Who's Talking to Chris Wallace

Chris better start talking to fox to see if he can get his old job back which was very successful there,He is a disaster on CNN. This show wont last long maybe a little longer than his streaming debut on CNN didbefore it went down in flames. He should just retire if he thinks CNN is going to be a success obviously his judgement is flawed now.

I think a lot of the hateful reviews are coming from those prejudiced against Chris Wallace since he came from Fox News. He was actually respected by both sides as being a good journalist. I find his current show very interesting and entertaining. His intelligence shows in the questions he asks, and he is a much better interviewer than predecessors like Larry King and Piers Morgan. Just look at how he pressed Pete Buttigieg on Biden's age, inflation and Biden relief funding. So contrary to the mean-spirited and inaccurate reviews I have seen here, he definitely not a "lightweight" interviewer. I recommend you give this show a chance and make up your own mind. And I hope CNN moves the show to better night and time since trying to compete with 60 minutes and the NFL seems to be at best ill-advised. I am glad he is on HBO Max so I can watch when I want.

I love the show and seeing Chris Wallace step far away from Fox, yet I am disappointed with CNN for not realizing the journalistic icon they have in Chris Wallace and giving him a show with more honest journalism (I love CNN, but they, like so many others, have become so dramatic and inflammatory).

Chris Wallace provides hard-hitting, honest, factual interviews. The man could elicit important information from a rock.

Even though I have found the non-political guests very interesting and enjoyable, CNN is missing a great opportunity in Chris Wallace to mix it up a bit with his amazing political knowledge and stamina to respectfully "beat up on" some politicians who need it sometimes.

I was pleased to see the 3.6 rating when I googled this after watching episodes. I half-heartedly made it through the interview with Shania Twain, then listened to Alex Rodriguez's ego and him fall all over Warren Buffet...a lot...like I stopped listening to it and felt pretty disgusted. It occurred to me as I looked at the rest that I don't care about what any of these people are up to, and not confident Chris Wallace was going to make me care with the right questions. The two I watched struck me as very curated and scripted, lacking any real moments that come from curve ball questions or the right follow-up questions. Add on the tone and cadence of Chris' voice that harkens back to broadcasting yonder and should have died with Cronkite, and I am left wondering who gave this the green light.

Most tv hosts don't make the effort to interview a wide spectrum of guests like Wallace does. His guests have backgrounds in science, religion, sports, entertainment, government. There is no hidden agenda here. If you want to stick to shows that complement your narrative, then this show isn't for you.

But it's a new show, he's still finding his rhythm. He should interview guests in the style of "Inside the Actor's Studio." While it's not the most favored form, I think they should add a live audience who are able to ask individual questions. There's more risk involved, and sometimes these moments go viral.

News programs are too afraid of live audiences. Partisan lectures or entertainers travel to universities, but we don't have this spectrum of guests on weekly televisions shows willing to speak freely, whether it's science, news, or inspirational stories from entertainment industry guests.

Get a live audience who have the ability to be involved. Up the game. Create YouTube shorts. Go viral. Give Chris the publicity he deserves.