I was very surprised at the idea of Cromwell's Law. More specifically, at the implication that Cromwell's Law suggests. Cromwell's Law tells us that we should always assign a certain probability for an unknown variable/outcome/etc. The implication of this law is that humans can never be 100% accurate or sure about anything. There is always some degree of uncertainty which then push me towards a philosophical conundrum about self-accuracy.
If I were conducting the interview, I would ask Spiegehalter about his thoughts about news headlines falsifying or misguiding readers by providing unclear statistics about certain events. For example, some news articles may say, "Survey says 100% of all Harvard Students are Depressed". However, if they only sample 3 people and those students all answer, "yes", then while the statement isn't false, it is not representative or accurate of the true populations. I am interested in Spiegehalter's answer because, within the first few minutes of his interview, he discussed how statistics can be misconstrued depending on specific wording and understanding of the statement.
Fantastic suggestion for a follow up question!