The reason people like her is that she gets them interested in the guest. Not many interviewers can do that. She'll interview some blues artist you've never heard of and the next thing you know you're looking them up on Youtube.

Personally, I would credit the guests themselves for generating interest within the audience.

I've never listened to Terry Gross... but taking your and parent's comment together, it sounds like she's someone who has researched the guest well and actively directs the interview in a particular direction - ie. tries to craft a compelling narrative.

Unfortunately, no. That’s my pet peeve about Terry Gross, she often gets things wrong and the guest has to correct her. It often sounds like she didn’t prep for the interview at all.

I'd heard at one point that she specifically cram-preps for interviews the night before, so it's all still fresh and interesting in her head. (Versus overly-researched and boring)

The article alludes to something similar, in the context of her interview pace.

>> [after work, she and her husband] go out for dinner [...], and then Gross will continue working at home, preparing for the next day’s interview in the living room. She clarifies her thoughts first thing in the morning in the shower. [...] It’s important to be away from her notes when she does this. She emerges from the shower with her ‘‘major destination points.’’ Then she goes to her office and refers back to her notes — sheafs of facts; dog-eared, marked-up books — for the details. Then she does the interview. And then she is inundated by the other daily tasks of running a radio show. The next day, she does it all again.

Getting the guest to correct and expound could be an intentional technique to make it so she isn't just reading off a biography to them while they just affirm each statement.

Could be. "Anything is possible," as they say. Personally, I'd apply Occam's Razor and say it's more likely it's not intentional and these are bona-fide mistakes on her part.

Seems like enough folks here are saying she’s terrible… makes me think her brand of drunken kung-fu might be more accidental than deliberate.

Perhaps a difference in what people are looking for. I don't listen to interviews for content discovery -- there is already a glut of content. Rather, I expect interviews to tell me substantially more about a figure I am already familiar with.

You're suspcious of the fawning over her? Don't keep me in the dark! What's really going on with how millions of listeners, her colleagues, and NPR have felt about her and her work for decades?

I suspect that Terry Gross, like NPR, is a brand that people wear to advertise "I'm smart." That's what's really going on with what her audience feels about her. That in turn explains what's really going on with what NPR and her colleagues there feel about her.

Respectfully, people who disagree with you might have valid reasons for doing so. It's incurious to remove their agency by ascribing ulterior motives to them.

I haven't removed their agency. I've only exercised my own. You're free to do the same however you like.

   - They like something you don't
   - They like it because others do
   - It's thus not worth considering more deeply why they like it

Did I map that unfairly?

No, it isn't unfair. It's just not accurate. A more accurate portrait would be:

- People make educated guesses about the internal states-of-mind and emotional states of other people all the time. We do it with friends, lovers, marketplace counter-parties, poker adversaries, etc., and there's nothing inherently wrong about that.

- I have made an educated guess about the internal state-of-mind and emotional states of "Fresh Air" listeners, not about any particular individual but about the ensemble. I could be wrong, of course. That's the nature of guesses, even educated ones.

- Having already considered it with enough depth to satisfy myself, it's not worth it to me to consider it more deeply at this time. Of course, I'm willing to revisit this policy in light of new evidence.

Anecdata: I enjoy it from time to time because I feel Terry Gross does a better job of listening to her guests' answers and asking follow-up questions on what they're expressing.

Most interviewers seem to have a rigid playbook, and effectively treat their guests' responses as scripted theater. Ask the pre-written question, allow the guest to perform for the listener, then move on.

E.g. the patently boring "Tell me about your new movie" > (canned story) > (laugh together) > (next topic)

IMHO, one of Terry's best skills as an interviewer is listening and being actively curious.

I believe they just did

This is why every large U.S. city is full of people blasting Fresh Air out their car as they drive down the street.

When I was young we signaled our love of Terry Gross by blasting her interviews on large radios when we walked down the street in our baggy pants. These radios were called "boom boxes" and they were wonderful.

I've recently listened to several Terry Gross interviews, and the David Bowie interview stands out to me as particularly bad. I think she frequently makes "educated guesses" about how her guests will respond about their thoughts, feelings, and motivations, and will have follow up questions prepared based on these anticipated responses. When she's right, things go well. When she's wrong, she just keeps plowing forward with homerun swings that completely whiff. She sometimes seems quietly incredulous that other people have different values and methods of reasoning, or that their perception of themselves does not match her research.

To be fair and not negative exclusively, I think she's very good at knowing how long to let people talk (some of this might be editing), very good at creating a "human connection" with the subjects, and reasonably good at keeping things interesting.

That's intriguing. I recently heard (and commented here [0] on) the Bowie interview, which I thought was great, and revelatory. Prior to hearing that interview, I wouldn't have believed someone if they told me Bowie would have preferred not to perform live: "Frankly, if I could get away with not having to perform, I'd be very happy."

I am pretty sure provoking small but significant revelations like that are what radio interviews are really good for. A talent for bringing those about, or simply allowing them to come about, is also why Howard Stern is regarded highly as an interviewer, I believe, although the two interviewers use very different techniques. Coincidentally, Gross's interview with Stern was pretty interesting. [1]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37629932

[1] https://www.npr.org/transcripts/722832463

Terry Gross is the worst interviewer I've ever heard. She seems to make a lot of the people she interviews uncomfortable, and not in a good way. Trent Reznor in particular seemed especially annoyed.

Terry is one of the best interviewers in the states. She tries to be informed and view things from her guest's perspectives.

She pushes people on uncomfortable answers, but does it respectfully.

Trent Reznor is not the best person to use for interpersonal communicating. He's famously kind of a prick.

Yes, I know my opinion will be unpopular. Terry's popularity confounds me.

That's interesting. Who would you consider a good interviewer?

For musicians, Rick Beato and Nardwuar the Human Serviette. Nardwuar’s preparatory research is always very deep, and musicians have repeatedly praised him for asking interesting questions outside the repetitive and superficial interviews they normally have to give when promoting a new album or tour. Since Beato made a career on YouTube where he doesn’t have to keep things as accessible to a general public as in legacy media, his interviews can get deeper into technical matters of music-making.

Nardwuar is interesting because he's a litmus test: some people just absolutely don't like him and his persona and his schtick, and the fact that he's clearly done more thorough research than any other interviewer they'll ever talk to doesn't move them. And then other people appreciate right away how unique he is.

It's funny that many of the punk rock types don't like a guy who is as DIY as Nardwuar.

lol. Not intend to be snarky. I’m middle-of-the-road on Terry Gross, but the idea using Trent Reznor’s (or Gene Simmons’ being another example) temperament as a yardstick on interpersonal protocol made my morning.

I was not expecting anyone to bring up the interview with Trent here, but that was kind of a dud to me... But I think maybe that's because I (still) run a NIN fan site. I was hoping to hear something new, but I'm the end, I realized I wasn't the target audience for that interview. Additionally, you can't knock it out of the park with every single interview you do.

It didn't stop me from enjoying her interviews, and even the famously off the rails Gene Simmons interview had me on her side. I'm glad it's not extreme reactions all the time on her show. It's usually good storytelling.

I personally gained a huge amount of respect for radio host interviews when I went on the Kevin and Bean show to talk about Nine Inch Nails. It was a surprise invitation, I figured "why not" but worried a bit that I'd stammer through spouting some dumb fanboy nonsense. But those dudes were like wizards in a way I still struggle to describe. They set me up, very naturally, and somehow extracted good responses out of me. When I hung up, I didn't feel like a socially awkward idiot, but rather felt like I played a part in a performance.

Anyway, I still like Terry Gross, sorry to hear you think she's the worst interviewer you've ever heard.

Ability to get along with Trent Reznor is certainly one yardstick you could measure people by.

I have felt the same. In the interviews I have listened to, she came across as robotic and fake. I know I am in the minority, but I can’t think of an interview of hers that I enjoyed.

Typo: "I'm [unimpressed]"

Are there any interviewers that don’t violate these pet peeves?

Michael Krasny of KQED ... I don't listen much to KQED since moving out of the Bay Area, but his questioning used to be both informed and succinct.

You might love Conversations with Tyler, the podcast hosted by Tyler Cowen. https://conversationswithtyler.com/

I used to enjoy Terry Gross and many other interviewers, but Tyler Cowen just blows past everyone by getting so much deeper so much faster than anyone else.

You can tell that the interviewers are often relieved to finally get asked real questions. Some people are put off by his style but I find it exhilarating.

What would you consider to be his best interview? Asking because I always found his interviews (I've only heard a few) to be quite dull, and that was a surprise since he is a pretty interesting guy.

Thanks! I'll check it out.

> I'm unimpressive

Your comments about Terry Gross seem completely off-base, but I nevertheless think you're being a little hard on yourself.

That's obviously a typo and one that I already addressed elsewhere. If you'd like to offer a serious response with actual substance, by all means go right ahead.