president eisenhower was the first to have a national security adviser. the first person to hold the position was robert cutler. thanks so all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. stay tuned for "reliable sources". the obama administration secretly conducting a massive surveillance program involving millions of phone records. is this anti-terror tactic a scandal, the outrage being portrayed by much of the press? >> we'll start with this news. the u.s. government may have your number. >> the issue of your privacy is front and center this morning. >> breaking news out of washington. >> now to that stunning report that the national security agency has been collecting phone records in millions of americans under a top secret order. >> "washington post" has uncovered another massive u.s. spying program, this will one capable of tracking virtually

anything an individual does on the internet. >> the phone surveillance story wasn't broken by an american news organization, it was london's guardian that got the scoop. msnbc's president says his network doesn't excel at covering breaking news. does that explain its recent dive in the ratings? the challenge of covering politics in a noncampaign year. plus now that netflix has put out an entire season of arrested development -- how do critics handle this new phenomenon ever gorging on 13 episodes at once, especially when they can spoil the fun for viewers. i'm howard kurtz and this is "reliable sources". it's not surprising on one level that glenn greenwald broke the story of the

administration's sweeping cell phone surveillance. he's a lawyer, commentator and activist who has been outspoken on what he view as national security abuses during the bush and obama administrations. he's now a columnist for the guardian and joins me live from hong kong. how is it that you living most of the time in brazil and working for a british newspaper got this scoop and no american news organization did? >> well, first of all, let me correct you what you said in the introduction. the newspaper for which i work is actually the u.s. edition of the guardian. it is based in new york city. it's an american company staffed overwhelming by americans including myself. so it is an american branch of a global news organization. secondly, there is a thing call the internet that allows people to learn about other parts of the world and there are people inside the united states government very alarm by what is taking place within the surveillance state who decided that they wanted their fellow citizens to beware of it and

journalists who would be aggressive about pursuing their duties as a journalist and inform the public. and that's how i learned of these things. >> and you said one of your sources at least is a reader of yours. and so was that person drawn to dealing with you because of your record on being an outspoken critic on these national security issues? >> i think that what it is more instead is there is a multiple episodes over the last decade where news organizations that discovered crucial information about what the government was doing sat on that information at the request of the u.s. government, the most notorious example was when the "new york times" learned in 2004 that the bush administration was spying on americans and their telephone calls without warrants required by law and sat on that story for a full year after george bush got safely reelected at the request of the white house. so there is a concern that there is a lot of subservient behavior. these sources wanted to make sure that if they took the risk

of trying to inform the public, that they would find journalists willing to be adversarial in their posture toward the u.s. government and be aggressive about performing citizens. >> i want to come back to that point, but first administration officials have been pushing back pretty hard against your story and the follow-up story disclosed by the "washington post". yesterday director of national intelligence spoke to nbc news and had this to say. >> for me it is literally not figuratively literally gut wrenching to see this happen because of the huge grave damage it does to our intelligence capabilities. >> and this morning after you were on "this week," mike rogers said the following. gree greenwald says he's an sxerpts. he doesn't have a clue how this thing works. your reaction to both

criticisms. >> well, first of all, to the extent that politicians like republican mike rogers are running around boasting that only they know but not the rest of us know about what the u.s. government is doing in terms of how it is spying on its own citizens, that to me is exactly the reason why transparency is so strilgts here. we shouldn't have a massive spying apparatus being constructed completely beyond democratic accountability and done in the dark. and that's why i think it's so vital to shine light on what it is the government is doing. as for the statements of clapper, what i would say is this. in every single case over the last four or five decades whenever reporters expose the secret conduct of government officials, they use the same play book. they try to scare americans into believing that they should be trusted to exercise powers. and then they attack the journalists. they did that with the pentagon

papers. the reality is that -- >> let me jump in. i would certainly agree that you performed a public service by letting americans know what is being done in their name in terms of these secret programs. but would you be willing to succeed that there is a potential down side with this kind of disclosure where terrorists, potential terrorists could be more careful to avoid this kind of surveillance that you have now made public? >> let me tell you why that claim is absurd. it's really actually what they're doing when they make that claim is ensuggesting the intelligence of everybody in the united states. every terrorist on the planet already knows and have known for a long time that the united states is trying to surveil their communications. any terrorist who isn't already aware of that is a terrorist who is incapable of tying their shoes let alone detonating a bomb successfully in the united states. that isn't anything about what we disclose. what we disclose is that the american government is surveilling its own citizens,

people who are suspected of no wrong doing. the only thing that has been damaged here is not national security. what has been damaged is the reputation and credibility of the political officials who want to hide behind top secret designations to conceal their own wrong doing. and that's really what they're's angry about. >> overs years you you've been portrayed by some in the media as a gad fly, obsessive on national security issues. now you have a profile in the "new york times". generally ssympathetic. they called you you a blogger. do you feel somewhat vindicated, nothing wrong about being a blogger, but are you vindicated by that you're getting all this media attention after years of pounding away on these issues? >> honestly what i really hope happens here is that we finally have a very ygenuine open debat about the kind of society and government we want to have. do we want to let the government be scrutinizing and monitoring

everything that we say and do and knowing everything about us, while we know virtually nothing about what it is that they're doing. so to the extent that the stories that we're writing and that we will continue to write trigger that debate, fuel that debate, make people more educated, sure, that's been my goal in all the writing i've been doing for several years and i'm happy to see the debate finally taking place. >> i'll ask again, do you feel a measure of vindication? >> i mean, i think that it's been clear for a long time that there is this massive secrecy that's being an accused and sure to the extent people are starting to realize how pervasive those abuses are, i think the things i'm writing have approach to proven to be c. >> when the stories came out about investigations being aimed at journalists, you felt some of

their own members have been targeted. with a few mobile exceptions you wrote, most major media outlets said little if anything about this. it took a direct attack on them for them to really get worked up, denounce these assaults and acknowledge the administration's true character. so do you think except when journalists are targeted that the media in general either don't care or just ensufficiently aggressive about government intrusion? >> unfortunately, i do. it's interesting i've seen a lot of people saying this week with the revelations about mass spying on american people that essentially we all know what american muslims feel like now since they have been subjected to extremely invasive surveillance over the past 12 years. the vast majority of whom are guilty of absolutely nothing. and even more so back in 2010, the united states convened a grand jury, a criminal investigation into wikileaks which really was doing what journalists do, which is they

receive classified information from a government source and then published it. and the theory of the government at that time we tried to warn was very dangerous. >> i want to bring you back to your view of the mainstream media. do you believe most of its members are to use a phrase you used subservient to political power and if so why do you think that is? >> of course they are. you wrote one ever the best columns on that about how your own newspaper had buried any real dissent regarding the claims of the bush administration justifying the run up to the war in iraq. the war in iraq was probably the best example in which the u.s. government is subservient to the claims of the administration. so much reporting in washington consists of running to government sources, mindlessly repeating what they say after giving anonymity to ensure that they can say it with no accountability and then simply disseminating it to the public. i also talked before about the stories in which newspapers have sat on stories because the

government told them to. >> iraq certainly was not the government's finest hour. do i want to ask you before you go, the nsa has now asked the justice department to conduct a criminal investigation of the phone surveillance story. are you worried about being caught up in the intensity of a criminal investigation which might either be aimed at you or person are or persons who provided you you the information? >> i'm not worried at all. i read the first amendment that i have the right of free press. i know that is my right and duty as an american to exercise that right and i really don't care what threats the government makes. if anything it will just backfire. i think it would embolden more people to come forward with more and more whistle blowing. >> glenn greenwald, thanks for joining us. when we come back, more on the coverage of the surveillance scoops and how many liberal commentators are suddenly turning on president obama. both maxwell and ted have hail damage to their cars.

ted is trying to get a hold of his insurance agent. maxwell is not. he's on geico.com setting up an appointment with an adjuster. ted is now on hold with his insurance company. maxwell is not and just confirmed a 5:30 time for tuesday. ted, is still waiting. yes! maxwell is out and about... with ted's now ex-girlfriend. wheeeee! whoo! later ted! online claims appointments. just a click away on geico.com. there's a reason no one says "easy like monday morning."

sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long. where over seventy-five percent of store management started as i'm the next american success story. working for a company hourly associates. there's opportunity here. i can use walmart's education benefits to get a degree, maybe work in it, or be an engineer, helping walmart conserve energy. even today, when our store does well, i earn quarterly bonuses. when people look at me, i hope they see someone working their way up. vo: opportunity, that's the real walmart.

>> the guardian scoop was followed by another bombshell, reports in the "washington post" and that they are attacking foog he will, yahoo! and microsoft. all this has created unusual split among commentators with men conservatives defending the

spying efforts, but not all. >> i praise the president for taking the steps he's taken to keep this country safe from potential terrorist threat. >> talking points usually supports war on terror strategies, but this one, a major entrugs on the privacy of all americans. this one is dangerous to us. >> and some liberal pundits but not all are outraged at the president who the huffington "post" morphed into george w. obama. >> i have no doubt barack obama would be appalled by this in the past. and i'd like to know why he's doing it in the present. >> do i think it's serious, it's one of the most outrageous examples of stepping on the constitution that i've heard. they have for right to phone records. >> i think the nsa program is totally on the up and up. nothing wrong with it. >> joining us now, charlie savage and political columnist

for the guardian. the story broke in 2005 of the bush surveillance program. you have the media been more lax about these issues under brarac obama? >> some of us have been interested in the continuity of this administration in its continuation of many war on terror policies that it inherited. >> surprised because obama -- >> because expectations created by his primary campaign when he was running to the left of hillary clinton created a sense this this was a dramatic departure from what he would inherit on january 20th, 2009. very quickly it became clear he was going to continue a lot of the programs that he had inherit inherited, whether drones or state secrets. on the other hand, a lot of his critique about the bush administration during the campaign five years ago was

based around the programs that george bush put in place in his first term when he was doing it in defiance a of statutes, a lot of the legal problems had been eroded by the second term. >> is it more than a coincidence that the guardian were able to break this phone surveillance story? >> i think the guardian does cover american politics from a slightly more standoffish kind of view. they aren't as invested in the arguments that we here in the american media have with each other. but totally in keeping with glenn's own coverage. no matter where he's been, a bl blogger on his own or now, the credit goes to glenn even more the guardian. >> what do you think about this question of whether the press has cut barack obama more slack on these kinds of issues than -- and perhaps up now when we see it starting to dramatically change? >> i think the until now part of that question is important.

because i think the last week's coverage has been really quite good. and i do think i actually am more worried that we'll get so bogged down in the question of, well, obama's being a hypocrite that we won't deal with the underlying issue which is actually pretty important, do these programs go too far and is the secrecy around them justified. >> president obama addressed this question at an appearance on an unrelated issue in california on friday and he used an interesting word to describe the media coverage. let's play that. >> so i want to be very clear. some of the hype that we've been hearing over the last day or so, nobody's listening to the content of people's phone calls. >> so charlie, the administration says congress was briefed on this, is this story

hype as the president says? >> you have to desegregate which stories we're talking about. there has been revelations about different top secret documents, one of which concerned the massive database of domestic calling logs, not the contents of the communications, every phone call an american makes thought just abroad but between two places in the united states apparently a record of that has been kept and continues to be stored in the federal government. that's story number one. >> so that's not hype. >> it's a revelation. we see it's continued for probably over a decade. >> and story number two is the thursday story, published by the washington possess and then "wa guardian, in a race to get it out. in its initial portrayal, will this is the one called prism where the government is collecting information from internet companies like google and facebook. >> and the "washington post" said the companies, microsoft, yahoo! so organization were

knowingly participating in letting the government directly access this information. and we're talking here about e-mails, chats, photo, facebook postings. but now in today's "washington post," the paper backing off on that saying that that is inaccurate. but no formal correction. what is your take on that story? >> it's not the knowing participation part that i'm focused on. it's the portrayal that the nsa was directly tapping into the central servers of user dwa take and was able to root around in the contents of all communications including americans. if that were the case, that would be wildly illegal, overreach. it set off an uproar and lingering impress that is with us today that that's what is going on. however it seems increasingly clear that all of this is a little murky that that's wrong, that there isn't direct access to the raw user data, that this is in fact just the name for the program that everyone knew about because it was part of a public law in 2008 whereby the

government can get warrants without vittized collection for targets overseas who are not american citizens and make requests under those court orders for information even if it's happening on u.s. soil. if it's true that as the companies say across the board, as the go. is saying across the board that they're not just sort of willy-nilly rooting around in americans' communications, that's a very different story. not as alarming as initially portrayed and unfortunate that that happened because it drowned out and stepped on the yet undigested first story which really is something we need to talk about. >> we are talking about it and i think that debate will continue. i wondered if people on your side of the political spectrum, some of them have not been outraged by this, but a lot of them, is there a sense of betrayal by the barack obama promise to change the -- >> i felt betrayed long ago on this particular issue. i do think anyone who has been paying attention to the obama record on civil liberties is not going to be shocked by this.

the shock by the level of intrusion, certainly that initial coverage, too, set off a lot of alarm bells. but i approve a lot of what he's doing domestically and can still be upset on this. >> conservative commentators seem to be torn between ripping obama and defending an anti-terror program that dates to gorng w. bush who started this in 2006 and this was continued by barack obama. >> i think there is a long standing division among conservatives on where you stand on the sort of liberty versus national security arguments. and this story is one of the things that is going to move conservatives in a more libertarian, more skeptical of the national security claims drebs. and it's not just because the obama administration is doing it, although it's part of it, but also with the irs story, there is just more of the sense that government is out of control and that is something

that is not just affecting conservatives, but i think the public at large. >> got to get to a break here. when we come back, the "new york times" seems to turn on barack obama. we'll look at a very sharply worded editorial. la's known definitely for its traffic, congestion, for it's smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the busses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution to the earth. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment. overmany discounts to thine customers! [old english accent] safe driver, multi-car, paid in full -- a most fulsome bounty indeed, lord jamie. thou cometh and we thy saveth! what are you doing? we doth offer so many discounts, we have some to spare. oh, you have any of those homeowners discounts? here we go. thank you.

he took my shield, my lady. these are troubling times in the kingdom. more discounts than we knoweth what to do with. now that's progressive. if you have high cholesterol, here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor, crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant.

tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

continuing our conversation about press cdisclosures, "new york times" editorial the other day saying administration has lost all credibility on shathis issue. he's proving executives will abuse its power. that was softened a little bit of a ter tafter the first add decision. is that a significant softening? >> i think it's an honest softening.is that a significant? >> i think it's an honest softening. you can have credibility on some issues and not on others. i just want to jump this about the hype question. i do think this has been hyped in the sense that the comments taker has been hyper partisan. you showed some people crossing

lines, but there are a lot of, no, obama's fault, no, bush's fault. and i believe the general public will shut its ears to the whole thing. >> when president obama called it hype in that clip we played before the break, he then went on to say no one's listening to anyone's phone calls. nobody in the press reported that, they said they have the the phone records of every call made by every american. so where are you on this? >> all of the reassurances that this is not a big deal, these stories, they don't reassure. because what he's saying there ignores the fact that modern technology allows us to infer a lot based on the data that we do know that they're getting. and these stories when people say, well, both administrations did can it, so it's not a big deal, no, that makes it a bigger deal. if the law allows it, which is another excuse being made, that's a problem. that's a problematic story. >> charlie, you were co-author of a story yesterday, i have it here, saying this kind of data

mining was instrumental at least in foiling one plot in pakistan that was going to lead potentially to the bombing of new york subways. and one of the people cited is a senior intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity. so it seems that an administration upset about leaks is perfectly happy to leak one when it's in the matter of depending a program that is controversial. >> the hypocrisy over leaking stuff and then going after other people who leak things you don't like is rampant. but to connect that to anna's comment, so much of what happens and what gets reported out of washington really is nonsense. it is partisan hackerry on both sides and each team is just throwing talk points at each other that means nothing. >> complicit in -- >> of course. because cover it like a baseball game. and the danger of that is the crying wolf syndrome.

when something really happens, the people will say it's just another benghazi talking point. this is something that will change america if it stays in place. the issue is now that the public finally knows about it, are they going to demand that it being dismantled or will they tolerate this for themselves and their children. >> this baseball game is out of innings at the moment. thanks very much for stopping by this sunday morning. ahead on "reliable sources," msnbc's president says he's not really in the breaking news business. is that hurting his ratings? ♪

this is the tempur-pedic innovation lab. it's like a front row seat to our latest technologies. here is where our engineers do their constant improving. we have helped over 7 million people fall in love with their tempur-pedic. and now for my favorite part of the tour. [whispers]everyone loves free samples. ♪ ♪ hooking up the country whelping business run ♪ ♪ build! we're investing big to keep our country in the lead. ♪ load! we keep moving to deliver what you need. and that means growth, lots of cargo going all around the globe. cars and parts, fuel and steel, peas and rice, hey that's nice! ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪

♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪ [ chainsaw buzzing ] humans. sometimes, life trips us up. sometimes, we trip ourselves up. and although the mistakes may seem to just keep coming at you, so do the solutions. like multi-policy discounts from liberty mutual insurance. save up to 10% just for combining your auto and home insurance. call liberty mutual insurance at... to speak with an insurance expert and ask about all the personalized savings available for when you get married, move into a new house, or add a car to your policy. personalized coverage and savings -- all the things humans need to make our world a little less imperfect.

call... and ask about all the ways you could save. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy? makes it easy for ann to manage her finances when she's on the go. even when she's not going anywhere. citi tablet apps. easier banking. standard at citibank.

helps him deposit his checks. jay also like it when mother nature helps him wash his car. mother nature's cool like that. citibank mobile check deposit. easier banking. standard at citibank. msnbc bills itself as the place for politics. but that's a less pop uhe you lar place lately with the network slips to fourth place in the cable news wars. its numbers down about 20%. when it comes to breaking news, msnbc president told the "new york times" unlike cnn, quote, we're not the place for that. our brand is not that.

is that a problem? joining us now a reporter for media hype. joe, does it hurt msnbc when its own boss says the network doesn't really make a priority to cover breaking news? >> absolutely. it reminds me of if you go to sizzler steakhouse and you say, hey, can i get a steak and they say, no, that's no longer on the menu. for griffin to say go to the cnn cafe, go to tgi fox if you want a national disaster, terrorist attack, maybe human interest story, we really don't do that, we're strictly politics. you're basically waving the white flag of surrender. >> in fairness to phil griffin, he doesn't have a whole stable of rotters. msnbc borrows reporters from nbc news. but the boston bombing, the cleveland kidnapping case, oklahoma tornadoes, even the philadelphia building collapse, does the fact that so much of breaking news has kind of

tomorrow natured t dominated headlines, has it helped cnn and hurt msnbc? >> yeah, the stories you mentioned, boston, cleveland, oklahoma tornadoes. headline news had jodi arias and the verdict there. so huge ratings for them. and then all the scandals unfavorable to the obama administration. a.p., irs, james rosen, nsa, benghazi, you pick them, it's not good for a network like msnbc that openly cheer leads for the president. >> i'm sure some at msnbc would say they're not cheerleaders. but you buy into the theory if it's branded as a liberal network, if the news is negative for barack obama, that can have a depressing effect on viewer ship, not just the fact that this is not a campaign year? >> exactly. as you said, a nonelection year. m scht nbc is like the olympics

at this point. you have the winter and summer other l owe lick pims every two years. presidential election, yes, they will do better. nonelection years and you have a president saying we don't do breaking news that doesn't leave a lot of compelling reasons for me to go to m scht nsnbc when i go to cnn or fox. >> couldn't this all turn out to be temporary when we get into a period where there is not a lot of breaking news, couldn't a lot of viewers go back to msnbc because they like watching chris matthew, rachel maddow, you name it? >> sure. the trayvon martin story, that's something that is a scheduled breaking news event. they say they will own that story. the problem is that their credibility there is shaken because you have an al sharpton who has led rallies y s iies in of trayvon martin.

lawrence o'donnell has lallegeda police coverup. i don't know if you'll get an objective story. >> all those these are opinionated people and we've talked about sharp tal sharpton in the trayvon martin's case. but you don't tune in without expecting the strong view points of the anchors. fox news firing back at msnbc jonathan alter over a serious allegation in his book, telling political most of what alter writes about is provably false and he needs to check into a first year journalism program or counseling center. alter says his information comes from current or former news corp employees and that he's being a bully. here are a couple examples. tales of his paranoia has circulated for years like the time he tried to order bomb proof glass for his office

because he thought homosexuals outside of news corp headquarters on sixth avenue might shoot at him. the response, he says i tried to bomb proof the office because i thought that hoe know smoe ze h be hoe hoe phobic. doesn't matter what glass you have. another one, after murdoch pushed him to moderate fox's coverage of obama, ail chlt september threatened to quit. the response, murdoch never asked to ease up on bom. what do you make of the back and forth? >> if you just take that one quote that you just read about roger aile september putting this bulletproof glass in his office because he thinks homosexuals are out to assassinate him, because they're a big problem why this country, who do you believe? i have to go with ailes, the guy isn't trying to sell books, a book that was poorly reviewed by the "new york times". they called it a tired tv rerun

of a not so popular show. book sales are not even in the top 50 on amazon. so it looks like alter is just trying to sell books. i don't see any names with these sources. so how believable can it be. and in the end i think that jonathan alter used to be the type of reporter that had graph takes and now he's morphed into perez hilton. >> what do you make of the response to politico?into perez. >> what do you make of the response to politico? >> why wi don't know why he wou even acknowledge alter. i say it was ill advised. i would have left it alone. because it will only help jonathan alter sell a couple more books. >> certainly made news. thanks very much for helpings out this morning. after the break, is the trend of online tv series like arrested development changing the way tv critics have to do that you are jobs? we got adt because i walked in on a burglary once.

the physical damage was pretty bad. the emotional toll was even worse. our daughter had nightmares. what that robber really took from us was our peace of mind. with adt, we got it back. [ male announcer ] every 14.6 seconds, a burglary takes place in the united states. so rely on the fast alarm response of adt. a single adt system can help protect you from burglary, fire, and high levels of carbon monoxide. when an alarm is received, adt calls the local authorities for help. and you can get this monitored protection, plus great local service, starting at just over $1 a day.

and only adt offers a theft protection guarantee. take it from me. the time to think about a security system isn't after something bad happens -- it's before. [ male announcer ] call now and get one of our best values -- adt's quick connect plus system installed for $99. hurry, and take advantage of these savings. adt. always there.

...and we inspected his brakes for free. -free is good. -free is very good. [ male announcer ] now get 50% off brake pads and shoes at meineke. remember back in the day when your favorite television show aired once a week? now it's all about bingeing as when netflix released the entire season of arrested development. >> i just want my son to have a

job where his incompetence won't be out of place. >> that's not a great sign. >> so is this approach changing the way the media critiques such programs? joining us from philadelphia, ken tucker, media critic and npr contributor. and also weekly reviews for the new season. ken tucker, arrested development isn't the first series to do this. how do you review a whole tv series at once? >> well, that is the key problem. and it's a problem that i think maybe netflix hadn't really anticipated. because once you you -- leading up to the shows both house of cards and arrested development, there was tremendous hype about the premieres of these things. once the shows premiered, coverage kind of dropped off a cliff because critics became kind of frozen. they couldn't write they felt about the entire arc of arrested development without giving away plot lines and i think in

general tv criticism has become so scared of spoiler culture, of people yelling at them that they don't want to hear details of tv shows, that it's kind of intimidated them. and it's hampered coverage. and i think that's a problem that netflix may not have anticipated in terms of ongoing media presence. >> well, since you brought you up the s word, are you scared you can do you think there has been too much timidity on the part of critics that somebody somewhere or a lot of people actually might find out how the season ends and be ticked off? >> oh, not at all. i mean, i think spoiler culture is just ridiculous and ought to be defied at any moment possible. also in particular with arrested development, it's not until you watch all 15 episodes of this that you see how beautifully constructed this is and you really want to go back and watch it all over again. i mean, i'm not one for binge

watching because i really want to watch my intake of saturated fast chew usness. but in the case of arrested development, i just wanted to watch it all over again. >> you had an analogy that you likened to a good ice cream sund sundae. >> it's possible to not enjoy every bite. like i know people who did binge watch this and one friend told me she felt like this sort of grueling nature of trying to get through all the episodes at once made her miss things. to be fair, you'll miss things in arrested development. there is something particular to arrested development more almost any other show i can think of where repeat viewings make sense. and that's one of the reasons why i think we may see a bump up again in arrested coverage as people start to consume the whole thing. >> but as a fan, you've been

writing reviews, but what about the spoileder problem. don't you get annoyed if you read something online if you're trying to avoid it? like learning the score of a basketball game that you've taped to watch later. >> much like a good sporting event, you can watch it over and over. the quality is high enough, spoilers won't make a difference. i can think like i knew what was going to happen in game of thrones, too. it was still compelling viewing. and with arrested, there is so much richness to the text, so much inside jokes that you can watch it again and again. >> ken tucker, it seems to me that it raises the question of which is the audience that you are writing for. it was so easy in the old days because everybody was on episode three and it would be the hype and anticipation and speculation about episode four. now you don't know whether you're writing for somebody who has seen the entire season or only a couple of episodes and that has to be challenging for

you. >> it is a little bit. but not in the sense that television has become so intensely populated by people who are really, really engaged. and they really want to hear what -- bounce their the audience will put up with a lot of spoilage so to speak when you actually experience the show. it. >> seems to me like you are talking about the super fans, neem that want to marinate in this thing. someone that will spend six hour hours watching 13 episodes or however long it takes but what about those that like to wait for next week they get left as road kill? >> it is my experience, really, that television, the television

audience has become so fractured that it is almost entirely populated by super fans that whether you are an "arrested development" fan or a fan of "the bachelorette" you want to know every single thing about that. chances are n a lot of cases when i write people know more than i do about the show. they remember old jokes, call backs to previous references and i think it is one of the things that makes covering tv exciting now. it is more of a dialogue between the critic and the viewer. >> anna marie, i have a half minute. does this reflect a people want it all culture? >> there is still time space continuum. you can only one at a time. i have been doing one at a time because that's the way you physically consume them. >> we are old fashioned. >> i am old fashioned in this particular sense. >> okay. well, it seems to me this has potential to change not just the way television is consumed but

the way that regular television markets will sell because more available on internet on sites like hulu and elsewhere. thank you for joining us. still to come, "the new york post" sued over a front page photo of the boston bombing. and wait until you see two women on a philadelphia newscast that clearly can't stand each other. the "media monitor" is straight ahead. s?? guess what day it is! huh...anybody? julie! hey...guess what day it is?? ah come on, i know you can hear me. mike mike mike mike mike... what day is it mike? ha ha ha ha ha ha! leslie, guess what today is? it's hump day. whoot whoot! ronny, how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? i'd say happier than a camel on wednesday. hump day!!! yay!! get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired. i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. whether you're just starting your 401(k) or you are ready for retirement, we'll help you get there.

time for the "media monitor" our weekly look at the hits and errors in the news business. it was a lawsuit waiting to happen. a massachusetts man and his high school friend suing "the new york post" over this bag men cover after the boston bombing. the headline fed seeks this duo pictured at boston marathon implied these two innocent bystanders might have to do with the attack. an appalling front page wchl the tribune company putting up the papers for sale there have been a number of protests that they could be sold to the koch

brothers, the billionaire businessmen that are aggressive and they would turn them in to propaganda vehicles. now charles koch telling the "wall street journal" there's a need for focus on real news, not news with an agenda or news that is editorializing. if the company buys newspapers, koch says, the editorial page would be a marketplace where all sorts of approaches to public policy interests are and there would be ongoing debate. there is reason for script schism but liberal businessmen such as warren buffett have been snapping up newspapers without compromising their journalism. keith olbermann has found a new gig with cbs. turner sports executive tells the hollywood reporter i think he realizes he's obviously burned some bridges in the

marketplace but he's a talent. should be fun and maybe he gets more than three strikes. not everyone in tv news likes each other, sorry to break it to you, but most do a good job hiding it. that doesn't seem to be the case at the cbs affiliate in philadelphia where anchor nicole brewer and carol erickson don't do a good job of disguising their mutual disdain. >> couple of shower by wednesday, thursday and friday and thank you for the applause. >> how's that carol, is that good enough for you? okay. i'll try harder next time. thank you so much. meanwhile a high-speed chase. >> uh-huh. there's more. posted by the website amazing life 24/7. >> i'he has nine grandchildren d two great grandchildren. wow. good for him. now, it may be his birthday, but carol, when it comes to the

weather we want no monkey business, okay. all good things. >> it's 49 degrees in philadelphia, nicole. with a temperature of -- >> i tried. you can't even give me that, can you? >> 38 degrees through the allentown area. >> she tried. officials at kyw say it is ridiculous and out of context and one incident where the editing was misleading because they weren't talking to each other and we didn't show it. since the video have gone viral they have been on a love fest. if you know carol and me there is only love between us. carol is a doll and noent disrespect. just good friends. catch the drop dead looks they were shooting each other? that's it for this edition of "reliable sources." you can catch the season finale of anthony bourdain's parts unknown tonight followed by the

premier of-- state of the union with candy crowley begins now. chances are pretty good that the feds have got your number and the ones you've called. today, tracking down bad guys versus protecting the civil liberties of everyone else. >> you can complain about big brother, but when you actually look at the details, then i think we've struck the right balance. >> democratic senator mark udall and republican senator john mccain on government spying and the balance between security and privacy. plus, the search for who decided to give extra irs scrutiny to groups with tea party or patriot in their name. >> indication is that they were directly being ordered from washington. >> this sunday, the top democrat on the house oversight committee elijah cummings gives us his take on who knew what when. and is any work getting done?