On Jul 2, 4:32*am, "Bob Terwilliger" >
wrote:
> Je us wrote about Larry King:
>
> > I unfortunately have managed to see him quite a few times over the
> > years. I've always been puzzled why he seems to be regarded as some
> > kind of *legendary interviewer... or something. I always thought his
> > interviews were rather insipid and pointless, really.
>
> I think perhaps he's highly regarded because so many celebrities would not
> give interviews to anybody else. And the reason they would insist on King
> doing the interview is that he would allow them to say whatever they wanted
> to say; he didn't ask them questions which would make them look bad. IOW he
> would steer the interview toward whatever message the celebrity wanted to
> impart to the public (and what more could you want from an interview?).

That's about right. King is even worse than Charlie Rose. Good
riddance.
>
> Bob

--Bryan