[brandall10]

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.

[dwater]

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.

[ethbr1]

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.

[goda90]

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.

[brandall10]

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.

[dventimi]

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.