Not all of them were bad. A lot legit have explanations. That also has to be understood. Sometimes an outrage isn't really an outrage. We are living in a time of internet outrage over half-quotes and it really should be okay to push back against those cases. However, he has owned up to several quotes that he considers wrong and said as much in this interview.
I suspect Shaprio wishes he had this one back, but that doesn't mean that the interview was conducted professionally.
When you are interviewed, its never good to be argumentative. The reason why is that you never get your point across and you look petty. Lets take the first question that triggered Ben which was the Georgia Ban on abortion. So the interview guy specifically stated going backwards and gave 2 examples. This triggered Ben who had an opportunity to explain why he believed the ban was a good thing and to explain why those 2 examples were legit but instead he concentrated on the farming of the question got argumentative and end up not answering the question or giving his opinion on the issue.
He also did not own up to any of his bad quotes. He told the interviewer to go to a website and read up on it but he had the chance in the interview to give his side. The only people who will go to his site are the people who already follow him. If Ben is trying to show a different side of himself he had the opportunity during the interview to do so. You cannot sit there and preach about change then get all arrogant and defensive about previous ills in his past. If anything I came away from that interview believing his book is only facade and the person who wrote is still the same person who made those quotes.