♪ emily: i am emily chang. this is "best of bloomberg technology." coming up, we will hear about bitcoin and trump. and technology can best serve society. at a summit in l.a., i sat down with outspoken owner of the dallas mavericks mark kubik.

we covered several hot button topics from donald trump to bitcoin. we also spoke about the uproar and protests around the nfl. take a listen. >> pick any football team, and you might recognize three players good the other players have no social media following of any kind. the only time they can make a statement is during the game when they show some unity. it is completely different. what i said to our team is that, if you have a message you want to convey to fans and the media, let's just say it. we will put you on videotape. youe types of protests, lose control of the narrative. emily: you think they should not have protested in that way? no, i am all for it, because i do not think they had a platform to do so otherwise.

however, we can come up with a far better way to communicate a message. this the correct path donald trump should be taking? >> no. companies and brands endorsed players, but come on. there is donald trump the salesperson, donald trump the president, and donald trump the twitter troll. when he is in campaign mode, you just ignore him, when he is twitter troll, you can take shots back, and then when he is president you finally start to pay attention. you let him be president and do his thing, and hopefully the best will happen. emily: what are your concerns about the administration?

>> that he just does not know what is going on. it is just not in him to make an effort to understand or learn. possibly because he is not capable, or possibly because he is not willing. i just do not think he has it in him. emily: does he make it four years? >> 25% chance to maybe 30% chance he doesn't. not because he's going to do but iing crazily wrong, think it is because he is just oblivious to the institution and government and a lot of the rules. he will do something and not recognize that could be an impeachable defens -- offense. emily: you recently bought some shares in twitter. why now? >> i am a fan of artificial intelligence and i think they are making some good moves.

i think they are moving in the right direction. emily: should twitter take donald trump off the platform ? >> no, you cannot do that. our lives are so tribal right now. when you try to make a dramatic move like that, you increase the amount of tribalism. if you kick him off, all the trump fans are going to go bananas. then, he will just go to facebook and keep doing the same thing. there are thousands of ways to post digitally. twitter happens to be the only one he knows how to use. he could just learn how to use another one. social mediaof platforms are now in the crosshairs when it comes to this russia investigation and the spread of fake news. what is the responsibility? >> if you are in broadcast television and you broadcast an

ad that says it is medicine deking to any disease, you would be held responsible for that. there are rules against what you can and cannot protest. it is false advertising. the same rules could apply to facebook and twitter. emily: what about content? is not content if you are promoting a specific agenda. it is marketing. be an opinion, but then state it is an opinion. otherwise, it is advertising. if you are posting it through the ad platform, then it cannot be news. it is a misleading advertisement. it is up to facebook and twitter to recognize that they cannot ds to be posted on

our platform. emily: last question, what do you think of the coin and people like jamie dimon calling it fraud? >> it is interesting, because there is a lot of assets whose value is based on supply and demand. it is like baseball cards. i think bitcoin is missing thing. its value is a function of supply and demand. i do have some that i purchased through a swedish exchange. they gave me some liquidity. i am also involved with some ipo's because i think watching is a great platform for future application just like how the net and streaming created some great companies. i am involved with some programs which i think will change messaging.

emily: how big is your take in bitcoin? >> relatively small. emily: that was dallas mavericks owner mark cuban. coming up, much more from the vanity fair establishment summit. we will speak with disney ceo bob iger. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: now, more coverage from the vanity fair new establishment summit. we sat down with bob iger, and we spoke with him about his outlook on espn. modelht now, the business through which people access the primary espn content which is live sporting events is a good business for us and for the consumers. it is working. it is not growing as fast as it once did which is largely what people have focused on. -- theut that for epithet for espn, i think it is far too early to be writing it.

espn still covers 16,000 sporting events a year. thousands of hours of programming. 5% a few months in 2016, 70 of americans -- 75% of americans viewed espn in one form or another over that month. it is still thriving from a profitability perspective, but the world of tv has been disrupted and we need to readjust accordingly. that is what we are doing by launching a streaming service. that is why we are making it available through these other sport streaming services. emily: you said you were looking into buying twitter, but you bought fan tech instead. >> we looked at twitter, and i said we were looking for opportunities to distribute in more modern ways with regards to

the consumer. we were impressed with twitter's distribution. they were not the only company we looked at, i said that on stage, but we did look at it, and we ultimately decided there were other alternatives to that. we were not really interested in owning a social media platform, but we were interested in distribution. decided to buy a majority come a control in fan tech -- a in fan tech,ontrol and that was more of what we wanted. do not want to be specific about what we saw in twitter, but our interest was in new distribution that was direct to the consumer. emily: in the meantime, oracle is taking the fight to amazon.

its founder calling its new cloud technology evolutionary. he spoke with our editor at large, corey, at oracle open world. >> it is called the autonomous database. automateda highly database, it is a truly autonomous database. withe spend hours automated databases trying to get them to perform, trying to patch them. that had to beff done technically can now be done automatically, autonomously, done by us. there are a whole set of implications out of this, but it is extremely significant, much lower cost, much more secure, much more automated. ofis just a fantastic set

announcements from our product team last night. what is it about this technology that allows it to work more quickly? done in really all "machine to machine learning." when you get into all the technology, we do try to stay away from it last night, but we wanted to talk more about what it does. basically, the computer is getting smarter and smarter the more data it has. the more data it has, the smarter the decisions it will make. something as simple as being -- scan yourouyour data to look for intruders. it is basically technology doing the work. computers can recognize faces humans can.

corey: there did not seem to be a lot of targets for oracle. you basically -- you have a robust and 18 within oracle -- robust m&a team within oracle. that process be slowing down for you? >> i do not think you will see much change in our behavior. no matter who you. from, you will hear the -- no matter who you will hear it from, you will hear the same thing. it has to make sense financially for us, or we do not do it. it also has to be something we can actually run and optimize when it gets inside the oracle family. so, we use those filters. agoared to maybe a decade

when there were lots of potential targets, the market is changing, it is dynamic. i do not think it takes a lot of analysis to say that there are less targets than there were before. we will continue to discern. notions cominge from the white house about repatriation of assets overseas. more ifacle acquires a there is a company with the potential to bring some cash back? let's be real, we have been looking ways to bring money back to the company regardless of repatriation. we are looking to bring me back to the company as we speak. investing.n as of seven or eight years ago, our headcount was at about

70,000 and now it is at about 140,000. some of that is an and a and &aher parts of it -- that is m and some of it is just natural, organic hiring. corey: looking at your last earnings announcement, your competitors were quick to call and complain to us about your growth rate. i wonder what you make of your cloud growth rate and how it compares to competitors? >> let's talk about our growth rates. i love it. think you for asking the question. our growth rates are the highest they had been in years. last quarter, we grew the company by about 7%. that is total revenue of everything. revenue growth rate was higher than any of our competitors. our bookings were -- last year, we booked over 2 million in new this timeings, and

last year we had people saying i do not think you will ever get that done. we did it, and our growth was great in q1. listen, there are a lot of people who say lots of things, but i say just read the numbers. our business is growing, and we made the biggest announcement regarding databases we have ever made. and we have more coming. emily: coming up, walter isaacson weighs in on the current leadership at snap. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: more from the vanity fair

new establishment summit, i sat down with walter isaacson, and i started our conversation about the current status of tech giants like facebook and google. take a listen. >> nowadays, facebook, amazon, and google in particular, are so big and creative and powerful that they could stymie competition. it is always difficult to know how to deal with that. jeff bezos had a wonderful line the others have said in that you should not be upset with your competitor -- not be obsessed with your competitor. you should be obsessed with your customer, and the rest will follow. innovating,hey keep they will stay a step ahead of facebook. emily: do you think they are on the same plane?

>> i think both of them are deeply creative people who have a real feel for what users want. i found evan spiegel to be deeply philosophical, smart, and have a great sense of leadership which, to me, is the hardest thing. to leave a public company is even more difficult than creating a product. steve jobs created great products, but, in 1985, he was having trouble leading a public company with apple. emily: facebook, google, twitter, are all in the crosshairs when it comes to fake news. they are all going before congress with the russia probe. how serious is this?

serious, and people have responsibility in this world. when i first went online, there was a service called "the well," and the first issue that came up was owning your own words. you have to take responsibility for what you said. anonymous online, and they can create fake news without any kind of responsibility on facebook and twitter. we saw it happen during the election, and now i think the time has, where you can no lnger say, "oh, it is no -- it is not our responsibility. we are just a platform." people need to take responsibility for what they publish. with all due respect, artificial

intelligence algorithms cannot do it alone. ourneed to say, here are values. you need to be able to say the difference between real news and fake news. just recently,as unto fire for this. re recently come into fir about this. what about google? have to stop people, who are putting up in the newsfeeds that will be searched by google, saying things that you know are incorrect and being done intentionally incorrect. havew journalists

published things in the past that are incorrect or bias, but it was not done for some old to rear, secret motive. however, that is what is oldening -- done for some to rear -- done for some u lterior, secret motive. however, that is what is happening right now. these companies have to look at the stories and recognize them as thickness -- fake news. you have to look forward. -- wes new environment were lucky, we used to have gatekeepers like walter cronkite. i are in a world now where news, anywhere to get the but we have to say that you cannot use our platform to

intentionally mislead people. as mark zuckerberg has said recently, we get it now. we did not do that all that well. people at google also have good values and are smart enough to figure out how to do it better going forward. emily: regulators are stepping in, especially in europe. do you think there is a reckoning coming for them? >> i am not somebody who is deeply in favor of on the spot regulations and government agencies regulating information. i think that is a very bad idea which is why it would be a very good idea for facebook and google to step up and do it themselves. governmentart having laws telling you what information can flow, you are in a very bad place. that is why people who do get involved in the industry of flow of information have to have very

good values so that the government does not regulate the flow of information. requires aertainly lot of trust in these companies. >> it does, and they have lost that trust. when they lose that trust, it is that for them, so they should try to regain that trust. i think they are trying to regain that trust. emily: that was walter isaacson. coming up, my more coming from the vanity fair new establishment summit in los angeles. we will talk about the future of a.i. all the episodes of bloomberg technology are live streaming on twitter. check us out. this is bloomberg. ♪

.

emily: welcome back to "best of bloomberg technology." i am emily chang. we have more highlights from the vanity fair summit. hoffman andith reid talked about the current debate around the future of ai and does its benefits outweigh the danger. i has huge potential to bring education and medicine to the whole world and an able space colonization. i think there are risks and we need to be careful about how we are doing it and careful and intelligent. emily: what are the risks?

once you get back the science-fiction is, we already have all the rhythms running our xives doing credit and equifa and judgments on parole and parole violations and all of these things have impacts that are currently like black box to us and we want to have a good society. those are the near-term risks and then cybersecurity and a whole set of things. the science-fiction risk is always out. myly: elon musk told coworker that a company like google could do evil and create a robot army. does the future of ai depend on the good intentions of the companies and can we trust them? think it isot

necessarily relying on the good intentions of companies. you have thousands of people working and potential whistleblowers and if people see something wrong, they can speak up. intentional about what is the thing that best help society and that is to help pay attention to the question, how do we have good human outcomes and how do we do that? that eventually will happen. the examples that elon gave actually, i do not know, you tell the ai to eliminate all human beings, that is kind of fictional. as you are building the safety measures and these devices, could you ask for more resources or articulate your goals, a simple safety measure and i know .oogle is thinking about that i know that facebook is thinking about that. i don't think it's a "rely on the good intentions." emily: is the fear mongering

irresponsible, as mark zuckerberg said? reid: i think it's dangerous because it causes the discussion not to focus on the real issues. we all talk about robots marching in the streets vs. how are algorithms already influencing our lives. for the right kind of social outcomes. it is not that we shouldn't think about the science fiction aboutias at all but think steering toward utopian. emily: facebook, twitter, google -- they are all being called before congress. they say they're adding more humans. can ai fix this problem? is it something only a human can do? reid: i think both ai can get better because you say, here is a a weird ad buy. here is something that looks like its external forces trying to do political ads. now let's have some humans look at it. i think the answer is actually both. i think the answer is to improve

the ai to detect fraud. and then have humans get involved. and they go this is weird, take , a look at this. emily: what about when it comes to robots and jobs? i'd know we always ask about it. it seems like the ground is shifting beneath us as we speak. are jobs under threat, and how many of them? reid: jobs will get transformed, just as any technological revolution changes them. people had this worry from agriculture moving to the city, and a this worry from manufacturing. we have to pay attention to people. these transitions can be very difficult. however i don't think that means , jobs are just going away. technology also usually creates a lot of new jobs. an ai may read your radiology exam a lot better than a radiologist, but a radiologist can still be there to talk to people, can still be there to look at the weird cases, that ai goes this is weird. that kind of thing. that's the kind of transformation that i think we should be building the technology for. emily: apple, google, facebook,

amazon -- they all are in a race to get there, to be better. who wins? reid: i think in technology they are all going to win, and i think they're going to win in different ways. i think you will get great voice stuff from all three companies. i think you will have google doing the, ok, this is the one big pile of data. i think you will have microsoft doing the, hey, if you want to be building ai with confidential or private data, we will partner with you. i think it will be in different directions. emily: you are also working on a very well done podcast called "masters of scale," where you talk to viewers about how founders take their company from zero to one to infinity and beyond. thinking about a company like uber, what are the lessons in that about what not to do, not just for founders, but for investors? reid: so, i think that part of the thing is to make sure that you start asking the social impact questions early.

it doesn't mean you orient your whole company around them, but you say, look, what is our mission and how is our mission best of all for helping people? for example in the uber case, , how do we help drivers as well? how do we make sure we are increasing safety early on? you ask those questions early. i think it is an effect, obviously, i am a board member, but i think airbnb did well. airbnb is a positive example. i think it still scaled very fast. that's still the way you build a globally impactful transformation. if you don't do that, then you are not the company that has impact. add in the social questions as you are doing it. emily: what's the job of investors along the way to make sure they are checking that behavior? reid: the job of investors is, you are in this intense cycle of this exponential curve. let's help bring resources, questions, people to you that bring in these other voices as well. that's one of the things that my partnership does well.

emily: something else you are ratio from-50 gender the people you are featuring and you were outspoken in the midst of this sexual harassment in tech and you ask people to sign a decency pledge. are you doing anything to take that forward because while a deceit pledge is great saying you are decent does not make you are. to stand up publicly and essay i will not do business with bad actors and doing it publicly, people will hold you accountable and say you are doing this. but, i am having a bunch of conversations with people about what we should do to take it to the next level. emily: that was linkedin founder reid hoffman. the star wars sequels have been a huge success for disney and more on the way. bob iger talked about star wars

and what is driving results at the box office. wins andink quality what we saw this summer was not as much quality as the audience what have like an reflected in the box office. i think it was a function of that, there are a lot of things for people to do and more competition for people's time when it comes to leisure activities and the bar is a raise in terms of delivering quality for experiences that people really want. this word of mouth, you cannot hide from anything, if something is mediocre, they will find about it right away before it comes out. learned,ing is to be concentrating more on quality. i think there are more challenges out there for more film because of competition for people's time. the big films, they will

basically the rise and continue for a long time as long as they are good. emily: will star wars turn things around? bob: i think it will be good for us and the business. i look forward to bring them both films. disney's bobas iger. we will sit with the discovery ceo, a company near completing a major acquisition. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: at the vanity fair

summit, talking with the biggest names in tech and media about massive changes. one company here is discovery which launched more than 30 years ago but working to stay current. david zaslav, ceo of discovery, joins us. david: i do not see bigger and better but the way people are consuming content is different and the type of content. the reason we did scripps is they have great quality brand and on all of their content. we see it as acquiring 200,000 hours of ip and great brands that have really saturated the u.s. in a great way. hd tv, food, travel, cooking, diy. it really has proliferated around the world. we launched some food and home channels around the world and were very successful. we think we could take it around the world, but more importantly, as people start to consume content on all devices, we can

take a lot of that content and the content we own -- we are the largest ip media company in the world. we have more global brands than anyone else. discovery, animal planet, tlc, own, science. if we close on scripps, travel, food, hg tv. we own everything on it. ecosystem and moderating growth in some markets and some decline in others but relatively healthy. mid-single versus double-digit or mid teens cell phone years ago but we have a load of ip we can take direct to consumers on their phones. if you're interested in italian cooking or if you love discovery or science, we can deliver it right to you on your phone because we own all the content. emily: when it comes to group nine, are you seeing traction with a younger audience?

david we are seeing huge : traction in terms of the scale of consumption of the content on group nine. it is over 6 billion views a month. we are the largest provider of short form news on facebook. those that would see now this that is us. ,and it is growing rapidly. it is not making money yet, but we are one of the largest providers on facebook. it is usually one or two minute stories. we are also the largest one of , the largest providers on a snap, and that is almost a full millennial audience. we have our traditional business where we are taking content around the world, an hour or half hour mostly on channels, and we will now be able to take that directly to consumers or -- consumers in a bundle or individually. we are the number one or number two or number three player in

the world in short form content. even when facebook was looking to build mid form content we , were able to get a lot of those series because we are already a top provider to facebook. the challenge is it is not making the money yet. we have huge scale and great name recognition and brand awareness, but now we have to take it. we are working with facebook and snap on how we really monetize that. emily: speaking about the need to make money, there is some speculation about job cuts coming with the scripps acquisition. what are you working through? david: yes, there will be significant synergy. we stated about $350 million. we think it could be more than that. we have two great companies that do quality content. when we put it together in the u.s. alone we will have more , than 20% of viewership on cable. we have five of the top six or seven women's networks.

id and own and tlc and hgtv and food. where they are going to invest more is content and go directly to the consumer. we really view the company if we close on this acquisition or would we do as being a breaking it in the right side is growth, half. owning more ip, providing that and that is content in different ways on different devices in all languages all around the world, and getting more viewership, more scale, more people spending more time with us. the left side is cost. we have to attack that. we think we can really do a good job of attacking that. we would have needed to do that even if we didn't do scripps because the industry is changing. emily: do you see doing a more deals? david: it sure. we have said that we think scripps is a very good deal for us, but one of the attractions is we pick up more ip, more quality brands, but 18 months after we close, we will be more -- we will be less than three and a half times larger, with a

bigger balance sheet so we can buy more stuff to be more successful in the future. emily: speaking of sports we , have seen amazon and facebook, nontraditional players pay up for sports rights. what is next that they could get? david they are in the : marketplace, and we are working with both of them, amazon in particular. we have been doing a lot of work with. we have a direct to consumer product already. we have been added for about a year and a half, almost two years in europe. we are the leader in sports in europe where -- with euro sports where we have the traditional espn business and the entire business, with eurosport. our model in europe is a little bit different than the sports model in most countries around the world. one, we have a dominant position on linear. we are the only pan european player. all the sports web acquired the , olympics through 2024,

cycling, handball football, we , own all that ip for all those platforms. most of sports platforms buy the rights for just the linear or the channel. if you go to europe or deutsche telecom or bt are selling rights to see the french open or olympics or tour de france, they are buying it from us. we seeing over the next couple of years, we will be able to sell to the super fans of tennis and cycling and the olympics and olympic sports, and we will be able to go direct to consumer in a much more scalable fashion. we are already getting real traction. emily: how many sports free tv packages will there be by the end of the year? david: in europe right now in , most markets right now, it is just us. there were couple, germany and the u.k., there were more. in most, it is just us. we got a great jump on it. i think more and more, if

somebody loves squash, we have all of the squash. if somebody loves speedskating or tennis, that will be a very attractive model. the way you would buy a magazine if you love golf or tennis or cycling, across europe, 750 million people, all the people that love a particular sport will be able to buy that from us and get all of it. emily: david zaslav, ceo of discovery. coming up, we bring you one less conversation from the summit, the man at the center of it all, grayden carter. you can listen to us on the bloomberg radio app. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: graydon carter who helped to make vanity fair magazine a and wall publication street is stepping down after 25 years as one of the nation's most influential editors. hisoins me to talk about decision to leave the magazine at the end of the year in the future of the magazine business. have been here over 25 years and wanted to take a break. i have worked solidly the last 39 years. -- if i have a third act, i would like to find .ut how it is i was originally going to leave nextril and the election that and i decided to stay on a for the first year of the administration. you hope the next administration, how they cover it? graydon: it will be up to them,

that was a personal mission of mine. forve political missions one was the iraq war and i was against the administration of donald trump which has turned out worse than expected per i think if there is an examination, i think the press is doing an amazing job. of fake news,era you have newer technology companies like facebook and google and twitter in the crosshairs and they will be isearing in congress, what the responsibility of these platforms? are sort ofy publishers and you have a newspaper and read a letter to the editor written by somebody not on your staff and it is inflammatory and libelous you could be liable. you have to take the responsibilities that come with the business and ensuring what

you publish or present is accurate. it's will figure out a way to do it. what is the future of the magazine business look like to you? change, it hasl changed dramatically over the last 50 years. it will not be as robust as it is now. -- a meanss a great of getting people to do things they have not done before. we have anity fair," very healthy digital business and healthy live business like this and would not have had it 10 years ago if not out of need and organic growth. emily: how long will there be a print version of "vanity fair?" for as long as you are alive. emily: will it have the same feel? graydon: quality advertisers

will realize that everything they want, they can not necessarily get on the digital space and nothing quite like a magazine for presenting something to urge people to buy it. it is right there been an hard to avoid it. you cannot click over it and cannot be hacked. new house publisher passed away, do you think they have -- graydon: publishing is in their blood and i think they have an change in ways over the next five to 10 years. establishment summit, other babies of yours, this is where we are. does this live on? graydon: this will definitely the greatd

culmination of what we do in the magazine and bring these worlds together and part of the magazine's dna. emily: you have an amazing insight of how the balance of power have changed a you were on the screen of travis kalanick and much as happened since then, how do you make a notice of how fast things have changed? goneon: he is not completely. he has had some setbacks and all great leaders have them. i think he is an impressive young man. emily: what did you see about the power of bounce shifting between media and political -- graydon: when we originally did at the new establishment, 60% came from the world of entertainment and 20% from technology and 20% from information businesses.

1/3.t is about 1/3, 1/3, it changes dramatically from year to year. and that is what makes it interesting. emily: i am sure you have given thought about what your third akamai to be, what will it be? graydon: i am taking time off to do that. on my back is stare at the ceiling and think. emily: graydon carter, editor of "vanity fair." that does it for this edition of "best of bloomberg technology" and we will bring you the latest in tech through the week. remember, all episodes are live streaming on twitter. check us out weekdays. that is all for now. this is bloomberg. ♪

so new touch screens... and biometrics. in 574 branches. all done by... yesterday. ♪ ♪ banks aren't just undergoing a face lift. they're undergoing a transformation. a data fueled, security driven shift in applications and customer experience. which is why comcast business delivers consistent network performance and speed across all your locations. hello, mr. deets. every branch running like headquarters. that's how you outmaneuver.

carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." julia: we are inside magazine headquarters in new york. candle coming up, the mississippi lawyer taking on the opioid industry. julia: what would happen of catalonia seceded from spain? carol: and mechanics driving lamborghini into the future. all of that ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ carol: we are here with