♪ carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar inside bloomberg headquarters in new york. this week, the escalating trade and currency war between the u.s. and china. areident trump and xi making big bets that could backfire. the massacres in el paso and dayton that left at least 31 people dead and dozens injured. kenny weakened nra leads to -- can a weakened nra lead to gun

less -- lost? here is joel weber on tech -- loss? here is a joel weber on tech lash. >> there in the zeitgeist right now, tech lash, one of the words of the week. people outraged at tech and the privacy issues. when we thought about that, this image resonated more than any other with us. it was this image that a company , joel stein's story, he experimented with how to take back privacy in his own life and disable tech from encroaching in his world. he found a mask. the cover images creepy -- image is creepy. it is for facial recognition technology. it speaks to a larger thing. there is tech lash, in d.c. especially. that is a theme. antitrust is a theme. those things feel out of your domain as an individual.

this cover is an attempt for us to say, you as an individual, what can you do in your daily life that will still have a modest consequence? asol: it is not so easy -- joel's story shows us, it is not so easy. >> he has been on gmail 15 years. the thing that is so part of his life. it's where he communicate and started flirting with his wife years ago. he decided to leave it because of the privacy issue. as he did that, it opened up this whole new can of worms. to have a private email server now, and there have been other private email servers that made headlines, all of these emails he sends around go to your spam folder. carol: it is not so easy to get gmail. i love felix's story. i feel like, how did we get here? that's where he goes. >> section 230, which has come in the crosshairs in d.c..

it enables tech platforms in particular to scale and grow, but not always be responsible for the content on their platforms. carol: right. >> lawmakers in d.c. have seized on these 26 words and this will be a topic of conversation going forward for sure. felix basically does an anatomy of how that section 230 and those 26 words came to be. carol: and created a safe harbor for technology companies. >> exactly. carol: not a lot safe harbors this week for investors. that were so many big macro stories everywhere. >> news, news. never ends. carol: u.s.-china trade. >> we cannot take -- can't not take into account the news this week. what happened this weekend and to walk into the trade war and the escalation. it started as a trade war and now appears to be coming a currency war and what the consequences of that are. michael shuman writing about what the trade war looks like now. and then also, the market

consequences when you have people like xi and trumpet battling, then also trump and powell battling it out. all of those forces come to bear, not only in the markets, but in the pages of "business week." carol: it's fascinating to hear what he says and how he played it into this mosh pit. >> it is a marsh pegs and you have three people more powerful than anybody else in the world -- mosh pit and you have three people more powerful than anybody else in the world and all three of them are moving in an opposite direction. carol: a great way to stay informed, but also the privacy issue, it's a great summary. a scary summary. >> zeitgeist, right. all of the stuff that is creating angst in the world right now. we tried to distill that down into something you can make sense of. carol: great stuff. thank you. president trump visited el paso, texas on thursday. here is national correspondent for "business week" on how the shootings, a plummeting stock

market, and trumps trade war with china may hurt his reelection bid. >> the events of this past week hits three key demographic voting groups, all of which are critical to trump's reelection. the first one are suburbanites who have been outraged by gun violence, by congress' lack of willingness, trump's lack of willingness to pursue meaningful gun control measures. if you go to last fall and look at where democrats won in a rout, it tended to be former lisa public -- suburban republican areas. these are places where trump needs to win in order to get a second term in 2020. collectively, if you look at the waypoint numbers have been moving, gun control is an increasingly important -- paul numbers have been -- poll numbers have been moving, gun

control is an increasingly important issue. you can almost see the shift happening for democrats. carol: it has certainly been an issue in other political races. feels like there is a lot more momentum here. >> that's right. in the past, gun control was a very important issue for people who were against it. the nra rose to power by famously being able to turn out single issue gun voters who tended to be more loyal and enthusiastic voters than people who support gun control. however, that has changed markedly over the past two years , especially since the parkland shooting. gun control is now a motivating issue for democrats, which is why i think you saw all of the democratic presidential candidates, one of the reasons they are so critical on trump and the senate for not passing gun control legislation. carol: let's talk about another group that has been key to president trump, and that is the farm group. talk to us about that and the

farm states. >> well, of course, one of the things china did last week in retaliation for trump's sankey will impose additional tariffs on china was to announce that they are cutting off agricultural purchases. there is probably no group that has suffered more under trump's presidency than farmers, because they have borne the brunt of china's retaliatory tariff. i did a lot of reporting on this in the last couple of years. agricultural areas in the midwest have been especially impacted. what is interesting, however, is that this has not really hurt republicans at the ballot box yet. i did a big story looking at which congressional districts that rely on the most on soybeans, which of course have been a target of tariffs. all 30 of the top districts that voted for trump, 25 of them had republican members in the house. the midtermer elections and there was a grand turnover of one.

farmers are looking like they will have to bear more economic pain. it may not cost trump quite as badly in electoral terms as some of the other groups he is losing. carol: staying with politics, how the nra responded to the pair of tragic shootings in the u.s., or rather how i did not, speaks to the turmoil within the gun rights group. >> this is the first incidents where the nra is dealing with a mass shooting without there very long time, very established pr firm. that pr from really kind of ielped build the -- f really kind of help to build therm nra we know today. the organization that said the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, that whole image has been a result of their work with the pr firm. carol: i want to get back to what happened a week ago. take us back to what happened in

february of 2018. we had another shooting at that florida high school. tell us about the nra reaction after. >> one of the big things that happened after that is that a lot of corporate america very quickly chose to cut ties with the nra. that was very unique. the nra had a number of different corporate sponsorships. for example, if you were an nra member, you could get a discount on a flight or car rental. almost all of those relationships were severed. that was a huge difference in what we have seen before. it was a huge difference from what the nra had seen before. they were very astute staying quiet -- very used to staying quiet. all of these companies had already said we are done with this group, we are not want to have anything to do with them. carol: what is also interesting is, didn't the former nra chief lobbyist, right, longtime powerbroker when it came to the nra and dealing with washington, he actually went to the white house and met with the president. >> that's right. about two weeks after the attack, the president sat down

with the different lawmakers and said to one of them, you are afraid of the nra. he advocated for a different kinds of gun control -- different kinds of gun control during that televised meeting. the next day, chris cox with at the white house ash was at the white house and the oval office with -- the next day, chris cox was at the white house in the oval office with president trump and tweeted that president trump has no interest in gun control. chris cox is no longer with the nra. carol: very different. just about a year in terms of, unfortunately, several mass shootings, but a very different reaction from the nra. let's talk about what's going on at the nra. why is chris cox not there? there has been a love turmoil within the organization. >> that's right. turmoil is the perfect word for what is going on here. we are seeing basically a consolidation of power at the nra with the longtime leader of the group. nra, cox led all of the

everything from local efforts, to state efforts, to federal efforts, chris cox was the guy. carol: right. >> because of this power struggle at the top, chris cox is ousted. lapierre felt he had been gone.al and cox was . another person we saw the was oliver north -- we saw leave was oliver north. he was basically outed. he felt there was a power struggle with wayne lapierre. now you have two powerhouses gone from the nra and the person who is left is lapierre. carol: michael bloomberg, the owner of bloomberg lp, the parent company of bloomberg news, is a founder and fund every town for gun safety, a nonprofit that advocates for gun violence prevention. coming up, also in the headlines

this week, the escalating u.s.-china trade work. why a week yuan is a strong weapon against the u.s.. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar. in this week's remarks, making sense of the u.s. and china confrontation. it has turned it dramatically and not to president trump's advantage. peter coy explains how trump's tariffs -- in the face of a currency shift. >> what happened this past week is that china allowed the value of its currency to depreciate theeaker than 7 yuna to dollar. it makes chinese products u.s.,ially cheaper in the and therefore, it actually does cause china to absorb the impact

of the tariffs rather than the american consumers. trump is furious about it. carol: china is a currency minute later. that happened this week. >> the day after he tweeted that china was manipulating its currency, the trade department declared china a currency minute later. the irony is that up until then, china had been manipulating to keep its currency up. carol: right, stronger. >> we briefly removed that manipulation, that's precisely when it was labeled a currency minute later. carol: what i find interesting and we got to talk about this earlier in the week, and this line stays with me. you say the president does not seem to have a clear idea of how foreign trade works or ultimately what his objective is an how to achieve it. that is a pretty big deal for a president in the midst of very important trade negotiations. >> that seems to be the case. does he want china to absorb the

cost of tariffs or not? u.s. companiesat are going to regain market share from china is if the price of chinese products in fact does go up, which inevitably means some pain during the interim for american consumers. he is trying to shield them from that. there is a little bit of cognitive dissonance there. carol: you also remind us, and in terms for investors, watching what china did with the yuan, we have to continue to watch that yuan-u.s. exchange rate. that is key. >> it is. because it is yuan to the dollar, when the yuan gets weaker, that means it is more. the number goes above seven and that's what happened. china does unofficial fixing everyday. abovet edged this week seven for the first time in many

years. so china is not manipulating it to weaker, but withholding some of the support it provides. china does not have uneasy situation here. its economy is softening. the trade war is harming china. degreed benefit to some from a weaker currency, but it also is vulnerable to capital flight if investors, both chinese and foreign, conclude china is taking away some of the support for the currency. there could be a mad dash for the exits. while there are currency controls in place, people desperate enough will find ways to evade them. china will have to use its stock of dollars to try to buy it up and supported. carol: the escalation of u.s.-china trade tensions played out in financial markets this week. in the finance section, senior editor mike regan because it -- because it the chaos cycle --

calls it the chaos cycle. >> i don't ever remember a time when the three individuals, specifically president trump, jerome powell, and judging pink, the president of china -- using jinping,e present -- xi- for these three people to have it much influence on the markets on a day-to-day basis is very unusual. we see conflicting interests, not just between president trump and the president of china, but also jerome powell has his own mandate to do what's best for the u.s. economy. obviously, president trump has made it clear that he does not agree with what he is doing and wants more aggressive rate cuts. it is this very strange dynamic that is very unique. carol: what's fascinating to you, mike, in the last week and a half or so, and it kind of started with the fed meeting at

some comments jay powell made. >> he cut interest rates, as expected. he mentioned, he called it a midcycle adjustment, which kind of shocked people. they were hoping he would sort say we mario draghi and will do whatever it takes to keep the expansion going. he tempered that. he is keeping those cards close to the vest saying it is a midcycle adjustment, which the markets signal, maybe it is just one interest rate cut, maybe two, not this full on aggressive easing president trump was hoping for. carol: there was so much debate going into that fed meeting about, could we possibly see on aggressive fed and can we possibly see 50 basis points? >> there was some conflicting messaging coming out of the various speakers from the federal reserve leading up to that. there was this notion that a big awe 50 point basis cut might be enough to kickstart the economy.

that was always priced in as kind of long odds. the market did not really expect that, but enough people expected that. it is not that this would be a very whatever it takes type of reaction to what's going on in markets. . they did not get that that's really what set the ball rolling. carol: one day after -- >> president comes out and threatens tariffs on the remainder of imports from china. that was like throwing gasoline on the fire in this market. markets up in double-digit percent. if you stretch the chart out further, we are below where we were at the beginning of 2018. that is when the market, everyone was very excited about the prospects of test prospect of tax cuts -- prospect of tax cuts.

over the last 18-19 months, we have basically got nowhere. carol: i love this line in your story. you say each coalition -- collision in the mosh pit involving these three individuals exposes the fragility of the global market. we realize kind of how vulnerable we might be. >> this is coming to a head at a time when markets are really craving sort of peace in the trade war. carol: some certainty. >> some certainty. one thing everyone looks at closely are the purchasing managers index is for the manufacturing sector of the economy and services sector. manufacturing is very weak. services is kind of following in its wake. they are both getting close to that level that signals contraction rather than a continued expansion of the economy. remember, the trade war ostensibly was to bolster the domestic manufacturing industry. these gauges of those industries are nearing sort of recession

levels. they are not there yet but they are starting to point to basically grind to a halt in growth. if they keep going at this trajectory, we will be seeing declines, shrinkage in those sectors of the economy, which is very alarming. carol: still to come, u.s. companies are borrowing billions but it's not helping the economy. we will look at why. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar. you can also listen to us on the radio on sirius xm channel 119 and a.m. 11 30 in new york,

106.1 in boston, am 960 in the bay area, in london on dab digital and of course on the bloomberg business app. when the fed cuts interest rates, it is supposed to deliver a direct boost to the economy. one key part of the machinery has broken down. here is liz mccormick with the borrowing billions -- with borrowing billions. >> if you took out your economics textbook, which we all used to look at, it would be lower rates help companies borrow, just like it helps you and i borrow, because it is cheaper, and they should invest more. we should see that come through in the numbers and investment and economic growth. the recovery has not been great. investment has been going down. it is a little mindbending what is happening. we looked into it, ben holland and i, and there is a lot of theory that says there were some changes and companies were just plowing this money back into their shares by buybacks and dividends to help the shareholders feel better. carol: we know this.

i feel like coming off of the crisis and because money was so cheap, we constantly talk about how much borrowing. we applauded companies think how great -- saying how great, this is good for your balance sheets. ultimately, they were not putting that money back to work on plans. test plants -- plants. >> exactly, borrowing is good when you do it for the right reason. they are spending more by borrowing, but then they were kind doug in the weeds of, what are date doing with -- they doing with that borrowing? we are leery of companies that are borrowing and plowing it back to shareholders and not expanding capacity and doing things. they said in a downturn, the companies that have expanded can easily cut back a little. if you just use that debt to funnel more stock-price growth, you are a little bit more in a bind. they were saying that's a problem. carol: in the past, we have always seen this correlation

between how much is borrowed versus how much is spent on capex. there has been a pretty close correlation, right? >> right. some economists have done studies and said since the 1980's since the fcc changed the rules that made buybacks possible for companies, they have been plowing it to shareholder wealth. it is kind of like a corporate governance thing. they have had a mindset change. if companies -- companies like to invest in stocks that go up. if we plow it back into earnings and dividends, that will help. that broke that correlation. you saw these lower rates, borrowing, and you see investment not go higher. carol: are we on track for another record year buybacks? >> yes, goldman sachs says about a trillion this year, which is higher than last year. this is the year when the tax cuts, it's not the first year, right? so we already have that in place. carol: still ahead, a work that has caught on this year, tech lash.

a series of stories on how we got here and how to take back your privacy in today's digital world. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." still ahead, a look back at how androids led to the smartphone revolution. and angling for some fishing fun? a fishing guide. but first up, our cover story with a striking and creeping image -- creepy image.

it is a series of stories on taking back your privacy. >> if you have been paying attention, you are probably already sick of the buzz word techlash. but it is used to describe a ge againstarch -- sur what is perceived as too much power the biggest tech companies have to decide the information we are seeing or how much market power they have. a growing push amongst a wider range of groups that have been active to challenge these companies. carol: one story that is really fascinating is by max chafkin. setting up his own lavate you know server. a hillary clinton. it's not easy to do. >> when max came to me with his

pitch for setting up the server, i was one of the people he describes who stared blankly. carol: how would you do that? >> exactly. i am a privacy hawk myself. i have thought more than once about getting off gmail's grade -- grid. but unless you are technically inclined, it is difficult. folkslks like helm, the he talked to in story, will suddenly package for a server they will run for 100 bucks a ye ar. they made it alarmingly easy to get off the grid. kin.com hasy maxchaf access. world it's not a perfect when you try to get off the

gmail grid. >> the downside he found is that, often, they were not delivered. there would be marked as spam and sent to the spam folder. so it takes a fair amount of work to warm up your inbox so that other, more established clients will trust it. he was forced to admit that he was still using gmail, by and large. carol: and he found out he was censoring when he was using google, either his searches or what he wrote in emails because he had an awareness this all went back to google. >> this big revelation of reporting a story and trying this out was recognizing the many ways in which was controlling his behavior. carol: i have to say, all of the stories are must reads. and let's get to the cover story. joel stein trying to protect his

privacy. he went in search of gadgets but he had to become a private before he could search. >> he really took this concept to 11. we asked him to build a list of all the gadgets available to take back your privacy. he did it all at once. carol: and for the face behind the mask, reporter joel stein in l.a.. to show what it takes to keep others from spying on you. >> the cover is creepy, and unfortunately, that is me. that mask is designed by an artist who works at brown university to foil facial recognition machines by having his face be everyone's face. he would get in trouble for all the nefarious things that i do. kind of messes up the

facial recognition software. and that is the whole mission of what you are setting out to do, to hide from silicon valley. >> yeah. the idea was that you can't just opt out, more or less, of leaving a digital imprint. but i am too lazy to do that. instead, i tried to purchase tech that isthe stealing my privacy. only by goingit to companies that weren't out of silicon valley. scandinaviaston and and celtic city who were -- salt lake city. carol: you say step one is to , stop typing your cell phone number and email into every conceivable internet phone. stop doing it. >> yeah.

your cell phone is worth more on the black market then your social security number -- than your social security number. , an easierdata-rich way to get into all of your systems. it's really easy if you go to companies and get yourself a burner, the app, get yourself some fake phone numbers, fake email addresses. just use those. just for the ease of your life in case you do get hacked. your main email address can still be your main email. same with credit card numbers. there are these companies that will give you a one-time 4:10 -- or ten-time credit card use. what i learned in the end was that, much like environmental issues, privacy is something you

can't really solve for yourself. unless you really become a hermit. it is something we, as a society have to change. up next, more about taking back your privacy and what got us here. and how android lead at the smartphone revolution -- led the smartphone revolution. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." join us for bloomberg businessweek every day of the radio from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.. or catch up by checking out our podcast or find us online and on our mobile app. back to our cover story, we look at the 26 words that has created

a world where big tech has so much and is accountable for so little. here is how we got into this mess. .> it is a fascinating law carol: it sounds boring. , and yet it boring is this statute that goes all the way back to the early days of the internet, passed in 1995. it has proven incredibly important. carol: why? sectionost important says that internet service providers cannot be held liable for the speech of their users. say heally, supporters would not have social media without this, you would not have the sharing economy, there would be no peer-to-peer services because it would be too risky to host any web service that relies on users. carol: who would want the

liability for what everyone else says? >> wikipedia to twitter to facebook, it's all predicated on the legal framework which was conceived in 1995. carol: a different environment? >> totally different. , at the time it had brought support, and yet now , as part of this broader backlash to big tech, it is suddenly under siege. carol: you said it had bipartisan support in 1995. i feel like now big tech is under siege from both sides of the aisle. >> you had conservatives and liberals questioning whether or not the slot make sense in 2019, but for very different reasons -- this law makes sense in 2019, but for very different reasons. , they werewrite

underdogs, now they are overlords. >> it is that conversion of power that has frightened people. initially, the companies were tiny on the idea was they would get crushed by unfair litigation. section 230u see invoked in lawsuits, it's always a big company, facebook, twitter, google, using this safe harbor to brush aside the complaints of typically small companies. so it is that a that has made it somewhat controversial. , theseatives say, well platforms are being unfair to conservatives. this law was predicated, initially, on a certain neutrality. we would not treat them as publishers, but they would have to stay neutral. democrats have said, well, that's not the case.

that is not the correct interpretation of how the law was passed. at the same time, they have their own criticisms. essentially, when the law was passed, it was done so with the idea that these companies would do a better job of regulating their communities. and a lot of democrats are now saying you aren't doing enough. but behinde shield, the shield you are meant to be cleaning your communities. proactively self-regulating. you have been proven incapable and you see all of this harassment and abuse online. if you are not capable of cleaning that up, the federal government needs to step in. carol: section 230 created a safe harbor, meanwhile, google's android was largely responsible for the creation of the smartphone revolution. let's take a look at how android came to rule the world. >> steve jobs considered it a

ripoff and vowed to spend apples last penny to destroy it. android, the about system that brought smartphones to the masses. smartphonesbillion were sold around the world. , offered itndroid for free, and added services. samsung came out with the first major android phone and became the world's largest smartphone maker. and china's stunning economic rise created a massive new market. the question is, what's next? last year, the eu claimed offering android for free violated antitrust laws. meanwhile, smart phone sales will decline for the third year in a row. tech companies are betting on specialist computing platforms. for better or worse, the future may not look like android. bloomberg opinion tech

columnist shira ovide writes more, joining us from san francisco. >> a decade after the iphone came out, everybody that was not apple was scared. google give them a solution, a way to enter the market with some google strings attached. to everybodyg help that did not have an answer to the iphone. that meant mobile phone companies, handset makers like samsung and motorola and htc. that meant all of the app makers who no longer had to make a for,on different versions if you remember, the proliferation of mostly crummy cell phone operating systems. carol: talk more about samsung. they were crucial when they came

out with their galaxy. they really took it to a whole other level. >> they really did. it's easy to forget this in the fog of history, but samsung was one of these companies that was caught flat-footed by the iphone once it was clear android was getting traction, they put their foot on the gas. and it's hard to imagine the modern smartphone without samsung, which is now the biggest seller of smartphones in the world. what they did was come out with every conceivable variety of android smartphone with every conceivable feature, price point , selling to just about every country in the world. on top of that, they introduced innovations that are now a

fixture of modern smartphones. notably, the larger screens the iphone was playing catch-up to. it was those larger screens that really made the smartphone this must-have device. it became a more appealing to have a smartphone is your primary computing device. to read on it, to do these things we now associate with smartphones. carol: throw in one more factor, china, and the economic rise and their increased demand. >> china is a huge part of the story, both as consumers of smartphones and related technologies and now as innovators. what happened in the last decade plus was the chinese government, as part of the economic development program, decided to spread fast, wireless internet all over the country. not just in cities, but every rural part of the country. smartphones came along with that. carol: coming up, the world's largest airport.

plus, a guide for top shelf angling. this is "bloomberg businessweek."

carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." you can also listen to us on the radio on sirius xm channel 119, and on a.m. 1130 in new york, 106.1 in boston, 99.1 f.m. in washington, d.c. a.m. 960 in the bay area, london on dab digital, and through the bloomberg business app. this week, a special solutions section. ,rom beijing to singapore governments are pouring billions into new airport. here is what is projected to be the hottest aviation market. >> the region is becoming a busy air travel region. over the course of the next

10-20 years, it is looking to surpass the u.s. and europe for just the volume of travelers. carol: that is amazing. >> and there are more amazing statistics in the story. projectsig, ambitious for the idea of the airport is not just for travelers, but a destination for locals. it is going to be shopping, we've seen a lot of that happening all over the world. do,in asia, as they often they are on a whole other level. it is driven by the need and number of air travelers but also by an idea that they can significantly affect the local economies. , it isthat's what i love becoming this economic stone. talk more -- zone. talk more about that. it is different from the business model, thinking about western countries. that's not where they make their money. >> exactly.

we have statistics in the story that look at airports in asia and how the percentage, for example, a revenue from retail and those airports, much higher than what you see in the u.s., i think that's the idea. there are these economic zones that are not only the airlines operating in and out and the travelers but other businesses creating jobs there --. -- jobs. but also creating the need for transportation to and from the airport. it is spurring things on a much grander scale. the project that is coming up most recently that we will see in september is the new beijing airport. carol: the world's biggest, right? >> yes. and we are seeing projects in singapore and hong kong, all

across asia, india, china, the asia-pacific region, it is an exciting time. and it's fascinating to see how they are being set up in terms of being satellite terminal buildings from the main concourse and how that is also something you see happening with airports in the u.s.. there are seeing that happening in lax, where you can create more terminals. we are struggling in the u.s., we have aging, old infrastructure. about the news york metro airports and how bad they are. what's tough is they have to deal with the existing infrastructure. in asia, they can to start from the ground up. >> its ground zero. it is not struggling with existing infrastructure and even the question of more real estate

available to spread this out. if you think about la guardia or kennedy, where do you go? you have to fix what's there and that's it. there's not much more spreading out or adding on. it's tricky, but in asia, that's why we are seeing that. it is cool to see what is happening. carol: we wrap up this week in pursuit of the perfect fishing trip. so if you are angling for some fishing fun, check out this jet -- chat. >> our audience is actually very fishing-heavy. we have never done a whole section takeover. we consulted some of the expert fishing team members like erik schatzker. carol: i did not know he was big into fission. -- fishing. >> a lot of diehards here steered us through the section. carol: you lay out a bunch of

places to go. there are some pretty possibly's is. -- posh places. >> we talked to people all over the world and got their recommendations for where they like to go, where they like to stay, and who they like to fish with. we got recommendations from patagonia, the amazon, martha's vineyard. there are luxury places, which is where we come in, and also who to go fishing with. the guides. carol: that's a big part of it. >> yeah. you want someone who will take you to the spots and two really is going to know how to make sure you have a good time. carol: so where should we go? did you do 10 places? >> yeah. the place i would go is martha's vineyard, especially because there is this guide, 29 years old, one of the only women we talked to. she is one of the new trend of

instagram-savvy guides. if you aren't getting many bytes, she will do an impromptu tes, she will-- bi do an impromptu yoga class. there are also boats you can go on where you are driving around, fishing the whole time. very cool experiences. carol: that's what's interesting. martha's vineyard is very different from the amazon and the type of fish. >> up i grew up fishing, but in new england -- i grew up fishing, but in new england. and i did not know about a lot of these fish. i did not know about this huge, silvery fish you fish for in the seychelles. carol: i am curious what has it gotten crowded -- curious, has it gotten crowded? thinking about the pursuits u.s. cover, or more people fishing?

>> more people are fishing in traditional areas. so the good thing about right now is that every part of the world is accessible. -- to aant to go to the peninsula in russia, you can go. that kind of place is accessible , but climate change is changing where some of the traditional spots have been. it can narrow down where you can people.uild up carol: we are available on newsstands now and on our mobile app. you can find more from this week's issue, including santiago's fleet of electric buses. plus, vietnam's trade war fuel boom makes it a tariff target. and like the odyssey, but for drones. a sailboat returning from antarctica troubling climate

clues. and check out our daily podcast. more bloomberg television starts now. ♪

♪ emily: i'm emily chang and this is the "best of bloomberg technology." this week, to mass shootings in the u.s. left dozens dead. president trump has called on social media companies to do more to identify masters. one of the government posted a manifesto online. we talk with ellen pao, the former ceo of reddit. plus, uber