Thanks for the question Juju. I have been dying to tell someone what I thought about the show (well, someone intellectual that is).
I wasn't sure about the setting at first. First impressions were that the style was simplistic and functional. It didn't quite work for me. I found myself drawn to background details too frequently, which detracted from the interview. I would have preferred a white screen background, if the conventional 'studio' wasn't felt appropriate.
I'm not sure Julian Assange was completely comfortable with his role as interviewer. Who would be after years of taking abuse as an interviewee. It is similar to the prisoner becomes the guard scenario, I think we will see that become more comfortable with time. What was really great is that Julian Assange asked difficult and pertinent questions, and then gave Nasrallah opportunity to expand and answer fully. A rarity in modern television journalism. But more importantly, he actually asked more or less the same questions I would have asked. How many times I can recall watching a long anticipated 'grilling' of a politician, only to find the questions were weak and irrelevent.
I thought the selection of the first interview was just downright brilliant. Hezbollah has been completely side-lined by the mainstream media in the west since its conception. Branded as terrorists and criminals, without justification, or a right to reply. And yet they are a potent force in Middle Eastern politics. It is so typical of western political hypocracy, that if an elected administration doesn't subscribe to our point of view we should just refuse to acknowledge them. This choice was definitely a double-edged sword. Not only has Julian Assange given Hezbollah the opportunity to declare its point of view where it had previoulsy been denied. But it is also a snub to the mainstream journalists. Nasrallah didn't come across as some machiavelian mafia terrorist type. He is simply doing his best to look after his peoples interests. And I, for one, thought he was far more credible in those terms, than our sad lot !
The astounding achievement of getting Nasrallah to come on the show cannot be overstated. I don't think it will come as a surprise to learn that this man isn't exactly on best terms with 'the west'. In fact, I don't think he really cares what we think of him or his organisation. And it shows an unparallelled respect for the goals of Wikileaks and Assange, and an understanding of what it means to be disliked by European and American administrations.
And do you know what will p1ss those administrations off more than anything? The fact that people are saying 'He sounded like quite a rational, reasonable man to me!'
But if this is an indication of what is to come in terms of the interviewee's. Then hold on to your hats !!!!