I'm speaking more to the style of an "interview". Which is that the conclusion is predetermined and the engagement is a setup. The use of the video-call "straight-talker rational counterpoint" is absolutely cliche in these sorts of things. Scoble wasn't allowed to get barely a point in, but instead this was just a "FUD about Google Glass, and here's Scoble to sit in to try to pretend that this is a conversation".
It is literally garbage news. He has absolutely no interest in actually discussing anything.
"allowed"? Paxman doesn't control the mic. Scoble argued badly. I'm not agreeing with Paxman. I suspect Paxman always argues the counter point irrelevant of his opinion - that's his job. If you choose to be interviewed by Paxman you better be able to hold an argument. It's not the Jonathan Ross show.
