Graph structure
I have a general comment regarding the structure of the Debategraph for this interview. On the one hand we have a list of considerations in favour of (4, 8, 10) and considerations against (3, 9) rejecting the proposition that crowdsourcing could facilitate multi-disciplinary risk assessment. On the other hand, we have a list of considerations in favour of (1, 5, 7) and considerations against (2, 6) accepting the proposition. I found this to be a little confusing.
Indeed, for instance,the considerations that speak against (respectively: in favour of) rejecting the proposition are considerations that speak in favour of accepting it (respectively: rejecting it), and vice versa.
So what we really have here is simply two lists of considerations: one comprising considerations that support accepting the proposition (1, 3, 5, 7, 9) and one comprising considerations that support rejecting it (2, 4, 6, 8, 10).
Furthermore, putting things this way allows us to see that there may be some degree of redundancy in the considerations provided: 2 and 10 for instance do not seem very clearly distinct, neither do 1, 3 and 9 or 6 and 8.