Abhishek Aravind IEM1201N Group 2

Comparison contrast paper 20 September 2012

In comparing Malcolm Gladwells interview on Charlie Rose and Walter Isaacsons interview on 60 minutes in the context of broadcast media, it can be ascertained that, in evaluating recorded interviews, the rubrics to authenticity must be adjusted to accommodate that they are edited and furthermore, that interviews as such, inherently include a system of turn taking and in so doing, the participants are steered towards a particular topic of conversation. In the context of broadcast media, Montgomery provides general rules(Montgomery, 2001, p.402)i to validate the authenticity of broadcast talk. Malcolm Gladwells interview only deviates from these rules in that the topic of discussion is premeditated, which as mentioned before is inherent to an interview. Additionally, there is a system of turn taking in that it follows a question and answer format. Here again though, the counter argument can be made that the format of the interview simply aids in keeping to the topic of discussion and does not greatly influence the content and thereby the authenticity of the talk, emphasized when Gladwell discusses the relation between mammography and bombing(6:03)ii. While it does not directly answer the question that Rose presents, it presents information that is related to their topic of discussion. We identify this as fresh talk as it represents input that is not coerced and is of Gladwells own construction. Isaacson, likewise, presents his own input, as is seen early on in the interview when discussing the surroundings in Jobs upbringing; his interpretation of how being born in Silicon Valley yet living a wild hippie lifestyle influenced who he would become and that it would play a part in his success (3:45)iii. However, another notable contrast in the authenticity of the two interviews comes to fore not when analysing the articles with regard to their adherence to Montgomerys rules but rather when considering if they adhere to Goffmans underlying definition of authentic talk, in that the speaker represents a union between animator, author and principal (p.399). Gladwell, in this definition, is animator and author of his discourse but above all, he is also the principle in that his discourse represents his own opinion and thought and does not hinge on that of others. Isaacson however, is forced, largely due to the nature of his interview, to mirror the opinion of Steve Jobs. Isaacson does provide his own interpretation of Jobs life. This is observed in his recollection of Jobs experience at ATARI(5:44), describing him as abrasive. He also goes on to describe the conflict that he, Isaacson, perceives in Jobs dichotomy of personality, the conflict between hippie and charismatic salesman. However, in his telling of how Jobs viewed the selling of the blue box as the actual beginning of Apple(4:38), it can be observed that he is forced to often draw on Jobs opinions, in the same vein as writing his biography, retelling many of the conversations he had with Jobs. The context of Isaacsons interview forces him to focus on the opinion of Steve Jobs, either in criticism or in agreement. From an immanentist viewpoint, it could be gathered that the extent of interaction with Jobs positions him, aligning with the principle of Jobs to a certain extent (Davies and Harre,1990, p.44)iv ; noting at the same time that this alignment is not complete. This contrast mirrors respectively, the contrast between the different
parts of Isaacsons interview recitation and fresh talk.

The point of discussion therefore moves not from which of these two articles are authentic to the degree of authenticity in the articles. Gladwells interview is unarguably authentic in that he represents the union of all three definitions of speaker. Isaacsons position, while being unarguably author and animator, is debatable regarding that of principle. While he draws on the opinion of Jobs, he just as often provides originally constructed interpretation of the same. In this sense we see that the idea of principle breaks down to two points, one of source, providing the original discourse and the other of interpreter, constructing an authentic viewpoint of the source; and in this chain of thought, it can be observed therefore, that Isaacsons interview also represents fresh talk.
i

Montgomery, M. (2001). Defining `authentic talk'. Discourse Studies, 3, 397-405. doi: 10.1177/1461445601003004004 Retrieved from http://dis.sagepub.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/content/3/4/397 ii Rose, C. Writers on Writing. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMACNQPrWDM iii Isaacson, W. 60 Minutes: Steve Jobs Special. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X64BijQA7Sw iv Davies, B., & Harr, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 4363. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174.x Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/doi/10.1111/j.14685914.1990.tb00174.x/pdf