Lance Armstrong Interview
The Lance Armstrong interview with Oprah Winfrey is very open with some restrictions. The entire interview was nearly two hours long, but I only analyzed part one of the interview. It pressed on every topic that the public wanted to know and should know about Armstrong’s doping experience during Le Tour de France. It was an interview that allowed Armstrong to discuss his truths with doping. He addressed the allegations that were true and suing those who spoke such allegations. The purpose of this paper is not to discuss Armstrong’s deceit to the world. The purpose is to break down the interview between Armstrong and Oprah. To analyze the structure and pay attention to their interaction.
Firstly, as watching the Armstrong and Oprah interview, …show more content…
She went right to the basic questions, which are the yes and no questions. Questions that have a direct answer. Towards the end of the interview, Oprah also asked a question about the only teammate of Armstrong that was with him throughout all seven wins of Le Tour de France.
Secondly, both parties had some form of control of the interview. There were times when each would cut one another off or finish the other’s sentences. I saw a combination of a directive and nondirective approach. It allowed both to be very conversational with each other. Oprah could answer any question that she wanted and Armstrong made it clear before the interview that he would answer each to the best of his ability. There were a combination of questions that could trigger different responses.
Also, their level of interaction was a two. This level of interaction required trust and risk and that is visible throughout the interview. The trust is seen as Armstrong is very open with his responses. The risk of receiving a different reaction from the public. Armstrong being honest and being so open could result to loosing fans who stood by his side and defended him. There is also the risk of not trying to name others involved or saying certain things. During the interview, Armstrong was adamant about not mentioning his other teammates or others who were also doping. He wanted the interview to focus on his problems
Firstly, as watching the Armstrong and Oprah interview, …show more content…
She went right to the basic questions, which are the yes and no questions. Questions that have a direct answer. Towards the end of the interview, Oprah also asked a question about the only teammate of Armstrong that was with him throughout all seven wins of Le Tour de France.
Secondly, both parties had some form of control of the interview. There were times when each would cut one another off or finish the other’s sentences. I saw a combination of a directive and nondirective approach. It allowed both to be very conversational with each other. Oprah could answer any question that she wanted and Armstrong made it clear before the interview that he would answer each to the best of his ability. There were a combination of questions that could trigger different responses.
Also, their level of interaction was a two. This level of interaction required trust and risk and that is visible throughout the interview. The trust is seen as Armstrong is very open with his responses. The risk of receiving a different reaction from the public. Armstrong being honest and being so open could result to loosing fans who stood by his side and defended him. There is also the risk of not trying to name others involved or saying certain things. During the interview, Armstrong was adamant about not mentioning his other teammates or others who were also doping. He wanted the interview to focus on his problems