Posted by The Editors
on November 4, 2009, 5:45 pm, in reply to "Chomsky beats Sackur by narrow margin"
At times it really did feel like Sackur was giving a speech rather than conducting an interview - at one point it was so extreme I thought Chomsky might actually comment on it.
The whole focus of every BBC interview I've ever seen with Chomsky has been to nail him as an extremist; primarily by trying to trap him with the "moral equivalence" argument and the idea that he is crazily negative about the US, failing to recognise any of its virtues. Other people are challenged, invited to explain their views - Chomsky is invited to reveal himself as a nutjob.
Sackur reminded me of a boxer who had carefully studied Chomsky's ringcraft. He'd obviously seen the brutal footage from 1996 of Andrew Marr plastered all over the canvas of BBC 2's The Big Idea. I think he decided to tie Chomsky up in the clinches and hang on as much as possible - hence the endless talking. Chomsky still caught him with a real haymaker on the Afghan war: "one of the most immoral acts in modern history".
Eds
Responses: