren’t questions like “Why don’t you talk about…” or “Tell us about…” I’ve been on the fence about these sorts of questions, because I’ve been afraid that they would be too open-ended. Charlie almost always asked these sorts of questions in conjunction with exposition.
He enunciated well and expressed genuine interest in Harvey’s answers. This should be obvious, but I sometimes find myself asking questions of people mechanically, especially when I have three interviews in a row in a span of a few hours. It’s hard to stay curious and genuinely interested when you’re worried about a looming deadline.