Your characterization of Jolie is unprofessional. She's a fair, fact-driven, passionate journalist. I've met her in person twice and I can vouch for this.
"Unprofessional"? I might consider a media pundit who accuses people on camera of political violations, sighs, rolls her eyes, shakes her head, and often has to have some of her snarky comments bleeped for profanity to be unprofessional. Or maybe just annoying. But an audience member who finds the pundit annoying and says so is not violating any professional code.
And unless she's different off camera than on, then the fact that you met her "in person" twice wouldn't make any difference. I've seen her express her opinions on camera more than twice, which is enough to make up my own mind.
I'm interested in useful technological insights, not in her hunt for political offenders, so she's not a pundit I look forward to hearing from.
Comments
Your characterization of Jolie is unprofessional. She's a fair, fact-driven, passionate journalist. I've met her in person twice and I can vouch for this.
"Unprofessional"? I might consider a media pundit who accuses people on camera of political violations, sighs, rolls her eyes, shakes her head, and often has to have some of her snarky comments bleeped for profanity to be unprofessional. Or maybe just annoying. But an audience member who finds the pundit annoying and says so is not violating any professional code.
And unless she's different off camera than on, then the fact that you met her "in person" twice wouldn't make any difference. I've seen her express her opinions on camera more than twice, which is enough to make up my own mind.
I'm interested in useful technological insights, not in her hunt for political offenders, so she's not a pundit I look forward to hearing from.