A conversation with cartoonist Scott Adams

with Scott Adams
in Current Affairs, Art & Design
on Monday, May 10, 1999 * * * * *

Sorry, this video isn’t available at the moment; please check back soon.

play

E-mail this video:

Distribute this video:

Share on:

Close
Description

A conversation with cartoonist Scott Adams, creator of "Dilbert", about cartoons as a form of media, the origins of Dilbert and its cultural significance and relevance.

Video Share Options
Share
Buy Amazon DVD
Keywords:
Dilbert
Scott Adams
cartoons
office politics

In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:

itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/4300

Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.

Close
  • Comments 5
    Post new comment
    1. rich dimmock  09/07/2008 11:47 AM Report

      warning:t.friedman is hawking another book!

      from mount olympus he has watched what has been happening, and now has come down to earth to explain it all(he missed it in his last BOOK. tom is like the guy we all encounter who KNOWS and explains everything,a sort of jack of all trades master of none.if you enjoy listening to biden and newt,tivo tom(he's sort of "a lesser god."). like that mr.know-it all we encounter, we soon look for the nearest exit.

    2. Tom Jones  06/18/2008 03:58 PM Report

      Most people will agree there is NOTHING quite as aggrivating as being interrupted when speaking.. nor as frustrating as being prevented from hearing someone answer a question fully. Phil Donohue got really bad about doing this as well.

      It seems like if the guest is a friend of Charlies --or if it's a topic he fancies himself something of an expert on-- the more he interrupts. But there are other times when Charlie sits enraptured by his guest. So that tells me he's capable of asking a question and listening.

      Tim Russert was brilliant at asking pointed questions and listening. Obviously Charlie just does't have as much time to prepare for each show as Russert did.

      It would be interesting to analyze the video archives and see how much time is spent by Charlie talking, interrupting, etc. Maybe the name should be changed to "The Charlie Rose Debate."

    3. Ed Hanley  01/29/2008 07:58 PM Report

      Charlie Rose has great guests and GENERALLY does a very good job of interviewing, but, from the interviews I have seen, he ALWAYS interrupts his guests. I think that part of his interviewing style needs some serious work. Steve Martin handled the interruptions brilliantly - he ignored them. Usually, he merely continued saying what he was saying and acted as if Charlie had said nothing. Charlie often ignores interesting points that his subject presents to him in order to press home whatever brief thought he has interrupted them with. His interviews would improve drastically if he would simply STOP interrupting and listen much more.

    4. Don S.  08/19/2007 04:17 PM Report

      This is probably the wrong place for a "Disappointed in Charlie" thread, but I feel your pain Toby. Finding out that someone you admire isn't all you had hoped they were can be a great disappointment, but it's also a good life lesson.

      I've been a fan of Charlie since CBS News Overnight (or whatever it was called). He struck me as one of the most prepared interviewers in the game, as well as one of the best actual LISTENERS on the air (along with Terry Gross and Bob Costas) at the time.

      But...

      Sometime after 9/11, during the fog of timidity that fell over the media for X number of years, Charlie finally sat down with Noam Chomsky. I was thrilled at the prospect of Charlie digging into the sandbox of information that Chomsky had been researching for years and years, but I was appalled by the unprepared and amateurish Charlie Rose segment. It was like watching Joe Franklin or something, with Charlie ignoring tantalizing avenues for discussion and even challenging where Chomsky got his information in a genial but incredulous tone.

      That same week, Charlie had Richard Perle and his deputy on, spouting all the NeoCon B.S., and Chas was SO obsequious, I thought I was watching gay porn!

      Chomsky was reporting facts, and Charlie treated him like he was Abbie Hoffman. Perle came on and lied, and Charlie fawned over him more than he did over Michelle Pfeiffer. SIGH. It reminded me of the Upton Sinclair quote, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." (Or perhaps when the security of his secrets depends on it... Hm?)

      Despite all this, even if he's not what he was a decade ago, he's still better than 90% of all TV chat shows, and I keep watching and still enjoying.

      (Speaking of enjoying, look at the end of the 2003 Gore Vidal interview. If it hasn't been edited out, Charlie asks him, "What do you love best about America?" and he nearly explodes at (the inanity of?) the question. It was among the more cathartic moments I've had since the post-millennial double-plus-good style of popular discourse took hold.

    5. Mr. Toby R. Madison  05/05/2007 01:11 AM Report

      Dear Mr. Rose,

      I regard you as one of the finest TV interviewers of our time. However, your interview with Mr. Christopher Hitchens was appalling in my opinion. You talked over him; you interrupted him; you almost argued with him. I would like to have heard what he had to say about his book titled 'God is not Great'. Based on your interview, I have no idea whether it's good or bad, or what you thought of it.

      Sincerely,

      Toby R. Madison

      Gainesville, Florida