As common as that may be, it is terrible. Especially when you feel like you're being taken in as a reasonably educated listener. For example, when the correspondent hesitates briefly in response to a question that seems particularly tricky and begins his answer with a long drawn-out "Well, that's a good question, of course..." Of course it is, the correspondent thought it up himself and passed it on to the presenter when preparing. You can also hear that if you're listening in a traffic jam mexico rcs data at Brüttiseller Kreuz. Radio listeners aren't generally stupid. And sorry, but acting is a profession, not everyone can do it.
Basically, it's amateur theater. that even the most underrated presenter on Swiss radio is an expert on the Middle East, Southeast Asia or Russia and is capable of having an enlightening conversation with an expert on the ground. But nobody expects that. And above all, nobody believes it. The information may be correct, but it borders on fake news: we're being fooled.
The uncrowned king of this discipline on the correspondent side is Fredy Gsteiger, diplomatic correspondent. The fact that this term even exists is astonishing. When Gsteiger is asked about difficult negotiations at the UN, it seems like a composition by an old master. Every answer, no matter how complex, is seamlessly followed by a coherent question, and without a second's hesitation. The script that Gsteiger probably delivers to Zurich is probably on a Tarantino level in terms of sophistication of the dialogue - including emphasis.