Show Details for the week of February 27th, 2017

Posted on Updated on

On The Monitor this week:

Roy Eidelson on the psychology of the Trump administration and Gareth Porter on the White Helmets.

More about this week’s guests:

roy_eidelsonRoy Eidelson is a psychologist and an associate director of the Solomon Asch Center for Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict at Bryn Mawr College. He is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility and a member of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology. Recent Articles:

Bait and Switch: Psychology and Trump’s Voter Fraud Tantrums

The Predatory Presidency


picture-1420-1404305283Gareth Porter (@GarethPorter) is an independent investigative journalist and historian writing on US national security policy.  His latest book, Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare, was published in February 2014. Historian Andrew Bacevich called his latest book, ‘Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War’, published by University of California Press in 2005, “without a doubt, the most important contribution to the history of U.S. national security policy to appear in the past decade.” He has taught Southeast Asian politics and international studies at American University, City College of New York and the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

How a Syrian White Helmets Leader Played Western Media


2 thoughts on “Show Details for the week of February 27th, 2017

    Rok said:
    March 7, 2017 at 2:10 am

    Hi Mark,

    I’ve been tuning in to your show every week for a number of years now (maybe 7). I really appreciate how critical you are toward the narrative in the corporate media. Lately (for the last couple of years maybe), however, I’ve been noticing that I’m sometimes not sure whether your interviewing techniques are up to your own standards. I’m not sure whether what’s changed are your interviewing techniques or have I become more critical. I’ll give you a concrete example.

    Toward the end of the interview, you asked Roy Eidelson about the “Muslim travel ban” and why it didn’t include certain countries like Saudi and Egypt (I don’t think that was in his area of expertise but that’s not my point here). He presented a foot-in-the-door argument and wondered whether more influential countries would be added to the list later. This is not in line with how you see the situation (as I know having listened to your previous shows) and you, in the role of interviewer, presented the opinion that the ban is actually on Muslims from poor and war-stricken countries who might want to move to the US and not on Muslims from rich and influential countries who just want to visit.

    Agreeing with your point notwithstanding, I am wondering about how this differs from the interviewing techniques of right-wing pundits that you have yourself criticized. The gist of your critique was that those guys will invite to their show a guest they believe will tell the story they (the pundits) want to present, and if the guest does something other than that, will step in and tell “the right answer” themselves. It seems you did a similar thing here.

    It seems you play two roles in your show: news commentator for the first part of the show and interviewer in the rest. I don’t pretend to know any answers here but I’ve been wondering to what degree it’s ethical to let the two roles mix.

    I rely on your show for news to a great degree which is why I’ve lately been worrying whether I’m listening to your show to hear what I already believe, and whether you might sometimes be interviewing you guests for the same reason. I firmly believe your heart is in the right place and will continue listening to your show. Just wanted to chime in with a concern, that’s all.

      themonitor responded:
      April 17, 2017 at 11:35 am

      Hello Rok,
      Thank you for your comments and for being a regular listener. You are correct to point out that my opinion does influence how I conduct interviews. I don’t think that makes me unusual at all but I hope that what is different about me is that I am honest about my positions and open to changing them if the evidence warrants it.
      I am always open to suggestions for topics and guests and will make more of an effort to diversify in my selection of guests to include more people I disagree with while also respecting their right to hold a different position. I appreciate you taking the time to check me and will consider your comments more fully as I do future shows.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s