Gwen Ifill Quotes

I have always tried to do my job in a way that I have people give me different points of view.

I think television is doing a better job than films in terms of representing people, but television is still not diverse.

My job as a television anchor or television reporter is not to proselytize.

I'm not always up to date on everything that's going on, but I am somewhat informed. I listen to NPR. And I actually watch Fox News, because I believe, if you just listen to the things that agree with you, you're not really seeing anything else.

People realized that they could come on Fox News Sunday, and they would be well and fairly treated.

I think it's always really important in broadcast to be able to get different views across and not just go down one route, because that's essentially journalism.

"Kindness" can mean a lot of different things. In this case, I felt I had to present his [Donald Trump's] supporters in as fair a light as possible - many of them hadn't been interviewed before and that entailed some interviewer-courtesy in the editing and so on.

It is not always the job of people shouting outside impressive buildings to solve problems. It is often the job of the people inside, who have paper, pens, desks, and an impressive view.

Other men are lenses through which we read our own minds. Each man seeks those of different quality from his own, and such as are good of their kind; that is, he seeks other men, and the rest.

The smartest groups, then, are made up of people with diverse perspectives who are able to stay independent of each other.

Doing interviews is very different from working as an actor, because it's up to the journalist not only to understand what I'm trying to convey, but to convey that understanding through their process. And often times it gets manipulated, sometimes intentionally, by pulling things out of context. Some people may not appreciate your work and some may be incredibly moved by it. So that isn't the concern. You have to do what you can do, and share what you feel is appropriate to share in the moment. And then, it's out of your control.

Journalism is a voyeuristic vocation that attracts to its employment many people who are often naturally shy and insatiably curious, and each day they are assigned to view the world with a critical eye and a detached sense of intimacy.

We have more information than ever before, and it is harder to avoid actually seeing what the other side is saying. Yes, we in Business insider focus on publications that we feel speak to us, but that is the same way it was 20 or 100 years ago. In the US, two million people have subscribed to the New York Times and many more millions think it is a terrible, liberal paper they would never read. We can choose to put ourselves in a bubble of only people who agree with us, but in the digital world there are many more ways of saying "Hey, here is something you might want to consider".

Increasingly I think of poetry as a theatre of voices, not as coming from a single "I" or from any one position. I want to imagine voices different from my own.

I think what we try to do is bring the news to our viewers in a very comprehensive responsible way.

I'm not prepared to have someone tell me there is only one view of what Europe is. Europe isn't owned by any of them, Europe is owned by all of us.

Have a deputy and develop a successor. Don't be consumed by the job or you'll risk losing your balance. Keep your mooring lines to the outside world - family, friends, neighbors, people out of government, and people who may not agree with you.

My job is not to talk smack about anything. This is why I dislike strongly doing magazine articles: My personality does not translate to print. People don't read it as sarcasm, and it just comes off badly.

I just really enjoy the process of working with other talented, creative people. There's great power in bringing diverse points of view together. It can be incredibly stimulating.

If you interview five people about the same incident, and you see five different points of view, it makes you know what makes history so complicated. Something doesn't just occur. It's not like a scientific event. It's a human event. So the dimensions of it will be seen differently by different people.

I think we've done a pretty good job staying in touch with the American people. But at a certain point you can't help but lose some feel for what's on the ground because you're not on the ground.

I absolutely tore George W. Bush to shreds, despite the fact I knew the guy personally and I actually campaigned for him in 2000. It's our job to just call it like we see it whether these people are our friends or not.

I think that you need all perspectives to reflect the needs of the country. If you only give people one perspective, inputting their views into the congressional process, you're going to have a skewed outcome.

My ideal of conversation that includes wide representation of perspectives, informed by the consensus view of current experts, pursued with an attempt to find a position with which all can live, brings the expert and the public dimensions together.

I like to hear what other people's interpretations are, because people come up with things I'd never thought about.