It must be said: in the first week of that second season I Concealed never really seen with full commitment of his physiognomy fed up with disinterest in one of his table guests. In this program you should already call that progress. Furthermore, however, I again got the impression that ‘the people’ prefer to worry about doom and gloom, even if it does not affect them. Not infrequently this involved child suffering. The murder of a 14-year-old girl sparked the long-standing debate about how safe our children are on the internet. When a child was killed in a bullet related to the drug world in Antwerp, an item was not only hung on Tuesday, an editorial choice that could be justified, but it was also thought about on Monday as soon as the news reached the studio . “Do you already know something more?” asked Verhulst Hilde Crevits – he can tutor her – while she had also just joined to talk about her burnout.
I always think it’s a bad sign if during an interview with an elected member of the people I feel more sympathy for the latter than for the interviewer, but it happened to me when Crevits was subjected by Verhulst to a six-year-old film from the last time that her hair had started to spin, then in the Flemish Parliament. I don’t know where Verhulst wanted to go with that dubious refresher of the collective memory, but I don’t like addressing policymakers about their health as much as holding them accountable for their governance. Which Vincent of Quickenborne was willing to leave his police shelter for Verhulst’s studio, undoubtedly also teaches us something about our current political system. But what?
I suppose that ‘the people’ are more concerned with feelings than with facts anyway, because ‘What do you think of this?’ is about the most frequently asked question in ‘The table of four’. Verhulst usually informs them of unauthorized persons who only come to sell a news book or program they have written. May on Thursday Jan Jaap van der Wal even touting his own talk show on Play4. And that in a talk show on Play4. The circle didn’t need to get much rounder, especially since I was still remembering the episode from the day before. Then Verhulst threw that by no means at just about every theme Luc Appermont concerned, nevertheless with a certain pleasure a line to Luc Appermont. However, he had come to familiarize us with De Kastaars, the latest invention of the media to congratulate the media for work done. You’d forget what happened to the TV stars. Appermont, who I think knows very well how things turned out with the TV stars, assured us that the voting procedure behind the Kastaars would be done with integrity. I took note of that, which again did not mean that the Kastaars were then significantly less able to harass me than before.
Appermont’s position on international relations with Iran also became ours, whether we wanted it to or not. That happened when Verhulst spoke to the sister of Oliver Vandecasteele, the Belgian aid worker owned by a rogue Iranian regime bent on putting innocent Westerners in jail in order to use them for an unjust prisoner exchange. ‘How sure are we that he really did nothing?’ Verhulst asked the woman. It is striking how his implanted journalistic reflex always kicks in at just the wrong moments. Then the voice of the people rose within him once again: ‘What is someone actually going to look for in Iran?’ Yes, what is it with those humanitarian aid workers?
After one week, this person had already seen enough of ‘The table of four’, a talk show from far after the era of the talk show.