"The Craft of Interviewing" by John Brady is just one book a beginning journalist should read. Most of journalism involves local newspapers covering local people, and despite how the internet has altered the speed and process of interviewing, good ol' gumshoe journalism still lives and breathes. That's why this book still matters 30 years after it first hit the college bookstores of j-school.

A good interview requires knowledge, diplomacy, fearlessness, rapport, organization, and knowing how to separate and summarize it all for a good story. This book has chapters on all of this. One complete chapter, "Off the Record" discusses some interesting approaches and policies this misunderstood phrase calls for. As you build relationships with key sources, this chapter, and others, can assist you in seeing ways through the thorny challenges of integrity and journalism.

Brady provides anecdotes about complicated interviews and interviewees. Even though these are with celebrities, the examples show the reader how to walk the line carefully and confidently.

"The Craft of Interviewing" by John Brady should not be the only book you read, and probably not your first. I fully recommend it as both a classroom text, and as a personal edification book. Your interviewing will be better you apply what Brady suggests.

Anthony Trendl

Some people seem to be looking for just one way to conduct an interview: John Brady describes several. If you are looking for something like a cookbook where the specific questions you should ask and in what order are listed, you won't like this book. If you are looking to develop your own interview style and want to pick and choose from a variety of methods, then you will find Brady's book an excellent source of information. Brady covers everything from getting appointments to to research to notetaking to tape recorders to knowing when the interview is over. He shows how different people handle interviews over the phone or by letter. When you finish this book, the choice of what questions to ask and how you should go about the interview remain up to you, but Brady's book will have given you a solid base.

Just about the only topic that is uncovered (due to the date of the book) is how to conduct an interview by Internet Chat. But a smart reader can easily adapt Brady's ideas to that situation.

Funny, I don't remember the parts about batting eyelashes and such. This book covers the fundamentals of interviewing and pre interview research.

I found the book to be a useful tool for conducting interviews, and think that it would be very helpful to beginners. I am a nurse turned free lance writer, and the techniques and tips for securing interviews were helpful to me.

I particularly liked the section on the "wrong questions"--this should be mandatory reading for local and national news reporters.

This is definitely the herpetological bible for anyone interested in reptiles and amphibs in kansas. I recommend it to anyone. I gave it as christmas gifts to people that are always telling tall tales of snakes and giant snappers they see. As far as the current common and scientific names go, hey its science, which is constantly changing and Joseph T. Collins is at the forefront of wildlife research in kansas. It truly is a shame he cant print a new book every year, but unless youre audobon, who really can.

Generally good pictures and up-to-date information, but writing is stilted and uninteresting.Book claims to use currently acceptable standardized names, but there is still much debate about such names. In fact, a new list of standardized names will soon be published that will make obsolete a number of names used in this book.

The bible for any budding herpetolgist in the sunflower state, and the model for all subsequent state field guides. Absolutely amazing professional color photography, detailed range maps, and text written eloquently, for both the layman and the expert alike. Common names follow Collin's list which are also used by the Eastern and Central Peterson Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles (the most widely read and used reference on herpetology in the world)as well as the Center for North American Herpetology. Can't wait for the next edition!

While reading this I was shocked at the utter disregard Saunders had for Arabs. I doubt he could have gotten away with a statement like this had it been about the Germans, for example: "...the Nabateans and the Palmyrenes showed that communities of Arab stock were capable of attaining a high degree of civilization under the stimulus of contact with advanced peoples" (9).

Saunders has put together a nice introduction to the early history of the Islamic world. At two hundred pages it is longer than most authors of long works dedicate to this period, but still short enough so as not to overwhelm the reader with unfamiliar people and places. The best feature of Saunders treatment of this period is the manner in which he easily cuts through all the confusion of the many movements, particularly the various Shiite movements, to find the simplest way to explain them (and their importance). Saunders also raises the interesting point that the Arabs became the inheritors of Hellenism via Rome and Persia, although he does not examine this in much detail. Written in clear language, brief, concise, and efficient, this is a nice introduction to early Islamic society.

Saunders' "Medieval Islam" is good old-fashioned scholarship at its best. The author's pithy, 1960s British style is something more historians should imitate today. And while oriented toward the general reader, "Medieval Islam" is still sound scholarship.

Saunders takes us from pagan Arabia in the years just before the birth of Islam right through to the Fourth Crusade and the 14th century. It's a shame he writes overwhelmingly about Muslim politics, since he writes so well. I would like to have read more about Muslim intellectual life and everyday conditions among Muslims (city life, women's experiences, books) as well as the periphery of the Muslim world (How did Islam move into Indonesia? The Sahara?). Stick to A.J. Arberry if you're researching Muslim literature and Alfred Hourani if you're doing social history.

Nevertheless, Saunders clarifies what for me, at least, is a very baffling political mêlée. The rise of Muhammad, the Abassid and Umayyad caliphates, Spain in the West, the Mongols in the East -- all are explained lucidly. Not as concise as Alfred Guillaume's "Islam," but more thorough. Recommended. 5 stars.

Goebbels - Mastermind of the Third Reich David Irving ISBN 1 872197 13 2 An Irving Biography of Joseph Goebbels is of interest for the light it sheds on each of them. Irving is well known for his ability to locate sources missed by others. His interpretations of the documents cause less admiration. Here, he has obtained much material from Goebbel's diaries that lay hidden in Moscow for nearly half a century. The book at times reads like a rather uninspired diarist too busy to sort out important events. For a historical work it is also surprisingly disordered. Irving possibly assumes that the reader is as immersed in the material as he is. It is frequently possible to wonder which year is being recorded. It is important for example that the events on page 388 belong in 1942. Page 390 is all about events in 1941, according to the references, but there is no indication in the text of such a step back in time. The page (390) is interesting for a contrast. Irving rarely tries anywhere to conceal a deep loathing for Churchill. Goebbels here, and in several other places, displays a reluctant admiration.

Irving is also out of step even with some of his subjects in the matter of visual cues. In two fat volumes about the war leaders Churchill and Hitler, both of whom lived surrounded by maps, Irving includes none. In this volume there are collections of photos clumped rather haphazardly. They seem always isolated from any relevant text, and are not listed in the contents or apparently included in the index.

The "Little Doctor" has a reputation as one of the worst in the nasty bunch who ran the Nazi regime in Germany. Irving underlines almost all of that reputation. The first half of Goebbel's life pointed nowhere and had little impact. It appears that he was a real socialist who became snared by the name National Socialist and remained attached by the magnetism of Hitler. From then on he came to resemble Shakespeare's Richard III to an extent that the original probably never did. As Gauleiter of Berlin he ran an operation where only the label distinguished the Nazis from the Communists and both had a strong resemblance to the ethics of Al Capone in Chicago at that same time. He retained his power in Berlin to the end, but when the Party came to government he became more highly visible abroad as well, with work on propaganda, including a film industry. His reputation as a liar rests on his being a very good liar. He knew when to tell the truth. If a lie was convenient and hard to detect he had no scruples. He could hold an audience spellbound for hours at a time. Would he have been able to hold an English speaking audience? Could he now hold any audience accustomed to TV attention spans? It seems unlikely. In a regime that was sometimes publicly prudish, his ill concealed sexual exploits and use of the 'casting couch' slowed but did not stop his ascent.

Having hitched himself to Hitler he became a spokesman for anti-semitism, which was not apparently innate. Curiously, Irving's Goebbels while growing fanatically anti-semite, was more pragmatic than most about trying to use internal unrest of oppressed nationalities against Stalin. Later he was the advocate of abandoning the usages of war against the West as well. Ruthless himself, he expected that of others. His children were killed rather than let them fall into the hands of the conquerors.

He unleashed the barbarians on Kristallnacht and poured venom over Jews everywhere thereafter. Other Nazis occasionally deplored the economic effects. Irving has maintained that Hitler was somehow cocooned from these policies. There is no doubt that Hitler was well aware of, and supportive of, plenty of other ethnic barbarities. Irving keeps himself in a similar cocoon. He never uses the word 'holocaust'. By repute he even denies the fact of the holocaust. One of his weaknesses as a historian is apparently an unwillingness even to explore the implications of facts he clearly knows. He is however well aware of the large scale slaughter of Jews that did occur. It is referred to in several volumes about WWII, without elaboration. In this work the knowledge of the scale is available to the reader as it was to the Nazi leadership. On page 388 it is mentioned that early in March 1942 Goebbels noted the content of a paper probably to do with the notorious Wannsee Conference. There were "still eleven million Jews in Europe" and 'for the time being' they were being sent East. On the same page, a [Goebbels] diary entry states that sixty per cent would be liquidated while "only forty per cent can be put to work." Goebbels may have done the arithmetic as he was dictating his diary. He would appear to have had no illusions either about the brutality of the entire process. Irving is obviously not inclined to pursue the mathematics or any other inconvenient detail. Over six million callously planned deaths meets most definitions of a holocaust. It is a book to plough through. Where Gray could ponder about some 'mute inglorious Milton' at rest in a country churchyard, this century has a nightmare of Eichmanns who had their opportunity. The contagion of horror is visible on pages 370 and 371 where Irving casually slips into Nazi usage and refers to "cleansing of Vienna" [of Jews], without any quotation marks. It is a book worth borrowing, but when the same material becomes generally available there is a better book to come. The holocaust denial industry is the major casualty of the book, and that demolition its most important content, but the author seems not to have noticed.

The Kirkus Review of David Irving's "Goebbels" could not have been more one sided if it had been written by Doctor Goebbels himself as a review of a Jewish author's book. This well researched book, and it's author, have been the subject of a smear campaign because the author has had the audacity to blasphem a religion.

If a person were an ordinary atheist, he would probably be allowed to freely enter Germany and Canada. However, if he were to examine and attempt to publicly debate the religiously significant number of six million, which is now called "Shoah" and a cornerstone of the Jewish religion, he will probably be imprisoned if he does so in Germany or half a dozen other countries. David Irving is probably lucky just to have been banned from these countries.

Yes, this is a look at Goebbels that gives him more depth of personality than is usually politically correct. But to have such an out pouring of hate focused at the author after he has provided us with the new perspective is indicative of the same mentality that had persecuted unpopular beliefs all through out the ages.

In his biography of Joseph Goebbels David Irving has provided some masterful and provocative insights into the inner workings of the Nazi hierarchy. However, the book is sometimes confusingly organized and Irving's use of the present tense when describing past events can be irritating and seem a bit amaturish in so seasoned a writer.

With these caveats in mind, this is still an important book and necessary reading for any student of World War II. Mr. Irving is neither a Holocaust denier nor a proponent of the Nazis or their ideology; he simply has a different point of view. It's amazing how vociferous and censorious the academic history establishment can become when their 'established' truths are challenged; and in this book, Mr. Irving has done just that.

The Tribes of Israel have not been found because they were never lost. This theory, and this author was "stolen" by Herbert W. Armstrong, the discredited cult founder of the Worldwide Church of God. Read 2 Chron 30:6; 34:9, Ezra 6:17 and James 1:1 and you will find that the nation of Israel was destroyed, but the tribes, the people were not lost. They did not migrate to NW Europe. No reputable historian accepts this fallicy. Allen and Armstrong (a high school drop out) were not scholars.

The book is split in three parts. While the fist two parts are a recall of Biblical history, the last part is based on extra Biblical sources.
The first two parts are very good and will give anybody, who is not familiar with the biblical truth of the two houses of Israel a good introduction.

With the end of the second part the trouble starts.
Allen tells the reader that the prophet Jeremia in companion of some daugthers of the Davidic linage and a the scribe Baruch flee from Judah to Egypt and from there to Ireland. He claims that the ancient history of Ireland has this account in their writings.

I made an in-depth search to find these writings Allen is refering to. They do not exist! I have no clue, where Allen has these ideas from, but they are not biblical, nor in any way historical and are deffinetely not in the records of Ireland. But on these little tale, he builds the structure of British Israelism.
Because of his very good introduction on the topic of the "lost" tribes, the reader is tempted to take the Jeremiah story as given fact and is deceived in the end.
Unfortunately also author Steve Collins in his book "The lost tribes of Israel found" and others refer to Allen as a source of historical facts and run into problems and in the end loose their trustworthyness.

I gave the book two stars, because the first two parts are very good and give a good understanding but the last part is a nice fantasy story based on the dreams of the Brish Empire that its monarchy are the descendants of the House of David, which is absolutely ridiculous.

This book is the most valuable book I have besides my Bible. It will show you the scriptures like you never have seen them before. It was well written by an amazing Bible Scholar in 1900. Most books on this subject will refer to this book. All my family and friends are reading it now. Enjoy!

James Wambaugh has a long and somewhat successful history of writing both fictional and non-fictional stories. From Onionfield to The Blooding his style remains the same, detailed but fast-paced enough to always keep the reader interested with the feeling that he has been there and done all this before. The greatest criticism of Wambaugh is his sometimes quirky use of syntax, which leaves the reader with the question of what is the meaning of his sentence or paragraph. Putting that aside, as in The Blooding, Wambaugh makes a factual and sometimes boring story come alive for the reader of Fire Lover. He even did quite well in the middle of the book when he had to cover the second trial and all of its detail without being too repetitious and going over all that went on in the first trial. After all there is only so much you can write about a fire and keep the reader's interest alive. In all, I liked the book and give it my recommendation.

I've read all of Joseph Wambaugh's books, from THE NEW CENTURIONS to FIRE LOVER, and this was the least enjoyable.
FIRE LOVER probably doesn't measure up because there's not a whole lot of suspense. We know from the synopsis that arson investigator John Orr may have been the most notorious arsonist since Nero. Orr was a brazen offender, setting fires in the middle of the day when customers were in the stores, leading to the death of four at Ole's Home Center in South Pasadena. But he makes one big mistake, leaving his fingerprint on yellow legal paper that was used, along with a cigarette, a rubber band and three matches, to start a fire similar to the one at Ole's Home Center. The fingerprint was almost ignored because of the jealousy between firemen and police arson investigators.
Much of the book involves courtroom gymnastics. There are so many closing statements that you tell yourself, "this must be the last one." But you're wrong. There are more of them during the penalty phase and Wambaugh cites them all, practically verbatim.
Wambaugh is also famous for his irreverent narrative tone. This works in CHOIRBOYS, where we assume the narrator is a man in blue, but here he's supposed to be an objective journalist. He refers to jurors, lawyers, and judges as "...strange fish that lazily glide, blowing gas bubbles that pop ineffectually on the surface of the litigation tanks in which they live and breed." He likes this strange fish motif so much he uses it over and over again.
All of this said, I'm still looking forward to Wambaugh's next fictional tome. It seems an eternity since FLOATERS.

I have always enjoyed Joseph Wambaugh. It seems a few years ago, he went through a "dark" period when his books were almost if not actually depressing. But "Fire Lover" is a very good book. What I like about Wambaugh is his insight into people and organizations. The interplay between the police departments, the fire departsments, the Federal Arson invesigators, etc, is very very interesting. Fire lover is a true story about a serial arsonist who is also the arson investigator for Glendale, California. He may have been the most prolific arsonist of the 20th century.

My only complaint is that the trial part of the book might be too long. But as usual, Wambaugh shows his insights into how the system works, or sometimes does not work. The system worked here, but it was a very long journey.

I think over the writing career of Joseph Wambaugh, we owe him a debt for telling us outsiders how police departments and now fire departments actually work. I feel we owe them a debt that they do work. The book is a very good read.

This isn't a particularly bad book to read, there are worse, but I agree with a previous reviewer in that there's not much new. You can get that same messages by going right to the source, the Bible, or attending sermons by a good minister. So my recommendation is go to church! This book also has an annoying quality that is common to many modern religious "spiritual" texts, which is the practice of cramming all sorts of oriental philosophy into western religious themes. Maybe just a pet peeve of mine but it's been going on since the 60s and there are books that haven't been adulterated in this way, see Billy Graham's writing for the best example.

One very popular view of things--a "secular view" to give it a name--is that things just happen to you in life with no rhyme or reason. Thus, you just happen to be reading this review of The Road to Damascus, just as you just happened to have been conceived, born, are now alive, etc..

That secular view will not survive a careful reading of this book. It will prove to you that nothing ever just happens to you. It will puncture the secular superstition that you are just a chip-in-a-stream, carried along by chance, unnoticed, uncared for, unloved. Once read, you will understand, perhaps for the first time, an exhilarating truth, namely, that it is time for you to shed the secular skin that has bound you in a tight embrace of being just one of billions of your species and essentially anonymous, literally nameless.

Yet, you do have a name! And if you listen carefully to yourself, that name is the bedrock of your consciousness and personal identity. It is the name "I am."

No one can say it for you, or take it from you! It is so real a name that it is yours forever, beyond death, possessed by you outside of time!

You are an "I." That is who you are and, if this is enough for God, it surely must be enough for you!

Well, is it enough for God? Read the book of the Exodus, 3:14. Do something to escalate your sense of being a somebody. An "I."

Joseph Pierre has crossed your path with this book of his. He wrote it for you personally. Don't miss your chance, your golden opportunity to credit yourself as the unique miracle that you represent and are. It's a sweat to read it, but Joseph Pierre has done most of the work for you already. He has put you on "cruise control." All you have to do is enjoy the fascinating ride!

John Cantwell Kiley, M.D., Ph.D., is a beneficiary of what Joseph Pierre knows. He is the author of some ten books, the latest being the forthcoming (in November, 1999) book, "Is the Pope Catholic?"

I feel that the author has acquired a superior grasp of many fundamental aspects of science and philosophy. His book is well written and conveys a message to readers that they should trust their own faculties of reasoning, rather than accept the teachings of "authorities" just because such opinions reflect a popular point of view. I recommend it to all who would seek a more realistic perspective.

As an introductory book its fine but as a 'Most Complete' you want it to expand beyond basic examples into e.g. interaction between the cartridge types, practical implementation advice etc.

I'd have used the money back guarantee if there was one as I expected a bit more from it.

Does a reasonable job of covering Oracle Web Application Server 3.0, but the Oracle Press book is better.

This book does a good job of providing an overview of the architecture surrounding OAS 3.0, but certainly does not hold to its claim as "The Most Complete Reference." Its biggest shortfall is its lack of detail concerning Inter-Cartridge Exchange (ICX). It mentions this topic at least a few times, and explains the premise behind ICX, but doesn't provide any examples of how ICX is accomplished from a PL/SQL cartridge to a C cartridge, for example. A good book for people who are just learning about OAS and want an introduction and then some.

subjects are old and out of date. For example, modeling of the eye, (...). This books seems like an attempt to introduce you to the research of a few professors who are trying to recruit graduate students. I found little educational value in it.

I've used this book now in 2 classes (including one taught by an author of one of the chapters) and have both times found the book hard to use. It is full of so many small errors you can never be sure whether the problems you are having are because you don't understand the material, or if there is another mistake in that section. Very frustrating. The problems are not limited to explicit errors either, there are issues with the presentation that makes me think it was poorly edited as well. Style, order, and omission of important points are among the sins. Some sections are pretty good, though.

The book is a good value for a textbook, however (it's huge!), and provides lots of useful information on a wide variety of BME-related topics. Just make sure you have someone to help you spot the mistakes.

This text offers a lot of good information. This book provides an excellent overview to the field and is easy to read. I am a junior and an engineering student at Iowa State. This book has helped me understand how many different aspects there are within BME to specialize with in my degree and also elaborate on engineering fundamentals. I highly recommend it!

John Cardinal O'Connor was undoubtedly a man of conviction. He was a colorful poltical heavyweight; a significant player in worldwide Roman Catholic politics and in American affairs in general. Sadly, while O'Connor might be commended for his loyalty, he is not a man who should be exalted as one of the great spiritual leaders of the 20th century.

John O'Connor could have been great! He could have been. Instead he chose a different path - favored son in a "family" (in this case an institution) out of touch with the world.

He could have dared to speak up for those who were marginalized.He could have told the poor faithful people of his church that he understood their need to practice birth control. He could have advanced the recognition of women as full and complete members of the church. He could have recognized that so many American Catholics felt out of touch with the message of their Church. While he visited dying gay men and opened places where they cold die with dignity, he continued to deny their legitimate place on the earth.

Perhaps the greatest lost opportunity was the fact that John O'Connor could have changed the Church -- but didn't!

I finish this book sadly feeling that here was a man who had the forum to do great things but sadly chose not to. It is the sadness of "the could have ... but didn't".

A Man of Conviction is small book which poorly conceived and dully written. If this book is some effort to advance O'Connor's spiritual legacy in the hope that he will yet again be promoted, perhaps to Sainthood, it is a bad start.

John O'Connor,late Cardinal Archbishop of New York, was a large figure on the political and religious landscape for almost 17 years. One time Hawkish military chaplain{his pro military stances influenced many of the documents that came out of the bishops conferences],he became bishop of scranton, Pa.,then very quickly{I mean real quickly} Archbishop of the largest archdiocese in North America. He sparred with polticians early{Publicly berating democats Mario cuomo and Geraldine ferraro for their pro-choice stands}though not republicans{though he did criticise R Guliani 's policies as viscious against the poor}, so often putting his foot in his mouth that all three of the major dailies began putting reporters at the Sunday 10 am mass. This collection, has nomne of that. O'connor was a vociferous supporter of the state of Israel, and is warmly remembered as such. He was also an avowed opponenet of homsexuality, and some of his worst moments came in trying to defend his position. He was also a man of great generosity, refusing to close any schools{no matter how poor they were]. begging, literally, begging some of the moneybags catholics{Simon, Grace, et,al. } for donations.He opened doors of catholic hospitals to aids patients{while condeming thier lifestyle. }In short, a man of immense contradictions, who died a slow, painful public death, and did so with great dignity, and without some of the macabre operatic flourishes of so public a demise. The best of these remembrances come from ordianry folks,not the politicians nor clergy{what on earth do youthink a priest of another bishop would say about him? Now if they gave archbishop rembert weakland of Milwaukee a free hand to discuss OConnors lack of support for him with this problems with rome, that would have been interesting]. In all, a well done,though curiosly unsatisfying collection, too much warm fuzziness, not enough exploration.For those who admired him,a very good book. see also Nat Hentoff's ear;lier Biography{also very flattering] for more sources. A loyal soldier of the church.

I am admittedly a very devoted friend of the late Cardinal. I miss him greatly as a former regular Mass-goer at St. Patrick's Cathedral in the late 90's. I miss him still more as my old guardian angel who did more than one favor for a skinny little kid from Brooklyn, without recompense. Nor did he seek it, except for my soul, and the hope that I would always love Jesus. So if you ever admired this man, his honesty, his frankness, his gift for trying his best in every circumstance, even if you did not agree with everything he said, you will indeed like this book. He was, as his friends reminisce, a mensch. You will hear his words, recognise his wit, recall his stature. I miss him too much, this man who fought tooth and nail, for whatever he thought was truly important for the well being of body and soul of his flock. But then, anyone in New York, or anyone in his line of sight was his flock. Oh, I miss him, and I am glad to hear from him again. Requiescat in pace.