mark: let's begin with a check of your first word news. prosecutors failed for the second time and efforts to hold a baltimore police accountable for the 2015 arrest and death of freddie gray. officertoday cleared an in his arrest, who died after being injured while in police custody. six other officers charged in the case will have separate trials over the coming months. donald trump met today with u.s. senator bob corker. iswas asked if trump considering him for a running mate or for cabinet position. >> i have no response.

[indiscernible] mark: corker's chairman of the senate farms relations committee. austria's far right has conceded defeat in the presidential race. mail-in votes were the margin of victory for an independent backed by the green party. the freedom party candidate tried to capitalize on public concerns about immigration. global news, 24 hours a day, powered by our 2400 journalists in more than 150 news bureaus around the world. from the bloomberg news room, i'm mark crumpton. ♪

emily: i am emily chang, and this is "bloomberg west." apple is betting big on bolder, brighter screens with bigger batteries. it is not coming until next year. plus, baidu behind the wheel. will the chinese search engine's advances in ai help the market in driverless cars? china's propaganda machine cranks out nearly 500 million posts a year. we will break down a new study from harvard that analyzes the marching orders. first, to our lead. news that apple is betting on a new screen for iphones in 2017. the new screen will be made from organic led, which is more flexible and energy-efficient. producers like samsung and sharp are saying they are investing.

apple is an investor in all of them. they say orders to make the screens are up 40%. but will this mean for iphone sales after apple's first sales declined in 14 years? here to discuss, alex len our bloomberg news apple reporter, and from new york, ceo of thrillist. what do we know? >> we know that orders have been placed to make this stuff, basically. for the iphone 8. there have been rumors swirling that it will come next year, in the 2015 phone. last week, applied materials. they said, we are getting massive orders.

emily: everyone has been waiting for the new iphone. it is not until the iphone 8. what does this mean for apple? >> the challenge you have got, that means, this year, let's slow our expectations even further. this is the kind of technology that people are going to be looking forward to. samsung has had o-led in their phones for four or five years already. what apple was very good at is taking existing technology and doing the best possible job. i was at a display conference this morning, and apple was the winner. apple will do a great job with this, but the question is if it can be different enough even in 2017. emily: talk to us about the real difference between oled and lcd.

since i have been making phones with oled for a wild out. they started making oled tvs but they pulled back because it was difficult to manufacture. >> it is the implications that are important and interesting, namely that the screen is lower energy and thinner. that could potentially create more space for a battery from which less power is needed. my biggest issue is, my battery dies inside a day. there are other things you might be able to do. perhaps creates augmented or virtual reality. emily: what does this mean for the cost of the phone? one of apple's problems is that phones are still too expensive for a lot of people. will oled screens significantly increase the cost? bob: i don't think that will be a huge issue for them. i think what we will see is the

ability to do foldable, even potentially bendable. you can do a shatterproof phone. the other big problem people have is they drop their phone. that saves you from having this crack screen dilemma that many people have had to face. emily: will these be shatterproof? bob: no guarantee that it will, but it is an opportunity. there are a lot of questions about what they are going to do with it. there is potential, so is the ability to do a radical design where you have a foldable, mechanical display that grows. there are amazing things you could potentially do. it is not clear they will do that even in the first

generation. emily: ben, you have built companies on the back of the iphone, invested in companies. when apple comes with a dramatically different formfactor, how does that impact companies on that and? ben: there is always a rush to kind of get on the back of the new things apple is doing, whatever that is. every company has to move with them because apple will only put their promotional power behind companies that are leaning into the things that are important to them. i think, with the new screen, it totally depends on what the form factor is. will this be a totally new size? will you have to rewrite all the code you have written for your

apps? what does that look like? i think everyone will have to respond, but it totally depends on what it is they are launching. emily: we did speak to gary dickerson, the ceo of applied materials, which makes the machinery that manufactures oled display technology. they recorded a 400% increase in orders for this type of machinery. take a listen to what he has to say. >> it really is the change in the mobile products to organic led displays. what we're going to see is a huge transition over the next couple of years that will drive a massive change going from lcd to organic led, flexible displays. emily: at the same time, we are hearing analysts say that the iphone se is getting a lot of pick up. bob: they need to have a broader range of products and have had. they have to have lower end products. they have to have the upper red

to maintain capabilities. my concern long-term is that apple becomes the premier device maker in the post device world. emily: ben lerer, you're sticking with me for the hour. now, to a story we're following. google's lead lawyer describes the copyright infringement case that could deliver one of the largest verdicts in u.s. history. he showed the jury a menu with just hamburger written on it. he likened it to the programming code oracle claims google stole to build its android operating system. his message dance putting the word burger on his message, putting a burger on the menu is not unique, it is what you put behind that. coming up, the search engine racing to commercialize a self driving car by 2018 and betting

on game changing voice technology. i am talking about baidu. ♪

emily: baidu, the chinese internet giant, is making great strides in developing ai tools that they say could power the next generation of search and smart devices. baidu also says it will have a driverless car on the road by 2018, ready for purchase. i had a chance to catch up with baidu's chief scientist andrew ng. ng believes ai will be as revolutionary as electricity. andrew: i think that baidu has

had a different approach to self driving cars and other companies. let's say you were driving along and there is a construction worker on the road. if a construction worker does that, you should stop. the behavior is totally opposite based on the subtle hand gesture. no ai system today can reliably distinguish between stop and go. we should make modest changes like giving the construction worker a wireless beacon. >> you are planning to test your cars in china, i think in the u.s. as well. what are the differences in how the drivers work in those two countries? andrew: drivers in china are incredibly aggressive.

i was in a car on my way to the airport a couple of weeks ago. there were five cars driving side-by-side. not quite sure what our cars are learning, but it is a more challenging environment. emily: are you still on track to have driverless cars on the road in two years? andrew: we are still on track for late 2018. jack: how will you make this available for automakers and auto partners, and how will you show the data between your self driving cars and the automaker? andrew: we are very focused on developing a technology right now. we work with bmw last year. i hope we will continue to create tons of value. emily: you have a personal assistant. what are your ambitions with that? andrew: one of the things i'm really excited about his voice-based communication.

the whole world is moving to cell phones. i think that if you can talk to your cell phone rather than type on a keyboard, it will be transformative of the way we interact with technology. i think that most people recognize the difference between 95% accurate speech definition and 99%. 99% is a game changer. since the beginning of last year, we have seen a number of voice interactions triple. i think we will see a rapid uptick invoice going forward. jack: once you get to 99%, is that good enough that you can sell it to businesses and sell that speech recognition? andrew: one of the things we're trying to think through his how to offer it to other companies. partnerships and so on. one of the challenges with ai is that, at least right now, it often takes skilled ai people

together with skilled building expertise, and have those teams work together. emily: there are reports that deep speech 2 can transcribe chinese language is better than a person. andrew: five years of audio data, transcribe audio data. this is a staggering amount of data for our system to learn from. emily: is it possible to do the same for english? obviously, the chinese written language is so much more complicated than the english written language. when we get to a point where machines actually are better at transcribing voice that humans -- it still seems like, based on the english language assistance

that i have worked with, it is a long way off. andrew: in terms of transcribing word by word, short phrases are superior to a human. but it turns out the mistakes a machine makes affect the meaning more, where a human gets a few words wrong but the underlying meaning is still there. we're working on it, and i hope our english performance will keep rapidly improving. emily: any plans to take on amazon echo or google home? andrew: i think amazon has done a very nice job on this current echo product. it is still not clear, i think. emily: one of the interesting things about voice technology is

that it could actually challenge different business models. how do you see voice shaking up the way that you guys currently make money? andrew: i think baidu and the leading tech companies are seeing voice input as a direction that we must do well in. this thing transformed the whole tech industry. i think htc might have been the first touchscreen. because it was a fundamental new way for us to interact with computers. i think that speech recognition has an equal opportunity to be transformative. jack: how do we monetize this? how would that change the type of adverts you are serving to me? andrew: i believe that, by making things more convenient for users, i believe that will cause users to use it more

frequently. i think it is a little bit early to call. emily: that was baidu chief scientist andrew ng and our bloomberg news reporter jack clark. chinese gaming giant tencent is in talks about selling super cell, the mobile game maker. it is unclear if they are in talks with other parties, according to "the wall street journal." supercell is a developer behind games such as clash of clan. at the biotech industry braces for increased scrutiny by the fda, we catch up with one startup increasing services. ♪

emily: i emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." now to biotech. the start of counsel is

extending that is expanding its range of tests. counsyl raised $100 million, yet the industry is facing some hurdles at the braces itself for some increased fda scrutiny. joining us to discuss is counsyl's ceo. thank you so much for joining us. give us an overview of the company. how many different tests do you have now? >> we have three tests on the market. family practice or parents who are having kids, informed pregnancy screens for women in their first trimester, and our newly inherited cancer tests. emily: how does this set you apart from other companies on the market? ramji: where increasing our panel size to about 36 genes in

total. we are able to offer some of the highest coverage of genes. emily: what is the range of costs and how much does insurance cover? ramji: the co-pay, if you don't have insurance, it is $349. if you are working with your insurance company, this is often the preventive service, so there is a price estimation. ben: i had a friend who did a test like this, and his wife credits it to saving her life. she ended up having a double mastectomy. are you guys getting tons of data back that this is saving lives on a regular basis? how do you know it is working

and what kind of feedback are you getting? ramji: great question. these are very comprehensive tests. in the hands of a physician and patient, physicians and patients can make really informed and educated decisions. we are providing this information to physicians and patients, who are ultimately the ones to make this decision. a woman who could potentially do a searchable mastectomy rather than a lumpectomy after a diagnosis. over time, we are collecting more and more data about how people use the information. we surveyed patients and found out that 67% of them chose to do a different type of reproductive option after finding out this information. we presented at the american college of genetics. these are genes that are already recommended to be offered by

some of the national cancer conference of network. physicians understand, if you are positive for these genes, how they ought to be used in terms of guiding and diagnosis. emily: you are moving very quickly, and i know there is a lot of excitement in this space. you guys in lay off a couple dozen people earlier this year and said it was to increase the efficiency of operations. what hapned there? ramji: it was a tough decision. we were ultimately redoubling our focus on medical market. we are focusing more on women's health, oncology, and continuing to increase not only our commercial footprints, but also our health plan footprints as well. emily: it is obviously very different companies, but when talking about health regulators, the other company is obviously everyone's first thought.

ramji: for us, it has been very strong. we are an open book when it comes to scientific publications. we publications are regularly. we are very committed to open and transparent science. also, to the point about genetic screening, i think we're still very early. this is not credit cards or smartphones everybody has one. it is not saturation any means. ultrasound for women who are having kids, the mammography for cancer screening as well. emily: ramji srinivasan, thank you for joining us. coming up, we will take a look at china's online propaganda machine. and your study shows hundreds of social media poster coming from government workers. plus, what are some of the

biggest names in tech advising the graduating class of 2016? ♪ okay, ready?

whoa! [ explosion ] nothing should get in the way of the things you love.

♪ get america's fastest internet. only from xfinity. shery: asian stocks are falling for the first time in three days as the stronger yen ways on japanese exporters. hawkish comments from said officials, tracing the odds of a june rate hike. extending declines ahead of stockpiles data, the biggest losers in shanghai. china watchers see further balancingr the yuan, the chaos of the january valuation. the pboc says it has learned its lesson and won't let the market forward to panic. china says they will use daily

fixing and broker support to avoid it. morgan stanley ceo jim goldman says the economy will continue to grow quickly but will end with "some bumps" as it transitions to domestic demand as its main driver. he also told bloomberg television that investors should stay tuned for improved returns on equity from the banks with markets becoming "more normal." and those are the headlines, powered by over 2400 journalists in 150 news bureaus around the world. let's get the latest. haidi, you have been monitoring a fairly lackluster day. haidi: you get the feeling, don't you, that investors increasingly over the past couple days, when we hear from janet yellen, are sidelining themselves. not a lot of direction when it comes to this, but we are seeing a pretty raw based selloffs. -- a pretty broad-based selloff.

a lot of investors waiting and seeing. shanghai down by 8/10 of 1%, following for the first time in three days. we are looking at selloff when it comes to property names and commodities related stocks. we're also getting investors bankingly, a top analyst to focus on china saying that china will need a bailout in the trillions of dollars to facilitate the debt buildup that has been happening to try and get that 6.5% growth rate. nubbers coming through from southeast asia, one area that seems to be vulnerable to quicker than expected rate had trajectories. we're also seeing hong kong off by 4/10 of 1%, in particular some of these property names. on the other hand we are seeing gains when it comes to these gaming companies like the slow down in macau starting to bottom

out. ers dragging down stocks when it comes to a trillion and the nikkei. thiser day of declines on stronger yen. a pretty lackluster day. ♪ emily: welcome back to "bloomberg west." facebook has sent a response to u.s. senator john soon, who complain about the controversy surrounding the trending topics section. facebook says they have conducted an investigation into what happened with trending topics. they show that investigation showed no evidence of systematic political bias. the complaints allege that facebook d prioritized conservative leaning news stories. facebook says they can't fully exclude possible unintentional bias, but they showed no systematic bias as a result of their investigation.

they are adding some new rules and oversight around trending topics. we will continue to bring you any more updates as we get them. facebook coming out and saying that, officially, as their investigation showed, there was no evidence of systematic political bias. to another story we're following. the chinese government has long been accused of using an army of propaganda workers online to sway public opinion. a new harvard study claims the chinese government now fabricates nearly half a billion social media comments a year. to discuss, gary king, a professor at harvard. also still with us, ben lerer. professor king, explained your methodology and how your able to deduce that these posts were indeed written by government hires and not by ordinary people.

gary: we found about 488 million posts fabricated a year by the chinese government. what we did is we found an archive of e-mails from the people writing these posts, reporting to the propaganda department. we found detailed patterns and pictures and photographs and who everybody was following. when we figured out exactly what everyone was doing, where they were posting it, and who they were, we were able to extrapolate it to the rest of china. we also did a survey. we asked them in a very specific way whether they were actually doing this. unlike most surveys, we actually had a gold standard, because we can ask people who we knew for sure were doing this, and we got exactly the same patterns. we can confirm this is actually the case.

emily: they did or they did not confirm to you they were indeed hired by the government? gary: they did confirm in exactly the same way as people that we knew were hired by the government because of this linked archive. we got exactly the same pattern. we knew for sure that our extrapolation to the rest of china from this one linked archive of posts and of people, where we found 43,000 known 50 cent party posts. those are written by people in the government and posted in other people's names on various social media sites all over china. emily: it is interesting looking at the way that these breakdown. you break them down by taunting a foreign government, disputing a factual reporting, not argumentative praise or suggestion, and cheerleading for china. if you read some of the examples -- "china's rise is now inevitable" or "china has done a

lot of positive things." these aren't incredibly extreme posts in any way. gary: it is really interesting, because what everybody got previously, including activists, journalists, academics, people on social media, they all thought one thing and it all turned out to be wrong. they thought they were arguing against the people who were against the government. the 50 cent party people would jump in and argue against them. that is what we thought. it turns out that is completely wrong. what it is these people do is not that. what they do is distract. they cheer lead for symbols of the state. they distract. it makes a lot of sense if you think about it.

if you are having a big argument with your kids or your spouse, a really bad way of ending the argument is coming up with a really good counterargument. that is not going to end the argument. a much better way to end the argument is to say, let's go out to ice cream. it turns out, that is the logic of what the chinese government is doing. emily: are you saying it is working? gary: i don't often is working, but it certainly makes a lot of sense. what they are doing is not only writing 488 million posts. about half of them go on government social media websites, about half of them go into commercial websites. there is a large number of social media websites for china. there they have a small number of large ones and a very large number of small ones. on the commercial side, it is like one of every 174 social media posts.

they are not just shouting into the wind. they are usually in bursts. whenever they need it, if there is some kind of protest activity they want to distract people from, they will send in the 50 cent party people. this is not really a political party, just a name people use for this activity. ben: this feels very donald trump to me. i would love to hear his comments on all of this. this is the kind of insanity that i think we are sort of vaguely heading towards here. gary: you should invite him on and ask. ben: a great idea. i am not doing the booking this week, unfortunately. gary: the chinese government, of course, also censors posts. they read almost all the social media posts that appear on the web and they decide which ones to take down. this is another activity that is even less visible than that.

emily: fascinating study. gary king, professor of government at harvard university. thank you for joining us. ben lerer, you are sticking with me for the rest of the hour. first, i want to talk about, here in the united states, the class of 2016 is officially entering the job market. before they make that big leap, some advice from some of the biggest names in tact. we have put together some of our favorite commencement speeches. >> deep inside of all of us, all of us, there is a primal desire to do something important with our lives. >> the easy days ahead of you will be easy. it is the hard days, the days that challenge you to your very core, that will determine who you are. >> my biggest problem was taking a track without thinking really

hard about where it was going. >> each of you have a chance to discover who you are rather than who you should be. >> you need to discipline yourself, to cultivate it and care for it. >> when tragedy strikes, know that you have deep within you the ability to get through anything. >> in this moment in your life, you know pure limit, pure taboos. do not squander your ignorance. >> when people start telling you you are crazy, you just might be onto the most important innovation in your life. >> not taking failures personally allows us to recover and even thrive. >> live each day as if you will live forever. >> that is how precious everyday actually is. >> it might take a while, but keep searching until you find a job that ignites your passion. >> with the challenges,, i hope

you remember that, deep within you is the ability to learn and grow. emily: sheryl sandberg, larry ellison, and peter thiel. coming up, we talked the latest facebook developments. ♪

emily: now to a developing story. facebook's internal investigation shows no evidence of systematic political bias in trading articles. the company did make some changes to guidelines, that will improve the ability to revise importance levels for trending topics. what is saying, what is

changing? >> the most important changes that these top 10 news sites that facebook was relying on to know if a topic was trending or not, they are just eliminating that practice entirely. now, it doesn't need to be listed on the new york times and buzzfeed and the wall street journal in order to be noted as trending. when conservatives were looking at that list of sites, they found that some of those were a little bit liberal leaning. the other thing is that they are making it very clear in their guidelines that there can be no political bias, no decisions can be made based on political affiliation. emily: reading the posts coming out of facebook, they say "will emanate our reliance on external news websites and outlets to validate the success of trending topics. this means we will discontinue the use of the top 10 list of trending topics." ben lerer is still with us.

then, you guys are investors in buzz feed. what are your thoughts. ben: i think about it first personally, i appreciate that i am not getting slammed over the news that i want and i understood the trending topics to be personalized to me and my needs. from a business perspective, the idea that you don't have to have a story validated by mainstream media is fine. i think it will get smaller publishers the opportunity to get noticed and push stories up there. i don't think there will be a huge impact one way or the other. generally, the idea of the content that you are getting is personalized to you is important. it doesn't sound like this is going to jeopardize that in any way. it is key that they don't feel like they need to go and cram republican stuff down my throat when i don't want that in my feed.

emily: thanks so much for breaking the news for us. i do want to talk a little bit more about was feed and the future of media. this is something you have been thinking a lot about. one of the things we're noticing is that companies like buzz feed for vice or what have you are finding themselves under the umbrella of old-school media companies, whether it is comcast or disney. what is your take on this model? are there any risks? ben: i think right now we are seeing an interesting moment in media, which is a mirror image of 30 years ago. 30 years ago, with the popularization of cable television, you saw a whole lot of content creators emerge in a very small window of time. the reason for that was that were building on these new pipes. in 10 or 15 years, you saw everything from hbo to espn to

turner, mtv, they all launched at once, filling in the pipes that were sort of popularized back then. today, we had a similar thing happening, the new pipes for content discovery are facebook, google, snapchat. there is a real opportunity, and there is a group of content companies like the ones you mentioned, as well as other ones, that are built to figure out how to distribute content in this new way. i think these guys are building a lot of value. it is a really interesting time to be investing in great quality content. that being said, there is always consolidation that happens. that happened in the 80's, and you saw the espns of the world ultimately get owned or consolidated. i think you will see the same here, where a bunch of these new media companies will get bought by the older guys. some will band together and build bigger media companies.

what he saw happened last time was the pipe owners ended up owning the content. will the snapchat's and facebook's of the world get into owning some of these media brands? emily: given some of the trending story controversy, how much sway does facebook have in king making the future leaders of media? ben: facebook's power right now in the media landscape is unimaginable. just the changes they have made to prioritizing video, now live video over the past three months, have thrown the publishing industry for a total loop. traditional tv is scrambling to figure out what to make of this new super kingmaker. facebook looks like 10 cable companies combined back in the day. the question is how they will use that power. traditionally, they have behaved well.

i think they appreciate the importance of great content. they understand that great content is what makes facebook valuable. if there is a great stuff going through their pipes, they are less important at the end of the day. so far, what they have done with instant articles, and now what they are doing with video and live, they are trying to be a partner to the media companies, and create a system where they can coexist and hopefully thrive. emily: ben lerer, ceo of thrillist. coming up, online menswear store jack threads is taking a page from brick and mortar. ♪

emily: now to jack threads, the menswear e-commerce famous for

flash sales. its latest product aims to bring the close to customers by allowing them to try it on, deciding whether to keep or return. the new offering comes after a year after jack threads split from its parent company, thrillist. here with me, jefferies ceo mark walker. you experimented with pop-up stores, as i understand it. why not have physical stores? mark: it takes a lot of inventory people to run brick and mortar stores. we had one pop-up when we launched our new line in october. it was more about awareness then selling the product. for us, the reality was that

back in january we were talking about this death spiral, where it is not about the product or the experience, it is about who can be the loudest about discount. we said, let's step back and really do something for the customer, make the experience amazing, and given a product that they want a format that they want. we feel really confident about the line we launched in october. we feel that the last kind of standing leg on brick and mortar is guys who like to go to the mall, take 10 or 15 things into the fitting come and pick the seven or eight they want to buy. the analogy that we use is, if you handcuff somebody and make them walk around the store and send you just have to look at it and pick it out, that is the experience that a lot of the e-commerce sites use. emily: a lot of e-commerce sites are struggling now. if you look at what happened with fab or gilt group, they did

this early have the greatest outcome. mark: we are a product company, we sell clothing. we create our own line of clothes and we stand behind the quality. now, what we're trying to do is say that we believe in the product so much that we are taking all of the friction out of the experience. a lot of other companies use things like free shipping as a carrot or incentive. for us, we feel so good about our stuff that we never charge for shipping, out or back. we've updated our packaging so that you put the box and a return label and you leave it out. it is really about simplicity and ease, and just getting the clothes to the consumer. and a lot of others are about nickel and dining the customer. emily: ben, you are chairman of

jack threads, how has it been going since and what does it mean for the future? ben: this is a big move for the company. you are totally right to highlight fab and gilt as companies that didn't have great outcomes. i challenge the team at the end of last year to go back and look at everything that was happening in retail. it is a bloodbath out there. think about what we can do to stand up from the crowd. at the end of the day, we said that we will take every penny that we have and a bunch of pennies that we don't have and reinvest those into the customer. there was one interesting metric, which was that 65% of our guys were buying with debit cards. we realize that they literally couldn't afford to buy the things they wanted from us and that we were cutting ourselves off at the knees. emily: thank you so much for

joining us. we'll see you tomorrow. ♪

♪ >> is this in the death knell of opec? show is justs of not that keen anymore. has $3 billionc in investment. the kingdom looks for life beyond crude. causeia's troubles creditors to be determined to does resolve the bond dispute.