56% of households have gun. the lowest death rates were in hawaii and rhode island where 12 to 15% own guns. thanks for being part of my program this week. see you next week. good morning. it's time for reliable sources. our weekly look at the story behind the story of how news and pop culture get made. we have rolling stones el chapo interview. here a surprising perspective from the country's top radio expert. the back story about the netflix series, making a murder. they will tell a true crime story. also hear from one of their fiercest critics. hln nancy grace who calls it a

mockumentary. can we ever agree on a reliable source about second amendment rights? we'll ask an expert mediator to do that. first, a developing story involving a notorious mexican drug cartel and the hollywood star who scored a controversial coup getting an interview before his capture. this is the cover just into us with the headline el chapo found. found by sean penn. here is the beginning of the 11,00 11,000-word article. that's quite a contrast. here he is hosting a gala to support relief efforts in haiti. we haven't heard from sean penn about his story but there's a lot to analyze within it.

he has new information on how this happened. he's outside the prison where el chapo is being held. good morning. >> reporter: good morning. i just got off the phone with the senior mexican law enforcement official who tells me that the mexican government is looking to question sean pen pn. what they want know is more about the location where they met el chapo and how they got there. sean penn talks about how they were not blindfolded and if he were more of an expert tracker he would be able to triangulate landmarks. mexico did not know about this meeting between sean penn and el chapo until this rolling stone article was published late last night. the source says they are hoping by this summer to extradite el chapo to the united states.

it all depends on legalities. the attorney says he doesn't want his client extradited to the yiet. he belie united states. he believes the mexican government can handle this case. >> we think he's there. he did sneak out once before. back in july. recently returned to that prison. what i'm wondering, your sources are indicating something important. there's been news reporting suggesting this meeting is what helped mexican authorities end up finding el chapo. your sources suggesting anything else. they did not know anything about this interview or afterwards until he was captured. >> reporter: this senior -- that's right. this senior mexican official says that the first indication that they had that penn had this meeting is when the article came out. on friday at that press conference when el chapo was

paraded in front of the media, we heard from the attorney general here in mexico sayi init was el chapo's arrogance eaching out to different actors. what we know and what we can tell you is that according to this source is they didn't know about this specific meeting. in this clip that was posted overnight on rollingstone.com we hear from el chapo talk candidly about drug trafficking and his role in it. >> thank you so much for joining us. there are ethics questions and legal questions. it says some names have had to be changed. locations not named and an understanding was brokered with the subject, that's el chapo, this piece would be submitted for the subject's approval.

the subject did not ask for any changes. what if he had? what would rolling stone have done? the idea of the approval is highly unusual. we'll talk about that. this is the cover of the new york post reacting to this calling sean penn el jerko. you got to spend time reading this article. rolling stone shared the article with you a few hours ahead of time. you were able to write about it this morning. what's the news in the interview? >> he has a distinctive writing style. >> people making fun of this flourishing article. >> it seems like the first occasion what he does for work. previously when asked he suggested he was a farmer of a

different sort back in 1993. i would guess this candid admission of how he operates his business and his mulling the consequences. >> he said if supply more heroi, meth and marijuana than anyone in the world. what a quote? the quote was obtained by an actor. he might have been performing an act of journalism or might not have been. what are the legal ramifications? maybe that's a face saving move because they weren't able to find el chapo but sean penn was able to. are there legal consequences? >> based on the facts available, i don't think there are any legal problems for sean penn or rolling stone. journalist interview bad people all the time. journalists are not obliged to

help them find fugitives. as long as he did not assist him in hiding or give him weapons or some way to avoid capture. there's no suggestion he did any of those things. if he went there and interviewed him, i don't think that's a legal problem for rolling stone or for him. now, what happens afterwards in terms his getting questioned that may create some legal difficulties in terms of whether they want to cooperate. did sean penn commit a crime, i don't think so. >> legally, no. what about the moral question of spending time with, interviewing and publicizing a drug kingpin? >> i don't have a problem with that. we're in the news business. if someone would have given me the chance to interview him, i would have run to it. i think it would have written it differently. i think this is a fully appropriate subject for rolling stone to write about. he's a very important person in

the world. an opportunity to interview him is a precious gift for a journalist. >> would you have accepted this idea of source approval? >> that's a very different story. there are certain circumstances where journalists have given quote approval where you don't quote someone unless they approve the quote. it's not favored practice. giving the whole article -- >> handing the copy over. >> that's something i've never heard of. they say he didn't demand any changes. >> that worries me too. if he didn't demand any changes that means he likes the story. should this drug kingpin like the whole story. has rolling stone commented at all in. >> they' >> they're declining to comment. it's raising all sorts of questions.

journalists interviewed bin laden. it's sort of reverse access journalist where the star gets greater access to the news making figure. >> the celebrity status of sean penn is a big factor. >> one of the things i thought interesting on the tape is el chapo mispronounces sean penn's name. he says seen penn. his interest in the mexican actress who was the other person involved in this story. >> a woman who brokered the meeting. >> i think he was more interested in her than the man he called seen penn. >> this is a comment from andrew seaman. he wrote that allowing any source approval over a story's content is inexcusable.

the practice of pre-approval discredits the entire subject where the subject requests changes or not. he said he's never been a fan of penn's journalism. me and other journalisms would have compromised a whole lot more to get an interview. that's a comment from danny gold. i think you're making that same point that others would have taken the interview as well but maybe not with the source approval requirement. >> quote approval is something that even respectable journalists negotiate. let's not kid ourselves. this is one of the most famous and notorious people in the world. i would have interviewed him. i think most journalists would have interviewed him. we don't just interview good people. this would limit our sources a great deal. you know, that alone, the decision to interview el chapo, i have no problem with at all. >> rolling stone hoping for a

comeback. a year ago their rape on campus story was debunked. the magazine has had some successes since then. this is the biggest story since the scandal. >> it's them saying this is the old journalism that we used to do and you knew us for. >> a highly controversial comeback. i think they are letting people read the story. >> to go back to the mid-1970s, the story that put them on the map is they were the ones who broke the story of where was patricia hurst when she was on the lam. they have a history of really great journalism. remember, they were responsible for the departure of the general who was in charge of

afghanistan. this is a very serious journalistic history that rolling stone had. there's been some serious problems. the virginia story, most notably. >> thank you very much for being here. thank you both for being here. up next, president obama, we all saw him tearing up earlier this week talking about gun control. did that emotion have any affect on his relationship with the a nra? we'll talk about that when we return. rates. it's a fact. kind of like ordering wine equals pretending to know wine. pinot noir, which means peanut of the night.

one of the biggest stories, president obama announcing executive actions that would place new restrictions on gun sales. he gave a feature where he teared up and two days later

presented this town hall. anderson cooper moderated it. he answered tough questions. it was notable how he called out the nra for not attending. >> there's a reason why the nra is not here. they're just down the street. since this is the main reason they exist, you think they would be prepared to have a debate with the president. >> this is what i want to explore this morning. how is it that the most influential voice in the gun debate wasn't in the room. they declined the invitation to participate and our programs request for an interview as well. as the president was speaking, chris cox of the nra was watching because he went over to fox news one hour later and explained why he wouldn't meet with president obama. >> does it make sense to meet with him? >> and talk about what in this

president can talk about background checks all day long and that nothing but a distraction he can't keep us safe and he supported every gun control proposal. what are we going to talk about? basketball. i'm not interested to talk to the president who doesn't have a basic level of respect or understanding of the second amendment in law-abiding gun owners in this country. >> what we see is mistrust and really no actual direct back and forth between these sides. no one can agree who is a reliable source about this. how do we move forward and how do we have a conversation everyone with participate in and maybe agree upon? in a few minutes i'll talk about that with a noted mediator. first i'll bring in a panel to talk about this. let me start saying s.c., you're an nra member.

you're not paid by them. i want to start with you eric. the nra doesn't like to debate. they don't like to be on these segments. they keep saying no to interview requests. i wonder if the strategy is not let this topic be debatable and not let gun reform be a debatable point. what do you think? >> i think they are willing to engage in discussion if they go over to fox news. they are happy having some level of discussion on this thing. i thought it was cowardly that they wouldn't show up for cnn's event. they complain they would only have one question and pre-screened. as you saw, as i saw and as the country saw, people who oppose president obama's gun agenda were able to stand up there right in front of him and press their points with the president. what more could you ask for. they didn't ask any follow up questions. they could have pressed him

harder. cnn said there was no prohibition on follow ups. how can you ask for a better forum than that if you want to criticize president obama on gun restrictions. instead, the nra took to twitter, which is a cowardly move. >> and fox news, a friendlier forum. do you think the nra's strategy is a wise one? >> the nra has no incentive to sit in a town hall and be lectured to by a president who thinks they are the problem and by extension the law-abiding gun owners that the nra represents are the problem. democrats running for president at a debate called out the nra as an enemy they are all proud to have accrued. there's no common language here. there's no sense of respect. why would any member or representative of the nra think they can have an honest and open conversation about these issues when they are repeatedly told

they are the problem. that makes no sense. >> that sounds like an indictment of your employer. are you saying that cnn did not put on an excellent event that encouraged the exchange of ideas? >> cnn did a great town hall and anderson asked some very tough questions. i've applauded the president for showing up at that debate. the media at large has not been friendly to the gun issue. a newspaper just after newton published the names and addresses of law-abiding gun owners, as if we the problem. the media has been overtly hostile on this issue. it's also been overtly and deeply disappointingly unknowledgenable. i have never seen an issue be covered by so many vocal people who know so little about guns. >> let's stick to the issue. >> i agree with you about lack of knowledge. too many journalists have too little knowledge about the specifics of guns.

i have a theory i want to try out. i think in the nra had come, it would have been great tv. it would have been great journalism. we would have heard from them at length. maybe they would have been going back and forth. that is something that it was a missed opportunity by the nra. do you feel that i'm right about this idea that the nra doesn't want the issues to be debatable? they don't want to suggest this is a debatable subject? >> so interesting, last month chris cox argued the nra didn't oppose gun research and support fair, tough minded look at how gun laws work. we're not seeing a lot of cdc gun violence research funding. why doesn't the nra release a list of questions they would like answered. that would be helpful to everyone. >> have you ever -- >> i've gotten comment from them but only rarely. >> i noticed that wayne doesn't do many interviews. chris cox does a number but not a high number. it's interesting they don't do more press. >> the idea that there's a

strategy to not debate any of these issues because the nra doesn't want any movement on these issues is not true. there's a bill in the senate introduced by republican john corning that has the nra backing to expand mental health checks. the nra is responsible for getting background checks as opposed to five-day waiting periods. the nra has been willing to help inform and construct meaningful legislation that it knows it can help get passed through congress. under this administration, however, it's been impossible when the president routinely calls out the nra after every shooting as the problem. that doesn't make sense for either side if actually democrats want to get meaningful legislation passed then they know they need the nra to do it. >> if the nra has such a great record and so on, why won't they

just show up unmediated and make the points to the president. i don't see why -- >> i explained why. he's hostile to them. >> you're complaining that the media has a widespread ignorance about guns. i think that's a pretty good point. the idea of a town hall is take the media away and let people have a direct channel to the president which is what we had on thursday night. i still don't think your defense in saying it's ludicrous to expect the nra to show up, i don't see how that stands up. >> they have their own media outlets. i find it really telling they have had nra news for over a decade. very forward thinking by this organization. they are you tube channels and radio shows. they get their own message out. they don't have to go on cnn, perhaps. >> that's true. it's important to emphasize that mainstream media has not done a good job of covering the basic data on this.

>> give me data on that. >> asking americans if gun violence had gone up or down. majority of americans thought gun violence was up when it was down 50%. >> we have too little data to cover this story effectively? >> many media outlets don't use the data we have. that's a problem. >> i guess maybe what we can all agree upon is there's no common ground here. very little common ground and language. is that fair to say? >> no there is common ground. that's what's so disappointing. you hear it from democrats and republicans alike after most tragedies that we need to talk more about mental health. that's why it's so disappointing that the president took an executive action to do something that john corning has already submitted legislation for. there is common ground. it's too beneficial to democrats and republicans to make this issue political as opposed to practical. i think one solution in addition to better data is to get

reporters whose beat is gun, not crimes. there's people at every media outlet who can speak fluently about a very complicated issue. >> let me say i have to turn to another guest. eric, i think president obama and the next president should do a monthly forum, i don't dare what channel, where they face the opposition. wouldn't that be great tv and great journalism? >> it would be great. the parts of the town hall where his supporters were asking questions, didn't make a lot of sense to me. i thought the parts where the opposition got a chance to ask questions were the only cutting moments. >> it's almost like question time in parliament that cspan always airs. thank you. i appreciate it. let me turn to the guest i previewed earlier. this is your specialty, ken.

i wanted to ask you, what you would recommend. how do we mediate a situation like this where many americans don't trust what they hear from the opposition on this issue? >> there's some issues that can't be mediated. if someone side -- >> i was afraid you were going to say that. i was hoping that wasn't going to be your answer. >> if one side to an issue sees any type of compromise or reasonable middle ground as as the enemy of the perfect, you're not going to get two sides to bridge differences and reach accommodation. i don't want to get involved in the gun debate and the nra versus the president of the united states, i see frequently people expect too much of mediation on negotiation. if one side sees the good as the enemy of the perfect, there's not a whole lot of time that can be spent trying to get people to compromise their differences.

>> are you telling me this is case that you wouldn't take? >> i don't know what i would do. if you've got some people on one side that view the second amendment as inviolate, it's pure, it's perfect. it cannot be touched, and you've got the president of the united states sitting, trying to come up with a package of reforms, reasonable reforms, but that run afoul of the view of the other side that it's simply unacceptable. then what can i do? what can any mediator do in a situation like that? i think the president tried to reach out to the other side to have a meaningful dialogue. the other side whether it's because there's no room to maneuver or they felt it wasn't a level playing field with cnn, i don't know. one can understand why they took that sort of position. >> interesting argument that the president using code words for

the left when he talks about australia when he talks about things that liberals know to be a positive instead of a negative that he's using code language and that causes them not to trust him. i wonder if there's a starting point, something small you would recommend? >> this debate has gone on for decades. it's a very emotional reason doesn't always enter into this. it can be a very emotional situation. the other problem with mediation in cases like guns or even i watch in the middle east, if one side comes to the table ready to negotiate, but isn't convinced that the other side can deliver, you know, i hear this is lot from the israelis when they see even if we sit down and try to work out with our adversary across the mediation table, we

have no confidence, none that that adversary can turn around and deliver on what might be agreed upon. that's a big problem in some issues as well. >> feels like one of those. thank you so much for being here. >> thank you. we know that donald trump using television, but do talk radio set the stage for his success? that's next.

♪ light piano today i saw a giant.

it had no arms, but it welcomed me. (crow cawing) it had no heart, but it was alive. (train wheels on tracks) it had no mouth, but it spoke to me. it said, "rocky mountaineer: all aboard amazing".

welcome back. we all know that donald trump is a creature of the media. television, cable news has fuelled his campaign and sometime treating this like a reality show. did another medium set the stage. think about talk raid show. he said there's a great divide within the gop and talk radio is reflecting that divide coming down firmly on the side of those fed up with the system. they are giving voice to their listeners who are being ignored. it's the same reason donald trump is doing so well into the polls. he's tapped into a frustration much of talk radio already understands because so many of us understand our listeners a whole lot better than the republicans in washington. let's talk about this issue. i wonder if donald trump -- if talk radio was the seed or fertilizer for donald trump's

success. thank you for being here. michael, you're the talk radio expert. do you create talk radio with donald trump's success in the past six, seven months? >> absolutely not. i think talk radio is one of many media that is playing into donald trump's success. i support the free speech and i think that donald trump is an expert at playing it. donald trump was created by donald trump and donald trump's media success was created by nbc and the apprentice. he's a shock jock that is now running for president. >> i hear what you're saying about the apprentice. i think his practice was really important. you don't think that rush limbaugh show and sean hannity represent and reflect the anger in the country that donald trump has taken advantage of. >> well, i think there's anger in a lot of places.

i think liberal talk radio has created bernie sanders, if you want to look at it that way. >> talk radio is so much less influni influni influenti influential. you know that rush is number one. >> talk radio very intelligently is reflecting. as for who starts it, whether the tail is wagging the dog or the chicken coming before the egg is something that media has been trying to figure out for years. i wouldn't be quick to say conservative talk radio is creating the hate and anger that donald trump is taping into. i think it's a political football and mischaracterization. there's many different kinds of talk radio and different kinds of conservatives. i think the media serves its own interests. donald trump is a big surprise to the conservatives on talk

radio just as he is to the rest of the country. everybody is tapping into the trump bandwagon. >> donald trump's candidacy would not have gotten the jump start it got if it wasn't for talk radio. when he was being blunt, talk radio started talking about him. talk radio helped the tea party become what it became. the next 2.0 version of that has been donald trump's campaign where you had a lot of listeners very upset this washington. they were sick and tired of what was going on there. you can accredit ben carson, i think his rise to talk radio covering him. i think carly fiorina the same way. i think talk radio early on when donald trump was deciding to go around the country, they were covering him in his events the same way they covered tea party. you take a lot of heat.

i take a lot of heat when it criticize certain things that donald trump says. his supporters are fanatics. they love him. they are loyal. they will come after any talk show that says anything about him. even if you're talking about ted cruz. talk radio gave him a basis in texas early on. they were the first people to introduce him to the public. donald trump understands how to control media afterward and keep the story on him. the core base of what he has been able to do spun out of talk show hosts around country covering what he was saying. >> thank you both for being here. >> thanks. coming up, netflix is making a murderer has a lot of buzz. does it also have some bias? hear from the film makers. nancy grace calling this is miscarriage of justice. hear both sides. except that managing my symptoms was all i was doing.

and when i finally told my doctor, he said humira is for adults like me who have tried other medications but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. and that in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief. and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.

welcome back. like many of you probably havive binged network newest series making a murderer. it follows other try crime scenes and generating tons of buzz and a lot of controversy. the series recounts the trial of stephen avery in wisconsin in 2007. he was found guilty of murder. some people believe he was framed and he's an innocent man. the series raises all sorts of

question about police and prosecutorial misconduct. there all these facebook threads talking about what could have happened. i sat down with the filmmakers. i want to ask what do they think. do they think he's guilty or framed. >> when you started netflix was a dvd by mail so it wasn't a market. >> getting those dvds in the mail is part of how we got by in wisconsin. our models were paradise lost, the thin blue lines. these were feature films. we had outlines for a series and ultimately we just had to keep making a series until we had enough of it made that somewhere could see where it was and see we could do it. >> what conclusion did you reach about his guilt or innocence in this murder? >> we did not reach a conclusion. that was of no consequence to

us. we were not concerned if he committed the crime. we were there to document the process and question whether stephen was entering the same system that had failed him in 1985 or whether he was stepping back into a system that had meaningful progress over the 20 years. >> did he get fair trial? >> i do not believe he received fair trial, no. >> that's the conclusion that you all are willing to reach based on the experiences? >> absolutely. we documented. there was so many irregularities in this case. the original case as well as what came out through the attorney general's investigation and stephen's federal civil rights lawsuit about while he was incarcerated what was happening behind the scenes. >> you've heard this documentary is bias and slanted in favor of the defense. is there any ring of truth to

that? >> no. we chose stephen avery to be the main subject of our documentary. part of what we were trying to share with viewers was the experience of being an accused in the american criminal justice system. that doesn't mean this is a biassed piece. we were depicting what this person was experiencing. >> let's talk about the local media's role in this case. have you reflected on power of danger of local tv influencing the jury pool in this case in. >> i think individuals who find themselves in a position that stephen avery found themselves in are at a distinct disadvantage. this was a high profile case. there is a segment in the series where stephen avery is commenting on his concerns he

won't be able to get a fair trial because of how saturated the community was with this coverage. to be fair to local media, the prosecutor was holding daily press conferences in november while the property was being searched and they were reporting on those. >> we all have to take responsibility for this. they wouldn't be there if they didn't have viewers. people want a gruesome crime. they want a dramatic answer. that's what they are delivering. maybe the prosecutor shouldn't be using the media to argue his case a year and a half before trial. >> a big bombshell from you all that one of 12 jurors reached out to you before the film premiered. what did this juror reveal? >> the person explained to us was they, for the past eight years, have been living with guilt for having voted in the way that they did. >> voting guilty? >> that's right. this person believe that stephen avery had not committed the

crime and the state had not met its burdens and stephen avery was framed by law enforcement. >> this person is afraid to speak publicly. that's why they're anonymoanony? >> that's right. we said you're saying this to us, but you need to say this to more people. are you willing to do that? this person said not until certain people are in prison do i feel safe. >> certain police officers? >> yes. >> this new report of an anonymous juror coming forward has a lot of people wondering if avery could get a new trial. nancy grace does not think so. she's been critical of this and the series has been critical of her. nancy is not buying that. >> nancy, great to see you. >> like wise. >> you said on your program you thought this was a miscarriage

of justice by netflix they were bias in the production of this film. isn't a film like this necessary to shows like yours that do strongly suggest guilt for people on trial. >> i wish you would tune in at 8:00 eastern every night because we stuck or guests against the state. i bring on multiple defense attorneys. >> for sure. your voice is the loudest on the show. >> i'm going to take that as a compliment. i'm just channelling lady justice. do you have a problem with lady justice? i don't think you do not one you'll admit to. hold on. i think what would be appropriate here if this were truly a documentary is to show both sides. both sides of what was presented to the jury of what exist. i am not impressed by two then film students who decide to pitch a documentary to in the meantime -- to netflix.

>> do you think people are gullible? >> no. i don't think the public is gullible. i think the public has presented a beautifully packaged mockumentary that appears to be serious and forthright, but is not. if you see just that, you would probably believe that avery is innocent. you probably would. i happen to know after speaking directly to avery before he was arrested that his story is a line of bs. bs. that's a technical legal term. i think you should look it up in blacks law dictionary. >> how did you feel about the portrayal of yourself in the documentary? >> didn't care about it one way or the other because it's not about me. you know what, they can tar and feather me. it's not what it's about. this is about theresa and how she died. how she told her colleagues she did not want to go back to avery's salvage pit and she was afraid of him.

he had already come to the door wearing nothing but a towel. she wanted to keep her job so she went back. it was halloween, october 31. she was never seen again. november 3, her mother reports her missing. volunteers, volunteers not police asked to search the pit. the older brother allows them to go. that's when they discover her car there, not police. that's how the whole thing started. to believe his theory, the cops would have had to no that he disguised his voice and asked her to come back over that day. cops could have to murder her or find her murdered body, burn it and put it in his burn pit and hide her car there. >> there's a dateline producer quoted. she said we're trying to beat out all the other networks to get that perfect murder story. dwro do you think there's any cu

culpability for the perfect murder story? >> that question presumes that our voices are so important that they override i got two syllables for you, o.j. how many times did people scream he did it, he did it. guess what. he was acquitted. so was robert blake. the list goes on and on and on. just because a pundit says it on the air, doesn't make it so. so the press, the media can do whatever they want to. >> can we agree sometimes prosecutors do get it wrong. >> yeah. >> but that we do have to be skeptical of them as well. >> i don't know if i would say you have to be skeptical of them, but i do believe they've gotten it wrong. there have been cases where they have gotten it wrong. i know it's going to be hard for you to believe, but that miscarriage of justice is just

as disturb k to me as someone guilty walking free. >> thank you for letting me turn the tables on you. >> if you want to characterize it that way, fine. up next, 25 top news editors sending a letter to john kerry urging action. find out what they're hoping to get accomplished right after this. and even though their dentures look clean, in reality they're not. if a denture were to be put under a microscope, we can see all the bacteria that still exists on the denture, and that bacteria multiplies very rapidly. that's why dentists recommend cleaning with polident everyday. polident's unique micro clean formula works in just 3 minutes, killing 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. for a cleaner, fresher, brighter denture every day. defiance is in our bones. citracal pearls. delicious berries and cream.

soft, chewable, calcium plus vitamin d. only from citracal. at ally bank no branches equals great rates. it's a fact. kind of like reunions equal blatant lying. the company is actually doing really well on, on social media. oh that's interesting. i - i started social media. oh! it was my...baby.

my name is jamir dixon and i'm a locafor pg&e.rk fieldman most people in the community recognize the blue trucks as pg&e. my truck is something new... it's an 811 truck. when you call 811, i come out to your house and i mark out our gas lines and our electric lines to make sure that you don't hit them when you're digging. 811 is a free service. i'm passionate about it because every time i go on the street i think about my own kids. they're the reason that i want to protect our community and our environment, and if me driving a that truck means that somebody gets to go home safer, then i'll drive it every day of the week. together, we're building a better california.

npr, abc, cbs, cnn, npr, the new yorker, "new york times," buzz feed, bloomberg, reuters and the ap.

they compete vigorously every single day. this weekend, all of them are coming together with one goal. this is a letter signed by virtually all of america's top newsroom editors urging the government to do more to secure jason resident knee january's release from a prison. he's been locked up since july of 2014 charged with crimes relating to espionage. this case continues to be a travesty. journalists around the world agree on that. the u.s. should press iran, urging the government to do more. this started months ago. they wondered what more could they be doing to support jason. the head of news at npr said kathleen carol was especially helpful framing the letter. he told me, we just wanted jason

to know that his colleagues have not forgotten him. we have not and will continue to keep you updated on jason's case. we'll be right back with more "reliable sources" in a moment. i'm on the move all day long... and sometimes, i just don't eat the way i should. so i drink boost® to get the nutrition that i'm missing. boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a great taste. i don't plan on slowing down any time soon. stay strong. stay active with boost®.

♪ light piano today i saw a giant. it had no arms, but it welcomed me. (crow cawing) it had no heart, but it was alive. (train wheels on tracks) it had no mouth, but it spoke to me. it said, "rocky mountaineer: all aboard amazing".

tonight is the start of hollywood's award season. it could be a big night for journalism. "spotlight" the film by the team of boston globe journalists. it is the odds on favorite to win best motion picture drama. those nominations come out this thursday. still haven't taken by wife to

see "spotlight." that's all for this televised edition of "reliable sources." sign up for our newsletter, cnnmoney.com/media. "state of the union" starts right now. ted cruz rising. >> almost every republican candidate is attacking me. that kind of suggests maybe something has changed in the race. >> the republican presidential candidate trying to tamp down the questions donald trump is raising about his eligibility to be president. >> people are worried if he wasn't born on the country. which he wasn't. he was born in canada. >> we're on the cruz bus in iowa for an exclusive sunday interview. plus, the president taking on guns. >> i respect the second amendment, but all of us can agree that it makes sense to do everything we c