Interviewing Bannon is probably best understood as a form of elite white male virtue signalling - a way to show that you stand above the 'emotions' of fear and hatred induced by white supremacists, and can assess their 'ideas' with your superior rationality.
For Zakaria, it's essentially aspirational. Sitting down with Bannon in a room with a globe for a big serious interview is saying to his white media peers that he's not one of the irrational browns, that he wouldn't personally be affected or *feel*. It's a claim to whiteness
Other activities, like droning on about campus speech or publishing thoughtful essays by #Metoo dudes come under the same heading. It's signalling to a public peer group that you too are fully rational, ie 'unaffected' by emotion. That you operate in the realm of ideas.
I should add that Bannon was a legitimate interview subject when he was in the WH. No one thought it was ‘not news’ when the NY’er profiled him then. But now? Its just performative.
The whole ‘intellectual dark web’ thing was equally performative, which is what made it embarrassing. A sort of Mensa membership for right-leaning talking heads.
Last word: as some wise person said on here a while ago: the ONLY legitimate reason to interview Bannon is to find out why he wears a button down shirt on top of another button down shirt. I’d tune in for that, but only if @mehdirhasan was asking.
