How not be a part of the encounter

Tracking press articles with Googles News and keywords like "interpreting" or "interpreter" allows at times for thought provoking encounters. What about for instance this article from the battlecreekenquirer.com, on a program that teaches community interpreting.

Here are bits of though provoking stuff:

"in the class, students learn "how to not be a part of the encounter as the interpreter ... Really all they are is a pipeline for language".

"They learn the importance of translating exactly what is said, Varricchio said, without allowing emotions to play a role. They learn skills to usher relationships between the two parties almost as if the interpreter didn't exist."

Doesn't this exist in a vacuum where speeches were perfect, that is perfectly articulated and meaningful? In court interpreting at least, I perceive the issues at stake. In medical settings too, to some extend. But why deny the presence of the interpreter as a major disturbing factor of the communication dynamics? Checking emotions that may upturn the interpreter even in business settings comes as the most valuable suggestion here I wish one day to dig deeper into.