[janderson215]

There is a lot of negative opinion expressed in the other answers, so thank you for actually answering the question. Lex does a great job and probing the interviewee on their perspective. He is constantly readjusting his perspective to ask questions as a student of his guest to give them an opportunity to express their views as comprehensively as possible. If there is inconsistency in the argument, it is made apparent to the listener/watcher based on the questions Lex asks. If, as a listener, someone is able to discern an inconsistency, that is usually because of the questions Lex asked.

My defense of Lex is incidental of trying to achieve my primary goal of highlighting how juvenile the negative comments are.

This isn't the first time this question has been asked, and it seems like the question was asked earnestly. However, it's clear there is a lot of jealousy at the root of the negative opinions. I'm guessing this is because Lex has access to so many interesting people for such long periods of time. People responding that he's a wet blanket or that they don't like him aren't even trying to answer the question. What kind of format are they expecting to hear when interviewing academics? Jimmy Fallon meets Bill O'Reilly interviewing a Democrat?

Ask HN: "Why is Lady Gaga successful?" Average response here: "Ugh, I can't stand her."

[caslon]

> What kind of format are they expecting to hear when interviewing academics? Jimmy Fallon meets Bill O'Reilly interviewing a Democrat?

This question suggests that you no longer have the intellectual curiosity to imagine an alternative to incredibly dull, surface-level questions even on subjects the interviewer claims to know about, except for... incredibly dull, surface-level questions.

And that's pretty depressing.

[klelatti]

The thing that completely invalidates what you’re saying here is that very little of the actual talking is done by Lex. I’m not an unqualified fan but he does at least create the space for knowledgeable guests to talk at length about their subjects - or put another way he generally gets out of the way.

[caslon]

I listen to a lot of his interviews, actually. A lot more of the talking is done by him than you're implying, and the questions he asks occasionally derail really interesting tangents a guest is on in favor of really dull, extremely generic questions you could get from anywhere. The Lenat interview, for example, was full of him doing it.

[janderson215]

I agree he interrupts his guests, and he admits as much on almost every podcast. I also agree that sometimes it detracts from the conversation and it is a net negative, but you must also recognize the times that his interruption fills in gaps, as well.

[caslon]

When does it fill gaps? The only way I could possibly see it filling gaps would be for completely non-technical people.

[janderson215]

Correct, and is that unimportant? Or do you think your level of competency is the lowest that Lex should cater to?

[klelatti]

We’ll have to disagree then. Not sure why you’re listening to so many of his interviews if you find the questions extremely dull and generic. Insomnia?

[caslon]

The questions are dull and generic, but the people come onto the show with an agenda. I like hearing about what they're wanting to talk about, between instances of boring questions.