The Art of the Interview: Costas Schools Gammons

In less than one year two of the most prolific home run hitters in baseball history have admitted to using performance enhancing drugs. Mark McGwire and Alex Rodriguez both used intimate television interviews to tell their side of the story and both came off looking fairly disingenuous and sometimes delusional in the process. Their inquisitors, Peter Gammons, then of ESPN, for Rodriguez and Bob Costas of the MLB Network for McGwire, had drastically different outcomes that played a role in how the stories were dissected in the days that followed.

Both Gammons’ and Costas’ pedigree are unquestioned. Gammons is a Hall of Fame baseball writer. For many years he played the wise, knowledgeable, and logical father figure among the silliness and frat boy antics of the ESPN baseball scene. He used his experience to lend perspective and provided insightful commentary that was sorely lacking from most of his colleagues throughout the day. Now at MLB Network, it is too soon to evaluate his contributions, but one can assume that his standard of excellence will continue.

However, Gammons’ interview with Rodriguez in February of 2009 was poorly planned and executed. Throughout the Q & A Gammons failed to follow up on the most basic non-answers by A-Rod. Gammons never asked him to reiterate, he never rephrased a question, and he rarely attempted to poke and prod A-Rod to expose more of his story. Because of these shortcomings, the interview did little to satiate the appetite of those who wanted information about A-Rod’s indiscretions. Clear questions such as “What kind of substance were you taking?” and “Where did you originally get the substance?” were not answered nor was a follow up asked. Gammons seemed to have a script and he was sticking to it.

Bob Costas has been the face of broadcast television for years. He’s worked every major sporting event for the last twenty five years. He was brought to the MLB Network specifically for moments like this. Say what you will about Costas, it is undeniable that his presence brings instant credibility to an interview and to a network.

Costas’ conversation with McGwire was in stark contrast to what transpired between Gammons and Rodriguez. Costas knew what information he wanted from McGwire and he didn’t just rely on prewritten questions to elicit that information.

The most startling admission made by McGwire was that steroids did not improve his performance or his ability to hit homeruns. Even as Costas referred to his ever increasing power numbers through the years McGwire admitted he took steroids, McGwire chalked it up to hard work, God given talent, and hand-eye coordination. Throughout the interview Costas sprinkled in EIGHT different questions about the possibility that McGwire’s numbers were influenced by his PED use, going as far to even use a metaphor involving two Indy Cars with one using rocket fuel. Even as he asked about the same topic, Costas’ line of questioning  never became repitious and never once did he belabor the point. Costas also never once attacked McGwire even as he was trying to show him how silly his contention sounded. Costas allowed McGwire to fully and clearly state his opinion, while showing the viewers that his assertions are ludicrous.

Costas was not perfect. Like Gammons he missed a couple of opportunities for follow up questions. For example:

-         If you don’t think you cheated why do you feel such shame and why did you phone Roger Maris’ widow before your announcement?

-         If you took steroids to stay healthy, why did you continue to do so when you were frequently injured while taking them?

Costas also never asked where McGwire obtained his steroids or HGH, an answer that could have led to more information about PED use in baseball’s recent past. Another Costas foible that rears its ugly head quite frequently is his use of metaphors, unicorns, and rainbows to describe magical moments in baseball history. His description of McGwire’s 62^nd homerun went on for way too long and included unimportant imagery that took away from the question that followed.

While Peter Gammons has an unblemished record of professionalism and quality writing and reporting, it is inevitable that his subpar interview of Alex Rodriguez will be compared to the superior version produced by Bob Costas with Mark McGwire. There is a fine line between investigating and badgering; Costas walked the line and Gammons never stepped up to it.

{For more on FCP’s take on Gammons-Rodriguez, see our piece from last year.}

Popularity: 1% [?]