instructive on this. united states supreme court has slated oral arguments on the immunity question for the end of april and has been discussed, we don't actually know when they will render a decision. that should be a concern for all of us. most importantly, it should be a concern for defendant trump. any defendant who is actually raised the defense of immunity should want to know if he will prevail on that defense, if he is actually immunized from criminal liability, even in circumstances like this one where the questions are unprecedented. the fact that the supreme court and donald trump see no problem with a significant delay, that is the real question. but please, don't take our word for it. >> so, it is actually imperative i think that the public read the indictments for themselves, that donald trump seems in no hurry to respond to and we hope you will take the

time to consider the charges against donald trump and make up your own mind, what we tried to do in the book, in our commentary and insider tips and the cast of characters is made this is easily digestible and understandable as possible for lawyers and nonlawyers alike. we understand that there are various rationales for the decisions that were made by prosecutors and we tried to reveal those in this book. >> and again, as part of that educative mission we have tried in this hour to explain some of those choices and the implications of all of these delays in their -- we are so grateful to all of you for joining us for this hour-long special. we really appreciate it. i am melissa my. >> i am andrew wiseman. good night. am andrew wiseman. good night. a good evening once again. i am stephanie ruhle. we are now 200 85 days away from the election and you are

in luck. tonight we have a very special nightcap we are going to get to in just a moment featuring an amazing lineup of student journalists. first, we have to break down some news of the day, starting with fulton county da willis. she will remain on the trump georgia election interference case. today a judge ruled that she could stay if nathan wade, a special prosecutor willis had a relationship with, stepped down. hours after the decision by the judge wade did in fact just that. here is my colleague, blaine alexander, with more. >> reporter: he was front and center when willis announced her criminal indictment of donald trump. tonight, nathan wade, the man leading the prosecution against the former president for allegedly trying to overturn george's election results has resigned. the culmination of a month-long spectacle after one of trump's codefendants, michael roman, exposed a romantic relationship between wade and fulton county dahi fani willis who hired wad

on the case. roman accused fani willis a financially benefiting from her relationship with wade after the two went on vacations together while working the case. in a ruling today scott mcafee said while he did not find an actual conflict of interest in the case he did find a significant appearance of impropriety that infects the current structure of the prosecution team and gave willis an ultimatum. either she and her office leave the case or wade. in a letter wade writes today he is resigning to move this case forward as quickly as possible point for willis, today's ruling is a legal victory but a professional blow following the stunning to our testimony. >> it is a lot. it is a lot. >> judge scott mcafee scolding what he called her, unprofessional manner, on the stand. while not dismissing the case pr out right as the defense had asked mcafee takes willis to task over this tremendous lapse in judgment.

tonight trump's attorney says he will use all legal options available as we fight to end this case. >> let's get smarter with the leadoff panel today. michelle joins us. luke broadwater, congressional reporter for the new york times. and harry litman, former u.s. attorney and former deputy assistant attorney general.r let's start with you. willis stays on the case. what are your big takeaways? >> that's the number one take away. but the number two take away is she really absorbed some real haymakers from mcafee and that's not going to go away. mcafee and she together have given trump and company, but georgia republicans in general, it's a real mixed brew of politics down there.

a club to beat her with and they will continue to do so. nt you may have the feel from the opinion that kind of puts this n to rest. i don't think it does and i think we are going to continue to hear trump and others shouting from the rooftops about the soundbites that mcafee has supplied.db the owner is not afraid of it as much as it would appear. >> you agree with andrew wiseman? even though she can stay on she can voluntarily recuse herself to get all of this noise out of the case. >> did he say that? he is one smart guy. the truth is, i do. when you think about it from the vantage point of the case, i'm not phoning her professionally. she's done an awesome job with the case. a lot of this is unfair. at least overplayed from what she has done. but if you want to say what's best for the case now, removing herself from it would be best

for the case now. i know a lot of people will think that is unfair. and maybe it is unfair. if the focus is on moving the case forward it would be better off. she could stay in the chair but turning it over to her staff to handle and staying outside of it i think with the the smartest move. i agree with andrew. >> what are you hearing out of trouble tonight? we just heard from alexander. trumps lawyer said he will be sa staying on this, all over this. i'm guessing they are already raising money off of it. >> of course this is a split decision. you have the vision of impropriety. let's remember, as much as this is a legal argument this is a split decision legally. when it comes to the politics it is really, does this look bad? they are essentially saying this is a win for us and that this looks as though fani willis did something that is at least not smart . directed on a

case that is of course dealing with the former president. in the trump world, and in the former president's mind, this looks like something to say we can rally people around this and say this is part of a big witchhunt we can say this is a woman who is at least unprofessional at best. and at worst, unethical. of course they will continue to call her ethical. so the judge said. especially when there is that part that says she was in last judgment essentially for her to have nathan wade on this case, it really place to this idea that she's not the best person for this case. of course when it comes to legally she can stay on this case and trump can continue to say she is someone who should not be leading this case. i think in some ways the politics here really almost outweigh the legal findings here, which is that she can stay on the case. if you are in politics and thinking about this from the lens of that, this just doesn't look good. >> harry, new topic. today thery judge in the hush

money trial here in new york delayed the case by a month. what you make of the situation? it seems like almost everybody associating with is frustrated. >> starting with the judge. the number one issue is how much time does trump need to process these new papers? that's a straightforward question that really doesn't have anything to do with how this all happened. and that seems to me there seems to be a little bit there but not a lot. 30 days should do it. ay but obviously the judge is hot and bothered about this and thinks maybe the u.s. attorney's office, maybe the da wasn't totally above board. i don't know. there are good reasons that the fdny could have withheld the ny request, which is what they first got from the das office before submitting the subpoena to trump. but he wants to get to the bottom of it and he's obviously peeved. i think that should really give way. the question before him should i be, what does trump now need for due process to process the

new stuff? that roshould be a focus. i think a month from what we h know ought to do it. >> today sounds like annoyed judges friday. the election campaign is now fully underway and all four of trump's criminal cases are delayed for a variety of reasons. what does it all mean for november? >> right. my view is if some of these cases are not resolved, and it looks like some of them may not be by the time we get to the election, that that is really a loss for the voters. the voters do not have the ability to analyze all of the evidence in all of these cases. there's too much information. so they do need to the juries and judges to do that for them. so we are going to go into an election where we don't know whether a potential new president will be guilty or innocent of the crimes that he has alleged to have committed.

that's the situation donald trump wants. he wants to delay. he wants to be elected president again. he can then move to get rid of the federal cases and protections for presidents from criminal prosecution. that in his interest. the voters will be going in blind as to whether or not donald trump is in fact guilty of these crimes and will have to make a decision. >> luke, are they blind? do you see a bloating -- floating -- voting block out there? i think he's corrupt, but i'm not quite sure. and i need a court decision to help me decide one way or another. you really think there are voters out there in that camp? >> there aren't a lot of these voters. but there is some limited polling that shows that a conviction would move a small amount of the electorate. i agree with you that most people are really locked in on donald trump. he's either really bad guy or r

some sort of hero. there is some small portion of moderate and swing voters who may conviction could affect their votes. or an acquittal. but i do think, generally speaking, it's to everyone's advantage to have the fax looked at and vetted by impartial people, by judges and juries and are really here. where these charges legitimate? is he guilty new york? is he guilty in georgia? is he guilty in federal court? or are these bogus charges? i think you should probably have an opinion on that. one thing i have learned from covering courts over the years is there is nothing like a real good vetting of the evidence in a trial to really get to the bottom of the truth. >> for sure. here's some different news. today mike pence, trumps former vp, went on fox news and said, very clearly, that he would noth support his former boss. let's take another look.

>> it should come as no surprise that i will not be endorsing donald trump this year. donald trump is pursuing an articulating an agenda that is at odds with the conservative agenda that we governed on during our four years. that's why i cannot in good conscience endorse donald trump in this campaign.se >> logically, it is not a surprise. when you think about tim scott, ted cruz, mitch mcconnell have lined up for trump. and mike pence, he was his former vp. is pretty big. do you think? >> it would be big if this is a conventional sort of political situation. but mike pence was running for his life in the capital with a crowd of people who were shouting, hang mike pence. it's pretty clear former president trump had really turned their attention and anger toward him because he would not steal the 2020 election on behalf of trump.

so i don't think it's that surprising when you look at the set of facts that mike pence is having to deal with. far apart from the policy decisions and the policy differences that they may have. you have mike pence, who i think is personally still dealing with the aftereffects of donald trump turning on him. let's remember, mike pence was a very loyal vice president. he was someone who has had no o daily on him. trump for years, and years, and years did things that were scandalous. things that looked like mike pence would naturally disagree with him. but when it came to stealing election that's when they finally found the straw that broke the camels back and he could no longer support him. it's interesting that he's not endorsing him. it's interesting that he's on fox news and willing to say this. it's deftly not surprising. mitch mcconnell is someone who is poignantly criticizing donald trump. at the end of the day he was, at least for now, still leader of republicans in the senate.

so he feels a different way in terms of the future of the party. like pentz is saying, look, i'm not doing this. this is not someone i'm going to back anymore. it's very interesting but not surprising. >> the phrase, "hang mike pence" is where he found his redline. thank you all for starting us off. you at home, don't go anywhere. when we come back it is time for our nightcap and i promise you, we've got an incredible group of young journalists. we will talk social media and why y the congress crackdown on tiktok is just scratching the surface. later, with information running wild online we will get into the importance of journalism with some of the industry future stars. we will end the week on a high note. if you believe the youth is the key to our future we have stars. the 11th hour is utjust getting underway on a great friday night.

scout is protected by simparica trio and he's in it to win it! simparica trio is the first chew with triple protection. whoa fleas! and ticks! (♪♪) intestinal worms! whoa! heartworm disease! no problem with simparica trio! this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions including seizures. use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. for winning protection— go with simparica trio.

my name is oluseyi use with caution in dogs with a histo and some of myorders. favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. giving millions of fans, like my dad and me, new ways of catching up on their favorite sport.

republicans and democrats have found one thing they agree on. tiktok is a threat to national security. forcing the sale of the chinese owned apple or handing out right flew through the house and now it is with the senate. for the 170 million americans that are addicted to tiktok videos the future is not looking very good. with that let's bring in our nightcap. and i could not be more excited about who is joining. the future stars of journalism. stars across the country who have done amazing work and they haven't even graduated college yet. the oh baker joins us. former spot like investigations editor for the stanford daily and the youngest ever recipient of the prestigious award. -- of the student newspaper at the university of north carolina , chapel hill's. she's here in new york not just to a visit us on the 11th hour but to receive the press association award. tommy perrone is back with us. his op-ed team got national attention for its position on

harvard president clotting and natalia wilson is here. news and politics reporter for the hill top and howard university. some of her recent interviews include stacey abrams and fani willis. natalia, what do you think about the potential band? >> i think this potential ban will have a large impact on voter turnout in upcoming elections. i saw firsthand, i entered on the hill, for a lot of offices they are receiving a lot of calls from young voters and also teenagers asking to avoid the ban. i think it's important to note that when we are considering what would be important for young voters and how presidential candidates should implement that into their campaign if they want to garner that vote. >> do you think those young voters realize why the ban is potentially being put in place? it's not because they feel like the kids are going outside to play baseball because they are on the tiktok, the issue is over national security. do you think the young voters realize that?

>> i would say that probably for the most part they are not aware that it is an actual reason that's on the floor. it's kind of unfortunate that they are not aware. i would just hope that they looked further into the issue so that they are able to make an informed decision. >> what you think about this? >> listen, social media companies don't use data well. i don't that this is breaking news to anyone. of course there is the overtone here. >> i don't think you mean they don't use it well, they are not using it for good purposes. >> they are using it very well, very sophisticated. but they are not doing so for ends that many people would deem good. >> but it's not just tiktok. >> it's not just tiktok. on one hand, i get it. it's a chinese company and that plays into a greater narrative that has legs to it. at the same time, i'm sitting here thinking facebook has more data, uses it with greater

sophistication and historically we have many more cases in which they have used it poorly. that's not to say that tick- tock is in a national security threat. but it is to say, and there was a great piece in the atlantic from jonathan last week, about what social media and phones in general, digital life what it has done to childhood. that, to me, is obviously one of the prime causes of the youth mental health crisis and a variety of other pressing issues. that, to me, is what i would like to see congress thinking more deeply about. we've had tons of hearings about how big tech uses monopoly power, how big tech makes people self-conscious of their bodies and their appearances. this goes so much deeper than just self-image. it's fundamentally about the way that childhood works and how we relate to one another. it's a little bit hard to listen to people rattle on about tick-tock when there is this fundamental crisis in american childhood that's producing crises in american adults now. >> but of course those hearings are just great big entertainment shows. and before the hearings and after all of the big-time lobbyists from all of those companies are entertaining those very lawmakers that are sitting at their railing against the companies yet

nothing gets done. katelyn, i see you nodding your head. i'm assuming because it's not just tiktok, all of these companies. and when it comes to data privacy laws and regulations we basically don't have any for any of them. >> i'm with tommy here. i don't think tiktok is particularly unique and what it's doing other than it is a chinese company that is very well known for being a chinese company and for being popular with young people. but what i worry about when we take tiktok off of the market is censorship, yes. but more so censorship for people who rely on it to get their message out. something about grassroots organizes. something about young people like us who use it to get an idea of what the political world is like. but that's what we are using it for. i think taking it off the market is cutting off of very valuable ties between young people and the rest of the world. >> but isn't there a risk that that is what young people using it for? tiktok as there's a new source. all of you have a deep understanding of standards and best practices. you know, as editors, all that gets left on the cutting room

floor as exciting and fun as it is, unless it meets the standard there are no standards when it comes to the platforms. >> i would be hesitant to dismiss tiktok too quickly as a national security threat. i will tell you the moment that i personally stop using tiktok like most people in my generation did use it. in june of 2022 emily baker white, a reporter, wrote the story and taling about how chinese authorities had a backdoor into accessing sensitive data and tiktok. after that the chinese company behind tiktok put her and other reporters under surveillance. putting journalists under surveillance is a big no-no. it also came out in court filings that in 2018 tiktok was being used to track hong kong protesters. so this goes beyond the conversations that we are having about xenophobia, which are conversations to have and free speech concerns our conversations to have. but we should not be dismissive of how authoritarian regimes

have been using technology to crack down on protesters, on advocacy groups, on journalists. >> i would know quickly that meta has been complicit in genocide and has been, to some extent, a tool of or at least a little bit cozy with authoritarian regimes. that's not to say that tiktok is not a national security issue think it probably is. but it's worth broadening this conversation to meta, one of the biggest companies in the world. it has more data and uses in sophisticated ways. >> so do you worry that if tiktok gets band it only makes meta more powerful? >> that's one concern. the other concern is regulators brushing their hands and saying, we did it. we defeated evil social media . when in reality, there is a bigger company that has more data and a long and fairly sordid history of using it in ways that we should disagree with. >> must go back to the point that natalya made. can there be medical fallout for these lawmakers to move forward and say, let's been this

? republicans are pushing it. our republican medic -- mega- donors that want to ban tiktok. and donald trump said, forget about it. joe biden, who needs to appeal to young voters right now, do you think that there could be fallout to that young people who use tiktok in all the ways katelyn was just saying could say, wait, you are already 80 years old. now you are taking away my jam. you are not my guy. >> i certainly think so. i think we have this all of -- all or nothing approach when it comes to tiktok or any social media platform. if we can't regulated to that we will ban it. like you were saying, tommy, if the solution is to ban it then we are not holding anyone accountable . we are not holding the regulars who have to keep "the trump indictments" up to standards accountable. we are not creating any standards were best practices for these company's. we are just saying, okay, that's it. we are done. really, the work is not yet there. and young voters are left to do with the consequences. >> one of the biggest worries of social media is the spread of misinformation. the biggest, most viral story this week of course on that

subject, i'm not necessarily proud but i have been down the rabbit hole day and night every night over there is this doctored photo of princess kate middleton and her family. put aside the question of where she is and i too would definitely like to know where she is. but really, the manipulation of this photo raises all sorts of questions. on one hand, yes, people were able to snuff it out immediately. but on the other, what about next time and the time after that? are you concerned that in this moment of ai photos can be doctored overnight and we won't know the difference between a truth and a lie. do you know where she is? >> i don't know where she is. i think that, in regards to what we were previously speaking about pertaining to tiktok, our focus should be on regulating ai so that instances like this can't occur. unfortunately, i think effective regulation comes with collaboration. working with ai

companies to ensure that we are preventing situations like this from happening where people are able to dr. fake photos. you can of course think of all of the terrible implications that can come with that if it gets in the hands of the wrong people. >> does this photo weaken the already weak trust in our institutions, our platforms? it is stunning. >> for a long time the photo and the video was kind of the gold standard of truth. you saw a photo of something and you could know it was true so you could get your fingers around it and see it with your own eyes. that's what people used to say. now, for the first time, we are seeing photos. listen, we have been able to edit photos for a little while now. for the first time you can generate a photo that fundamentally did not happen. and i'm not saying that's what happened in kate middleton's case. but i think it brings to bear a really important question. what do we do politically and as citizens when we are not really living in a shared reality anymore? when we can't be sure that we

are living in a shared reality. when we don't know we are operating on information that is real in any setting is a profoundly challenging thing. yes, regulators will have to grapple with it. i think it goes much deeper. including how we educate people about consuming media. >> what do you think? we are approaching a time where we can believe the photos and videos we are seeing. >> i would hesitate about saying how unprecedented this is. spent a lot of last year dealing with doctored images. that's a lot of what happened to the research of the former stanford president i was reporting on. these were papers that were up to 20 years old where they were displacing together images and putting together! mental results to make it look like something had happened when actually hadn't happened. and this is well before ai tools could generate stuff like this. the tradition goes back to stalin sensors and altering images after the fact. >> being able to alter those images is getting better and better. >> absolutely. and it's incumbent upon places where i work. stanford university, where we are doing

so much ai research and barreling ahead so quickly to step back and think about ai watermarking. to think about efforts to properly identify deep fake content. these are hard questions. they are not easily solvable. the problem is, the arm races are already afoot. it's too late to put the genie back in the bottle. at this point the most important thing is for people to have skepticism. >> but isn't that the scariest problem? that stanford might be the gold standard. but there are all sorts of bad actors that have this technology and who knows what they could do? >> absolutely. and it's very clear that these are going to get manipulated more. especially with the advent of tools like the new open ai video model that can generate convincing clips from a text prompt. these are going to get shockingly better in the next year. literally a year ago yesterday gpt four was released. it's a large language model that everyone has been talking about. and in one year we have already seen massive transformation. i think we should be keeping an eye on this because it's going to get worse before it gets better. >> is part of the problem with it misinformation that people

really like conspiracy theories so they want to push them? >> i think so. especially for young people. what i think about ai is really notable. and notable from instances in the past when people have been not so trustworthy with her documents. it's democratic. anybody can get on chat gpt and dr. an image. not to give to much credit for ai, it has a long way to go. i know people that can photoshop kate middleton's photo better than she did. but what is happening with it now is that everyone can access it. it makes trust kind of difficult unilaterally on every level. >> but is there some good news here? in terms of the kate middleton picture people care enough. they dug into it. they got to the truth. does this give you some sense of hope that people demand the truth? >> yes, i would say it definitely gives me a sense of hope in media literacy. people aren't taking things at face value, especially considering ai. i think that is important

moving forward to ensure that the truth is upheld and maintained. >> i think the trouble is, what happens when it's not kate middleton? what happens when 5000 people care about and not 50 million? that is the really challenging thing. i appreciate the point that misinformation is nothing new, including visual misinformation. >> but its ability to amplify it . >> my friends ability to edit their photo to make them look better, that is a photo that fundamentally existed in the first place. they may be touchup the blush on their cheeks or something. but it happened. the ability to create a video that fundamentally never happened, to create a photo that never happened, to depict people and places with other people that were never in that place, that's a brand-new thing. in that sense it is kind of a watershed moment. it's not to say there hasn't been really high level misinformation in the past. but it does require a real rethink of how we approach misinformation in the public sphere. >> we are going to stay on this conversation after the break. we say here all the time, the truth matters. but only if you see it. we are talking about the future

of journalism in the 11th hour. the nightcap continues. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

whether you realize it or not we need good journalism for democracy to thrive. the news business is having a tough, tough time. we talk about all of the time here. it's not just the fight against misinformation. recently there have been massive layoffs across the industry and local newspapers

are getting wiped out around this country. but we, at this table, have the future of journalism right here and it is giving me great, great hope. natalia, i want to start with you. what role does your college paper play in the local community? >> with recent industrywide layoffs there's been a great hindrance and reporting and reporting news journalism especially at the local level because people are fighting to keep their jobs. that's why collegiate journalism is so important. it allows us to inform the public. not just our local campus about issues that are important. and the supplement of the lack of reporting is happening due to local papers losing fundy and -- funding and getting them altogether. >> you are trying to separate fact from fiction in your paper. what concerns do you have about the future of journalism when you see more and more outlets are shutting down every day? >> let me start by saying i love student journalism. even more, i love local

journalism. >> why? >> in chapel hill, daily tar heel commensal 131-year-old paper. it's the only record for -- carolyn. parts of durham. we have a big service to our communities and we are just students. i think one big part by getting students involved in local media is one creating pathways to becoming actual professional journalists but making more sustainable business practices. because what to local journalism needs is ways to sustain itself going into the future and i'm happy we are sitting here talking about it because the silly way things can get done. >> but we are seeing young people, we talked about in the last segment. fewer and fewer young people are getting their news from traditional news sources. whether it is a college newspaper, a local newspaper, a national newspaper or television program. how concerning is that for you? >> for them at -- me that is a big issue. a lot of things people don't realize about these older established newspapers is that there are a lot of guys that go into a story. if an individual

person has bias, fine. every individual person has their own opinions. the idea is you can correct for that by having so many different people with semi- different views actually trying to have a say and make sure it is as perfectly factual as you can actually get it. and you don't see that on tiktok. and you can see individual people going out and doing gung , amazing work. but you will have the same controls for quality. that is something that concerns me. >> you think the average person realizes that? >> i think a lot of people don't really understand what goes into journalism. i remember last year. i talked to 10 people for every person i would quote in an article. the thousands of hours they go into a big investigation, that's not something people have a real conception of. and that's okay because that means you are putting out the most distilled, quality product as you can. but it also means people discount the work that goes into quality journalism and they don't understand why it matters so much. >> but that's the issue. quality journalism is expensive. and right now people are

saying, i don't want to pay for it, i don't need to pay for it. >> it's a huge concern. the thing that people don't fully grasp all of the time is local journalism is not just journalism that happens to cover local stories. for a very long time in history local journalism was the fabric of the community. you could pick up a paper that could cover ongoing events in your town and county. that would be how you engaged with them cynically. so it's not a crisis of local journalism. it's a crisis of local engagement. as journalism and media shifts to a national frame you have people who are only engaging with national and political issues and it allows so many things at the state and local level to under the hood and never be talked about. it means important issues, where a lot of the action happens at the local and state level, don't get as much attention as they deserve and people are not held to account in the same way. >> people often say they are tired of the news, they find the news super biased. when you're actually doing your reporting do you necessarily think that the news is biased

or are there people that just don't like the end result? >> as a news reporter i wholeheartedly believe that it's important for us to not be politically biased at all. however, i think there has been a great political shift in the landscape to where political bias has been conflated with morality or moral bias. especially over the last 10 years, even more specifically since the summer of 2020 in response to police brutality and race relations in america. there's been this shift. for that particular instance and in that context the unbiased coverage didn't tell the full truth and it lacked nuance. that's why i also think it's super important for there to be diversity in journalism so that there can be nuance in coverage of news and politics and that people are able to tell the stories with nuance, without the being completed, being a journalist.

you also have student news consumers. >> often times, as people get older, their views hardened. you find that your readers have more open minds or are they set in their ways, especially when it comes to politics? >> gosh. at least here in chapel hill we have an open mind student body and i think the onus is on us, as the student paper, to meet people where we are at. i have pushed back on the idea that people need to care more about news, my pushback on the idea that we need to make it a certain way. we need to meet people where they are at. if they are getting the news on tiktok and instagram we have the ability, especially students and young people, to make news to meet those needs. >> my feeling about student journalism, this is something i think people have not been so tuned into. they wouldn't be tuned into if they are -- it's on the campus getting reported on. local journalism is better journalism. it's not just journalism is covering local issues, it's local journalism covers local issues often better than national publications. something that i've watched a

lot, there's been lots of narratives spinning around about my school, harvard. the way i have watched publications like the times or washington post cover those issues has at times been unsatisfying. as a student at harvard i can personally fact check the claims they are making. i think they usually get it mostly right. this land, the angle, the exact way their framing things, often there is something missing. that's because they don't have the local or student context to give us the real analysis of what's happening. >> what do you think? >> i totally buy that. and i hear a lot of different perspectives that are coming into journalism right now, which is really important. we need to be rethinking the model. i don't really care the platform it's on. but the quality needs to stay the same. it's not just about ensuring that we are putting the hours into the reporting, it's also that we as reporters are uploading our responsibility. i love student journalism so much. i love my peers around the country that are doing amazing work stepping up to people that otherwise would be doing that

work. but if there's one thing that can be said i think the parallels of student journalism right now is a lot of people to bring their own opinions, bring her advocacy into journalism. and that is unacceptable to me. journalism is a public good. that means it requires individual sacrifice. and it's all well and good to have opinions. it's all well and good to have advocacy. we need to do in this country and all countries. but that does not align with unbiased journalism. >> what was it like? the harvard crimson, you are in the mouth of the lion during the controversy swelling around claudine gaye. >> i leave the opinion section for the crimson. the thing i was repeating over and over again while these narratives are swelling around about our campus is, we need to be able to say the sky is blue. there are some facts that are actually verifiable, that are objective. the thing that straight news gets itself in trouble by doing is they have a commitment to this notion of objectivity where you have to treat all of the sides, not just equal

consideration, you have to treat them as actually equal in the substance of what they are saying. for example, if a former presidential candidate says, i actually won in 2020 when he lost, then you have to pretend sometimes that there is some validity to those claims when we know they are not true. on our campus, when i heard the narratives going around that were often not true, something i would tell my team is we, as opinion journalists, have the freedom to say this is not true. so someone tells me that there is a giant hulking rocker see the runs harvard, that's factually incorrect. we can count the number of di administrators. there's not that many. you can make perfectly legitimate arguments about the di at harvard if they are doing a good job with it. but it's important to say, in all caps, di bureaucrats do not run harvard. because they don't. >> everybody is staying right here. when we come back you know what time it is. it's time for the mvp of the week. there was so much news this week . it doesn't mean they have the best week but they certainly have a big one. the 11th hour continues. it's nightcap night.

♪♪ why won't scout play with us anymore? he has something called osteoarthritis pain. it's joint pain that hurts him all the time.

come on, scout. now, there's librela. the first and only once-monthly injection to control your dog's oa pain. veterinary professionals administering librela who are pregnant, trying to conceive, or breast feeding, should take extreme care to avoid self-injection, which could cause allergic reactions like anaphylaxis. this is the best day of my life!

i am not letting you go to bed without this. our nightcap is wrapping up with the mvps of the week and let us be clear, you are all my mvps. i'm amazed, i'm inspired, i'm excited by every single one of you. i want to hear who you have chosen. katelyn, to you first. >> this week i wanted to pick andrea, a pulitzer prize-winning -- critic. her latest cover story for new york magazine is called, "freedom of sex, the moral case

for letting trans kids change their bodies." and i think her writings in support of transgender youth, in particular, has been transformative especially at a time when marginalized youth need a voice and journalism speaking up for them. >> my mvp for the week is my alma mater, christopher deborah, who published an essay in american magazine, which is one of the leading catholic magazines in america. entitled, "a catholic and -- at a time where di has become a political football and it's locked into place, either di is great where di sucks, it's refreshing to see a leader in education speaking forthrightly about what his school is doing to make sure that di is really achieving its ideals. a point that he makes in the essay, which i encourage everyone to read, is it's important that i link di. not just -- i situated in a broader framework of values.

that, to me, was the mvp of my week pick >> and it's about humanity. >> my mvp for the week is regina king who plays shirley chisholm in the upcoming netflix film. i had an opportunity to attend the early screening of african- american history and culture alongside regina king and her cast members >> did everyone bring folding chairs? >> no. we were in a little theater. alongside some of her cast members and some black women congress members as well. it was a really great experience. i will say, i was inspired hearing from regina about the struggles that she experienced while making the film and bringing shirley chisholm's story to the forefront. the movie itself, the messaging was amazing. i recommend everybody watches it because there's so much to learn from regina king as well as shirley chisholm. >> i saw her in an interview

this week on good morning america. she was talking about what it has been like for her. it's been two years since her son died and she said something i've never heard before. she said, grief is when love has nowhere to go. >> my eyes were not dry when i was watching that. >> i believe it. the last one to you, my friend. just so you know, if you are not aware, the o is the son of peter baker and susan glasser. last week my mvp was his hockey playing grandmother. >> 82. >> bad journalism. i think i said she was 83. fact check, right here. >> mine is also a tearjerker. i want to talk about the team behind 20 days in variable. which is the pulitzer prize- winning and now oscar-winning documentary about the russian invasion of ukraine. talk about something that you can't not cry while watching. i really want to talk about it because they represent all that i care about and journalism. this is her was a. this is staying behind in cambodia. these are the people telling the stories that no one else will tell. >> he said he didn't want to win the oscar. >> he did want to win the oscar, he wanted a war.

that, to me, his hair was in. >> you are an impressive bunch. ready? my mvp is someone who gives me enormous joy every day and sometimes it really frustrates me. i know i'm not the only one. today they are celebrating the 1000th game created by josh during the pandemic. the word guessing game has been played nearly 5 billion times. i can assure you, i am one of those people who plays every single day. i am in a very special worlde group. and i love it. but this game is now one of the reasons the new york times is doing so well. remember, the times bought worlde a few years ago. it's popularity now encourages people to subscribe to the new york times and those subscriptions support great, important journalism. may your first line be all in green. the oh, katelyn, tommy, natalia

. thank you all for being here. and i wish you at home a very good night. remember, you can catch the nightcap fridays and saturdays at 11:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. from all of our colleagues across the network and nbc news, thanks for staying up late. we will see you. we will see you. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

richard bolton: there was a female victim that was shot in a car, slumped over. cthis is houston 911 what are you reporting? >> i just heard what sounded like three gunshots. >> there was a female victim that was shot in a car. slumped over. >> i