Peter and Sandra, for the record I did say that that was my initial impression only. I also noted that this impression (i.e. that the interview could have and perhaps had taken place as early as say, 1997) had turned out not to be the case, given the info Peter's already given us here on this thread. I have read this thread from start to finish (including your posts), and I also am familiar with this journalist's work, so I would have been very surprised had the interview NOT been recent.
I do, however, stand by my opinions regarding the Herald-Scum and the truly woeful standard of what passes for a) news, b) a good headline and c) sub-editing at that paper. My point being, why get worked up about what that pathetic rag prints anyway as they (I refer to the newspaper and not the individual journo who has the misfortune to work there) are just out-and-out ****stirrers anyway.
Edited to add: Let's hope the article in Who Weekly has a few more facts and a little less "beat-up"... when's that issue due to come out, anyway, Peter?