Evaluation Report on the Interview Participants - MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theEvaluation Report on the Interview Participants. Answer: Introduction: This part of the assignment deals with evaluation of the behavior of the interview participants, Camerota, Lemon and Reza Aslan and looking for ways how the participants could have managed themselves more effectively during the interview to avoid conflicts and crosstalk. To achieve this aim, each of the participants behavior is to be scrutinized separately in the following section. Lemon: As the interview shows, Lemon is the moderator of the discussion and therefore, he is entitled to manage the entire interview without letting the participants involve in any kind of conversational conflict. As the interview begins, we see that Lemon addresses the topic of the interview very formally and presents the much-debated excerpt from the interview of Bill Maher that would be the topic of discussion. However, soon after the interview proceeds and that, Reza Aslan has made his first comment on Bill Maher there are interruptions from Camerota and several cross talks happen in which as a moderator Lemon has not interfered whereas he should have (Moore 2014). While the cross talks were going on between Reza and Camerota, Lemon could have eased the discussion by helping out both of them understand each others point-of-view. Now, after several cross talks happened, the first comment of Lemon to Reza seemed a little rude as without acknowledging the facts Reza presented to counter Ca merota, Lemon countered the facts with another comment abruptly made. This ensued a sense of bias on the part of a moderator which should have been neutral to make the conversation more effective. Again, the same instance of predisposition is exhibited on Lemons part as he counters Aslan when he says the way Saudi Arabia deals with women is extremist (Yusof et al. 2013). Although this comment makes sense, Lemon is not seen managing the conflict between Reza and Camerota rather he tries to re-explain the comment that Camerota has made. This is an inappropriate behavior of a moderator as he could have become a communicator between the two and thus could have devolved the petty argument. However, when Reza stands out with his points well explained Lemon has to acknowledge the fairness of the his previous comments and thus ends the argument making peace between Reza and Camerota (Day 2015). In the next section of the interview, another interview excerpt of Israeli Prime Minister, Benjam in Netanyahu is shown to proceed by Lemon. Here, the conversation takes a heated turn as Islam, as a religion is generalized for the wrong deeds of some countries. While Reza has already made his point clear that religion does not play any role to decide the ill practices of some countries, Lemon repeats the same mistake of referring to injustice to Pakistani women underpinning the idea that these are the issues with Muslim people everywhere. This is not an instance of effective management, as Lemon has clearly not understood what Reza is trying to convey (Cahn 2013). Hence, cross talks happen again and conflicts arise. However, to diminish the conflicts, Lemon tries to clarify the difference between Maher and Rezas opinions, this is an appreciating move indeed and the discussion ends with thanksgiving to Professor Reza Aslan. However, to make the conversation more effective Lemon could have addressed the problems rightly, tried to understand the perspective of Reza without repeatin g questions from a typical Western stand. Reza Aslan: Reza Aslan is the guest of the interview and he is a scholar of religions and a professor at University of California as well. Since the very beginning, Reza Aslan is seen to address the questions or issues thrown at him very patiently without losing control even in the heated moments. For an effective discussion, the code of conduct directs one to appreciate his opponent even if the person does not agree with him (Oetzel and Ting-Toomey 2013). Reza commences his talk with appreciating Bill Maher and thereafter firmly places his points where he disagrees with Maher. Even when Camerota interrupts him after the very first comment, he explains his disapproval without being agitated. However, he becomes fixed with his displeasure on countries having majority of Muslim population being referred to as Muslim countries in general. Little does he try to understand the points of Camerota and Lemon and rather calls their arguments as facile. As conflicts rise on pathetic condition of women in countries where Muslims are the majority, he tries to counter those facts with the instances of other Muslim countries where women are in the leading power. This, countering one question referring to something else is poor instance of conflict management (Diehl and Regan 2015). Again, the same instance can be seen when Camerota tries to talk about extremist drift in some of the Muslim countries in terms of terroristic activities, Reza deviates from the point and refers the dismal situation of women in those country as extremism. Instead of this, Reza could have tried to catch the underlying meaning of Camerotas comments and then attend to then directly. Although Reza has been quite patient all through the interview, towards the end he seems to lose his patience and conflict is ensued. While Camerota simply asks his opinion on the subjugation of women by Muslim laws, he countered her though not on point. These are the instances where Reza Aslan could have shown a little more sporting attitude and maintained a superior level of competitive ethics. Camerota: Camerota is another moderator in the interview though she is not seen acting according to her role. From the very beginning, she is found to be impatient and interrupting within the talk of Reza Aslan that caused the conflicts and cross talks primarily (Dodge 2015). She plays more of a questioners role rather than a moderator. As per the ideal code of conduct in an interview, the hosts should be respectful towards others opinions but in this interview, Camerota is found to be questioning based on her pre-conceived notions about Islam as a religion. This is an unfortunate instance of conflict management on Camerotas part as forcing ones perspective on another undoubtedly increases conflict among the participants (Yusof et al. 2013). In addition, she is also violating the code of conduct of being polite; the phrases like But hold on, Hold on a second Reza are instances of her impatience and indecorous mannerism where she could have put a little effort. Finally, her Westernized partial thinking on Islam and Muslim countries has augmented the argument and cross talks even more on which Camerota could have worked before and during the interview. Conclusion: Thus, three of the participants had some certain flaws in playing their roles effectively where in an average all of them exhibit lack of tolerance. Other than this, deviating from the topic has also taken place a couple of times avoiding which the discussion could have been more effective. Besides, the lack of sporting spirit especially in Camerota and to some extent in Reza towards the end could have been improved (Hybels 2014). However, since not everything in an interview is planned, it becomes difficult strictly adhering to the norms always. The interview, nonetheless does not present an unprejudiced view on religion. While Lemon and Camerota are overtly prejudiced about Islam, Reza seems to be consciously guarding his arguments with good instances from Muslim countries unconvincingly addressing the some disturbing issues. References Cahn, D.D., 2013.Intimates in conflict: A communication perspective. Routledge. Day, G.E., 2015. Successfully managing conflict.Leading and Managing Health Services: An Australasian Perspective, p.273. Diehl, P.F. and Regan, P., 2015. The interdependence of conflict management attempts.Conflict Management and Peace Science,32(1), pp.99-107. Dodge, A. ed., 2015.Public relations: Strategies and tactics. New York, NY: Pearson. Hybels, S., 2014.Communicating effectively. McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Moore, C.W., 2014.The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. John Wiley Sons. Oetzel, J.G. and Ting-Toomey, S. eds., 2013.The SAGE handbook of conflict communication. Sage. Yusof, S.H., Hassan, F., Hassan, M.S. and Osman, M.N., 2013. The framing of international media on Islam and terrorism.European Scientific Journal, ESJ,9(8). Bibliography: Coombs, W.T., 2014.Ongoing crisis communication: Planning, managing, and responding. Sage Publications. Fair, C.C., Goldstein, J.S. and Hamza, A., 2017. Can knowledge of Islam explain lack of support for terrorism? Evidence from Pakistan.Studies in Conflict Terrorism,40(4), pp.339-355. Gleditsch, N.P. and Rudolfsen, I., 2016. Are Muslim countries more prone to violence?.Research Politics,3(2), p.2053168016646392. Samovar, L.A., Porter, R.E., McDaniel, E.R. and Roy, C.S., 2015.Communication between cultures. Nelson Education. Zhirkov, K., Verkuyten, M. and Weesie, J., 2014. Perceptions of world politics and support for terrorism among Muslims: Evidence from Muslim countries and Western Europe.Conflict Management and Peace Science,31(5), pp.481-501.