I would say if the interviewer is unable to conduct an interview where they can detect bullshit then they probably shouldn't be conducting an interview.

In those instances - and there will be many, nobody can know everything to the point of being able to detect bullshit - they should probably just report established fact and avoid interviews such as this entirely.

Not great for editors and producers of course, interviews are good for ratings I imagine but if they become a favourite medium for bullshitters to spread lies then they bring the organisation into disrepute. Better avoided, imo.

Seems like a good excuse to bring in more expert opinion though, I'm sure there's plenty of academics etc. who would love to take on a guy like Lawson live on air.