Who's talking here?

Karan Thapar: What I am saying is rather than ask the Prime Minister not to operationalise the deal, the power to stop the operationalisation is in your hands. If you withdraw support, the government ceases to exist and can’t sign the deal on the dotted line. So if you want it stopped, then you have the power to do so. Are you serious about this or not? Sitaram Yechury: My agenda is the deal and your agenda seems to be the government. My agenda is not about which government will sign the deal, but what it contains and that is what I want it changed.

( [:http://ibnlive.com/news/devils-advocate-123-deal-sell-out-to-us-says-ye…|Devil's Advocate] - IBNLive. ) Whenever I watch Devil's Advocate on ibnlive, I can't suppress the annoyance the good old anchor (Karan Thapar) causes by doing all the talking. Even the conclusions seem to be made straight in front of the camera by none other than the anchor. How sensible is it to invite someone for a talk and not let them talk much? Shouldn't they at least have the sensibility to leave conclusions to the viewers? It is almost as though some party mouth piece is thrusting out through this channel asking people to accept their perspective of everything. I've never much followed the 'Left parties', but Mr. Sitaram Yechury sounded the most sensible on that interview today. He was most clear in mind while Thapar kept on with his babble. Mr Yechury put his points impressively well considering that he was hardly allowed to speak. It was just enough to make even a cynic his fan and follower. Here is the video: [:http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/47107/.html] On a related note, [:http://timesnow.tv/|TimesNow channel] has gradually become the more interesting and much better channel of all present English news channels here. The programs are not pompous, the news presentation is nice on most occasions (the anchors co-ordinating prime time programs are much better than on any other present English news channels). I just hope their website would become better too.