of the supreme court. there was also a lot of celebrating by those who believe that the constitution means what it says, and with those who adopted it meant to say. ..

>> as you all know, a well regulated militia, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shot be not infringed. what is the pream buy already preference have to do? when usually obstacles to regulation, not spurs to regulation. it's not evident how they will contribute to the well regulated militia. a different kind of puzzle arrives from changes in the world in 1791 when the second amendment was adopted. it's withered away, and advances of technology has produced arms far more dangerous than those

available in the founding era. how do those developments affect the applicability? heller was a good test case for another reason. it was reason by the courts most prominent exponent of jurisprudence, anthony scalia. thanks to the last 30 years, scalia successfully made a powerful case for two important opposition. first the, the right to keep and bear arms is a individual private right. not a right of the states to organize militias. second, the purpose is to enable individuals to exercise their inherent or natural right of self-defense, including the right to defend themselves against criminal violence. but that's not enough to resolve the initial textual puzzle about the relationship between the prefatory language and the clause. scalia tries to do this as any

originalist must. but his analysis is full of fallacies and absurdities. he provides no tenable explanation in the constitutional text. and he provides no evidence of any kind about the proper scope of the people's right to keep and bear arms. the most difficult question, which scalia never even addresses is how codifying the right to arms in the constitution could have been expected to preserve, promote, or prevent the elimination of a well regulated militia, i believe there's a perfectly answer to that question. no answer of any kind will be found in scalia's upon. i guess that's what's nice about being at the supreme court. if you don't have an answer to a hard question, you can just pretend the question doesn't exist. but if that's consistent with the theory of originalism, it's not very different from the living constitutionalism that scalia routinely denounces.

scalia's failure to identify the evidence about the scope of the 2nd amendment right when he addresses the original question at stake in the heller case, namely whether the d.c. handgun ban was unconstitutional. it was unconstitutional, ruled by the court. he ordered he thinks there's good reasons why handguns is popular today. this is not historical or originalist argument. if it mist kind of argument at all, it's probably a disguise, incomplete form of the legislative living constitution that scalia discusses elsewhere in the opinion. it's very striking that scalia responded any pretenses when he addresses the question actually presented in the case.

what's even move, he includes a series of astounding and unnecessary comments, endorsing various forms of gun control that were not at issue in the case. scalia does not provide a shred of evidence to support the conclusions. to the extent that he gives any reasons at all, they are based on historical evidence or irrelevant decisions by state courts, or in one case on interpreting the prior supreme court opinion to moon the opposite of what it said. scalia's irresponsible comments are particularly significant for us today because they speak directly to the issue of concealed carry on campus. his opinion for the court clearly states the justices have no problem with banning guns from what the court called sensitive places, including schools and government buildings. the opinion also clearly states the court has no problem with

the bans on concealed carry and firearms. of course, the justices can always change their minds or be replaced by new justices with different minds. they do that sometimes, maybe they will bo it in this case, i wouldn't told my breath. heller applies to only laws enacted by the federal government. in the mcdonald case last year, they decided it also applies to laws enacted by local and state government. that was not a big surprise. the courts precedence pointed overwhelmingly to the conclusion and there was an argument based on the original meaning of the 14th amendment. sad to say, however, justice alito's plurality opinion went out of the way to expressly reaffirm scalia's comment about the permissionability of banning guns in schools and government buildings. alito didn't mention concealed carry, but he didn't didn't cast any doubt an what scalia had

said two years earlier. the supreme court's comments about schools, government buildings, and concealed carry are what lawyers call obitter dicta. that means the comment is not legally binding. if they change their mind, they don't have to overrule any precedence. it also means the loafer -- lower courts are not technically required to go along with what the supreme court said. when the supreme court states the view as in mcdonald v. heller, they will rarely go against what the supreme court said. the constitutional challenge to protest campus guns are charging. some of you wonder why they had to say anything at all. including the comments and the opinions violated a cardinal principal to which the courts

conservators often swear allegiance. namely, the courts should define themselves to the legal issue they are deciding. for some reason, they decided to violate the principal in these cases. i think the reason is obvious. both decisions were decided by a vote of 5-4. at least one member of the majority and quite possibility more must have insisted on including these comments and the opinion. whoever it was that felt so strongly about this, all five members of the majority agreed to go along with it. when you put that together with the fact that neither scalia or alito gave any good legal reasons for what they said, it becomes clear there's some very strong fieldings on the court. excuse me, very strong fieldings on the court about guns, schools, government buildings. who knows why they feel this way. maybe it's ignorance and superstition, maybe they feel they should pander to the ignorance and superstition at

the editorial writers at "the new york times". maybe it's something else. whatever caused it, when judges have strong fieldings about something, it's hard to get them to change their minds with legal reasoning or any form of reasoning at all. >>[cough] >> excuse me. there was another group with more matter will be difficult to persuade than judges. academic administrator, they tend to share the same feelings about guns in schools that the supreme court put on display in heller and mcdonald. but they also have some additional motives for objecting the concealed carry on campus. these are motive that is will you never hear them admit to. put yourself for a moment in the shoes of an administrator of a college or university. if you ban guns and then there's an illegal shooting, you can say this proves we were right to say that guns don't belong on campus. if you allow concealed carry on

campus and there's a shoot,ing you run the risk that you'll be attacked for creating the wrong kind of environment. and in the very unlikely event, that someone with a permit goes bizerk, you won't just be attacked, you'll be crucified. it runs parallel to every fiber in an school administrator. you can talk yourself to death with all of the reasonable arguments that are familiar to every person in the room, and you will get absolutely nowhere with such people. why? because even if you can prove that concealed carry makes the campus safer, the bureaucrat won't get credit for the improvement. and he might get blamed for shootings that have nothing to do with concealed carry. i don't want to end on a note of hopelessness. the same kinds of problems that i've been pointing out with

concealed carry on at campus also consistented with the respect to concealed carry for the general public. we live in a different world than we did before florida kicked off the reform movement in 1987. reason has prevailed in a great many state legislatures and it can prevail again. when you go looking for leadership on this issue, courts and academic administrators are probably not the place to start. thank you. [applause] [applause] >> thank you. next we have dr. cottrol, history of professor of history, articles on the subject and georgetown journal, yale

journal, and law review morning others. he was 2nd amendment article was cited, and he is currently finishing a book, a long lingering shadows which is in the united states and latin america. dr.doctor? >> thank you. i would like to thank students for concealed carry and 2nd amendment foundation for the opportunity to speak with you today. i think this is an incredibly important issue. obviously it looks at the issue that certainly is near and dear to my heart, safety on campus. i have made the academy my home for all of my adult life. with the exception of some brief stints of military service. so it's clearly an issue, very

near to my heart. we certainly have seen graphically in the case the tragic case of virginia tech how important this can be. and as the father of a daughter who's about to join the academy as a freshman in college, i'm particularly sensitive to this question in college safety. safety on campus. i wonder if we go might use the question of concealed carry on campus. which by the way, i am in favor of. i think that an adult who has the right to carry, should have the right to carry in all venues , or most venues in our society. i don't think the campus by any means should be a prohibited zone. but i wonder if we might be able

to take this debate beyond the usual precincts i think that we have in the gun control debate. that's the usual precincts of do we have a right to own a gun, do we have a right to carry a gun, what kind of restrictions might or might not be good either as a matter of policy or past constitutional muster. i'd like to actually take this a bit beyond that traditional debate and ask is there something that we might learn and might apply from the well regulated militia clause of the second amendment? and my reply to the question of carry on campus and carry perhaps a bit more broadly, or take it a bit more broadly. now the well regulateed militia

clause of the 2nd amendment has certainly been used for a good 40-50 years in an effort to essentially gut the 2nd amendment. to gut the command that the 2nd amendment has at the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. the gun control movement, and i think with all do respect to members of that movement who might be here, is not -- has not really been a gun control movement, but a gun prohibition movement has tried to, in fact, foster uninterpretation of the 2nd amendment that essentially emphasizes the well regulated militia clause as a way of essentially visuating the command. doing away with the command there's a general right of the people, not simply select members of the militia. to, in fact, have arms. but i wonder if we might

reconsider the well regulated militia clause and try and see can we take the original understanding of it, which as i understand it, is the idea of the whole of the citizenry playing a role in the defense of a community. not simply a select body of people like the police, like the military, but indeed the whole population playing something of a role in the communities defense. and if we might see how we might modernize that and how a modernization of that concept might actually tie into our discussion of carry on campus. and public safety if you will more broadly. the notion of the well regulated the militia, the motion of the community playing a role in the

defense of the individual rather playing a role in the defense of the community is a point of view or a world view that i would say that is light years away from the propaganda that we have been inundated with. really for decades. and we sense the '60s, have not, in fact, rapport. it's a point of view that is well accepted by a certain strain of the liberal community in this country. it basically says, look, the average citizen is simply too feckless to play a role in her under defense, much less a defense of the community. and i wonder if that has to be the next target for the 2nd amendment movement, which is to attack it all head on. that particular point of view,

that point of view that keeps us disarmed and helpless in too many venues in our society. and which certainly at the beginning of the gun control movement or the earlier stages of the gun control movement was seeking to make us even more disarmed, that was seeking to make the whole population disarmed. i -- and i wonder if a way of approaching this is not to ask okay to what extent to we as individuals have a right to be armed? either in home or in public. but to what extent should the citizens more broadly be deputized? to, in fact, participate and again not only in their own defense, but more broadly in the

defense of community -- of the community. do we -- to what extent should we try and break free from this idea that we've been sold for many decades that only members of law enforcement, only people with a special credential are, in fact, to defend the community and the rest of us must, in fact, be helpful bystanders. until -- until the specially anointed ones come to assist in our defense. and it's led to some absolutely absurd results. let's consider, for example, the falling. since 9/11, there has been a very sensible move to try and arm airline pilots. we know that sky marshals cannot be in every airplane.

we do know, however, every airplane has a pilot. or at least we hope so. and yet there's been tremendous bureaucratic resistance to this very simple idea. at one time, and i believe it may still be the case, for a pilot to get certification to be arm, he has to take a special course in new mexico. new mexico is the only place in the country with ranges? but nonetheless, they have to take a pattern and fire it more difficult than the average law enforcement pattern. what with retalking about with a pilot who is in -- who is going to use a weapon to stop a hijacking. he basically has to shoot from the pilot seat to the door of the pilot -- to the door of the

cockpit. i don't think we need sergeant york for that shot, quite frankly. or we've been told with pilots, they have to under go special psychological screening. if there's something wrong with the guy, why is he a pilot particularly on the plane that i'm on? somehow we've convinced ourselves of the absurd notion that a person can handle a 747, but can't handle a .38. i know some of you thinking he should have a sig sour. he should. but .38 is something that one can train real live by app lot of people were fumble fingers, but they managed to qualify with a .38. i think we could have 747 pilots do that without too much difficulty.

similarly, we allow minority communities to be terrorized by small numbers of gang members, why not find some way of deputizing the population to protect the community so that it's -- not simply a matter of an over stretched police force. why have we not again on this question of how do we modernize the concept of the well regulated militia. why haven't we formed home guard courses given the fact that our national guard is constantly being deployed to iraq and afghanistan. again, we're training our citizens to be helpful bystanders, rather than participants in their own defense. i have another question, as a -- as a retired member of the armed forces. why is it in a time of war when clearly our bases and military

installations are subject to terrorists attack, as we've seen in fort hood and other locations, why don't we, in fact, do what was once done in the law offices and have ncos and officer carry side arms. as a matter of course, openly. you know, you are you are -- asd in one movie from the 1980s, you are a soldier in an army who's country is at war. you know, you should be armed. but seems common sense enough to me. but once again, we have blocked this idea that only people with a special anointment, in fact, can play any role in the community's defense. we need to attack that, we need to demand that the idea of who participates in the defense of the community, in fact, should

be expanded. what i think we should use the debate over concealed carry on campus to do is to expand the idea of the citizen participant in community defense. and it should -- this is something that i think we could bring to campus. i think we need to bring to the society of more generally. this citizen participation that i would argue would include broader use of full fledged police reserves. that is people who go through the kind of -- the kind of equivalent of the kind of training that police officers use -- that police officers get. and have full fledged law enforcement powers. development of a second tier police reserve, which would have significantly less of a training

requirement somewhat similar to the kind of training and requirement that private security guards get in many jurisdictions and these individuals would have limited function offects of fixed area. and then regular police training of armed citizens on a voluntary basis. so that people would know the law of deadly force and practical dos and don'ts in terms of what to do when the police arrive. so the police know who the bad guys are and who the good guys are in the terms of an armed confrontation. that should be considered to be a regular part of community policing and something that we need to think of as the second level agenda, i would argue for the second level amendment. the issue of -- i would submit to security and on campus should be looked at as part of the

framework, within the framework, the right to carry is important, the police obviously cannot be everywhere. why not think beyond this question? how can we deputize and train members of the campus community and of the population at large, i would argue to be participates in defense of themselves and the community. let me submit that that should be our focus or our -- or the next item on our agenda. for years, we fought over the right to how to preserve the right to bear arms. maybe we need to figure out also how to restore the regulated militia. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. next we have dr. jane, he's a professor the computer science where he specialized in software

development and product assurance. currently with support from the office of naval research. with previous support from the national science foundation, department of advanced research project agency, and other corporate sources, he has studied on topics of software accountability, former methods, property property property property -- prototyping and served within the department of justice. at the university of maryland, he's served as the dean with the under graduation with charge of the computer, mathematical, biblical sciences and shared the under graduate program and directed the masters of software engineering program. he received his phd from computer science at the university of illinois in urbana in 1986. >> thank you. this is the part that i should start and now for something that's completely different.

it's a recognition that the battle for the rights goes on in many different kinds of battle fields. so i didn't do a lot of research on constitutional draw and covered that i have the rights. i have the rights and i do a lot of research to see what i can do to preserve them. i'd like to talk about about some of the research that's relevant to take the battle out to the people in the hearts and minds argument that i suppose. and of plant these seeds during the discussion part of the panel, you ask good questions for which i've prepared good answers. okay. that's the homework assignment to keep in mind. as you've heard, i'm a computer scientist. some of the several topics that i've studied have been data mining and profiling. now that's not constitutional law by a preferred piece. but it is absolutely critical to the business of advocacy of an

issue. because it turns out if we know enough about you, we can sell you anything from soap flakes and ringtones to presidential candidates and importance here social policy. and so it's pretty clear there's a lot of selling going on. some people here today sell to very exclusive audiences, judges, okay? and that's an absolutely critical thing to do. it's also only a rear guard action in some sense while we focus on having sales through legislators to enact better policies. that's not going to happen effectively in many as places as we want until all of us, you and i together have made it safe for officials to support us politically out in their districts. that's the hearts and minds argument that i made reference to. :

how do we find that information? it turns out a lot of my farmers are too wicked ths and the distinction between the two is busier all the time. a common core of information, a science data, turns out science is the same, whether you try to ferret out voters for consumers

or terrorist of different data in ways you use it in those cases. but this science is all the same. that's not what i'm going to talk about today. that's the computer science test. i'm instead going to focus on what she do with information but the message into a deal to people and relate that engagement. my vehicle for engagement for many years had been a political newsletter that i wrote independent of the university that had the effect of distributing information about gun development policies, specifically in the state of maryland. if i got this out, that was a good thing, but also kind of a side effect because i was testing as part of this research the effect of messages, what worked and what didn't. the intent was that at times when we measure the most important, at polls in elections, we would know what

messages were and where the people where they were going to do the right to, the obvious political overtones there. here's some of the navigates an observation that again i put out to plant seeds for discussion for a panel later. first of all, it is never easy recruiting are over. very few people come to these poly decisions when they reach out to them in different ways, very few people have an open mind about the policy discussions we have here. that makes for sometimes a pretty hard sell of these things. culturally the only easy day was yesterday. they are not yet enough proponents already walking around available to us within the established gun groups to affect this change all by itself. again, this speaks to the engagement and the hearts and minds of the business. we have to reach out. if you only go to your unplugs and get over that come you go

look at what percentage of that is within the population for voting purposes and so on. so this again beats to operations like ours they reached out to try to understand messages and take the edge off. you don't have to have everybody , to be from my cold dead hands cannot proponents, but you have to at least not at least not spit on the ground when they hear about your organization or group and that's a pretty important thing as well. some of the cultural trends we know about, again in specific ways, but these are the bullet points. the cultural trends are not necessarily in her favor. if you look at established groups are just waiting for them to come along and affect this change, you're not going to be very happy. if you look at the profile of something like the national rifle assist haitian, and action rarely their dead. this is a phenomenon we know it may not ask the politics is still an old person sport,

speaking as somebody who represented, i'm glad you campaign your fica is a wiki be your lunch on some of this stuff. i'm glad to see you are bucking the trend by having an people involved in political debate on this. but this is the trend which is a concern. in places like maryland, unless hunting and shooting going on all the time. best place to do it, more attention for young people. various statistics that we know and we studied that if you don't give youngsters a field or insulted me since 16 you don't get them. somebody who is disinclined to participate in these activities is not going to be sympathetic to your kerry argument a little later on. so again, this speaks to the importance of reaching out and engaging. reading is not an option as the punchline there. gun control does not elect politicians. these are the positive things were finding out.

if anything we see increasingly looking a little too shrill on this staff is an election will peer for not capitalizing on it necessarily as effectively as we might, but this is something we see pretty affect me. again, it is something that is old-school. people have moved on after the assault weapon ban 10 years ago. those are some bullet points. obviously we have a long way to go, especially in places like maryland. we won't have much discussion about not some of these reforms to carry on campus in because we don't have general recognition of our rates to kerry in the state at all, much less on a campus. if anything, there is a rearguard action were fighting as well. one of the prominent pieces of legislation proposed in the state the last session had to do with extending gun free weapon free zone laws to include college campuses.

it would have made it a felony to possess on the language of the proposed. it would've been a felony to possess plastic knives that you might use at a reception. so notwithstanding the critical aspect that many students live on a campus and there should be a castle that applies to them, this would be a concern. but we stopped at and we did this by being in the room. he did this by being able to engage in relationships with people, not confrontations. and that's the last cultural trend to speak to before i shut up and turn it over to your group for question. this is again the business right now especially because all the things we see in technology were making it increasingly easy for people to only listen to the sound of their own voice or voices like them. and the only time you go to another forum, another place is kind of on a search and destroy

mission to take hostages or grab information you can use against them. and this is running contrary to the business that i'm glad you're trying to do at this conference today, which is engagement and from people together and kind of reach some agreement and understanding. that's a very important and should be able to do. engagement is the key and that ultimately is the bottom line are looking for outreach and messages to us as well so bottom line, never think about gun control like it's supposed to make sense. don't try to fight it as if it was released exclusively so. 13 he met very much. [applause] >> at this time will take a few questions from the audience. if you would raise your hand will bring a makeover to you. and i'm going to lead off here

with the first question here and i'm going to give it to you, professor. or faster, have a lot to things like the idea of bringing more into regulating a college -- i don't know, ununiformed reserves. how do you think i would actually play out in the risk of our nature that we had also taught about here? >> the prescription that i cannot miss for society as a whole and not simply college campuses. but you know, the galway it would actually work out would be to ask students, faculty members, at demonstrators, staff at universities of the extent to which they would be willing to spend some time with training programs with police for

certification as special deputies of one sort or another. certainly the idea that we should ask police forces to regularly give classes on the use of weapons and deadly force i think is absolutely common sense to call, but they should simply be a regular part of the duties of a police department to give classes of this sort. and now they think should be open to any citizen who has a gun on a voluntary basis. it shouldn't be a requisite for having the gun, but it should be certainly open so people would have a sense of their legal rights and sort of the tactical situations that the to be an.

>> what are their question do we have from the idea? in the second row there. >> thank you. many of us at levine, director my question most late at george mason. recently the attorney general came out with the uva opinion about kerry on campus, which he made the opinion that instead of policy if this change to administrative code is enforceable at law at george mason so therefore he basically told uva and every other college campus in virginia if you change your post he took mr. ducote you can now ban guns on campus in the buildings. and while we're not quite for maryland is, certainly in virginia seems a lot closer than we are to conceal to carry on campus. i asked the attorney general hatchery. i peered he says you have to fix

that the general assembly legislatively and i want to see if there's any thoughts you have that can accelerate that process. >> i agree he is probably right as a part of the matter. you have to get the general assembly to change. technically you could get the board of visitors of each university to change these rules because these are not stayaway girls. they are adopted by each university. and if you had -- how can i say this diplomatically? people with a different kind of mind on the boards of visitors come and they can simply change those rules and allow kerry on campus. and in fact, at george mason for example they've got some kind of byzantine rules, but on most of the campus you can carry openly at george mason. they banned carrying concealed weapons and a ban -- they banned

in certain buildings and so on. but i'm part of the campus you can carry openly and they can certainly get rid of all of these silly rules. [inaudible] >> yeah, they can order you to lead the campus and stop bringing it on. they have that ability. they're just not very likely to catch you, that they can order you to stop in if you come back with your t-tango be charged with the trespass. the other thing you could do is hope the virginia supreme court changes its mind. it was unfortunate what i thought was a very ill-advised lawsuit brought against george mason, which got shot down in the virginia supreme court. so maybe if somebody was used for brow, maybe the virginia supreme court to change his mind. i don't and that's very likely, but it's possible. ultimately the federal courts if they interpreted the second amendment correctly could get rid of the whole silly business.

but again, i don't think it's very likely. >> we have time for one or two more questions. who else do we have? >> hi, i live in maryland and i must duden of constitutional law. so mr. lund, i was so nice that the second amendment is now incorporated to the state coming to see a lot of headwind states like maryland coming even if kerry on campus is not in the near future, but other carry opportunities? >> well, i think alan gura you hear from later is the expert on what the next steps are as you move along. the thing that everybody should understand is that at the moment the supreme court has interpreted the second amendment authoritatively to create you a very, very limited rate. they're all kinds of questions that haven't been in it. some of them have been if that answered. concealed carry ban third time,

we don't care. don't worry about that. but there's a lot of open questions and exactly how it's going to play out, how it should play out i think alan gura is more of an expert on that. at the moment, your rights under the second amendment have been recognized for the supreme court are very, very limited. basically the right to have a gun in your home. >> movie not now, will hear from -- sorry getting the clock running. if we can move to alan gottlieb on the second amendment association. [applause] >> with the senate out for their summer break, watch tv all this month in primetime at the span

to you.

>> the department of education's office of safe and drug-free schools how to panel discussion on the impact of 9/11 and terrorism have goals throughout the country. it's part of a three-day

conference on school safety, or participants ranging from education leaders and mental health representative to experts in the field of substance use, violence prevention and emergency preparedness. it's just over an hour. >> when i first got the invite to come here, i was sorted curious why somebody like me would be invited. and i've realized they pulled the wrong guy of the google] list. [laughter] zoologists make it up as they g. along. >> thank you, bill. mu thank you very much for inviting me.in i believe we have aviting film p that we were going to play before i spoke. so i that so if that's available, we canae run not now. if not, i'll march ahead. ahead. >> i think i'm going to march ahead. okay.

♪ ♪ i still haven't cleaned out the clause it, i just can't do it. every once in awhile i get that moment where i say he loved that

shirt. >> i can't explain it but my heart hurts right here, and i think about my mom and it hurts. >> every morning when i leave the house to talk took the girls and i think of michael talking in his goals because he missed out on that. >> i say to myself it could be worse. and get very frustrated. [inaudible] i want to cope with everything i

have. i'm here with survivor's guilt, and its -- ♪ i can't believe i've learned to live without her. i still miss her every day and think about her every day but i have learned to live without her. ♪ >> i still am committed to the thing i said the day i got there, i was going to find my brother and rebuild the site, stay on till it is completely done.

♪ traumatizing as it was, coming to the realization you can't open your heart any more to allow a new love to come, that takes some window but when you do eight, its profound. ♪ ♪ [applause]

thanks for watching that and again to bill and his team for inviting me. it's an honor to be on this panel with a bunch of professionals. i was relieved when you mentioned me giving of a community perspective because it's intimidating to be in a group of people who know what they're doing to try to address their profession not knowing much about it. however, i will tell you a little bit about my journey getting involved with project rebirths and what i've found over the seven years i've been involved might be of interest to people in the educational field and particularly in the area of preparation for psychological trauma and grief. i met the filmmaker, jim whiteaker, the director, from seven years ago, when he was in

the earlier stages of making the film that you see and what is a quick aside involved in the filmmaking process 14 time lapse cameras the dirty 5-millimeter cameras positioned around the site the have been there since six months after the attack and are still filming today and interviewing the nine people that you saw in the four minute clip over the course of eight years basically following their progression from the attack. they were affected in very different ways. the first thing that appealed to me being a parent and somebody involved in the community and schools and rebuilding our town library was to find a way that young girl generations could engage in this important event in the nation's history that they would be able to remember and learn and some very hopeful

fashion figure out how to make something good out of a horrific event. so my first instinct in terms of getting involved in project rebirth was about teaching and passing our knowledge on to younger generations. as i became more deeply involved in may be applied my business instincts to what we had which is quite obviously a film and film content, i would show piece is similar to the one you saw, the three minute piece, and as bill mentioned involved in georgetown university, and shows the content to a wide range of people, first responders, family members, to tell them what we are doing as a way to get feedback by was also showing it to any number of educators across the spectrum from teachers in the community and my wife was the head for many years, so it shows what we have and what do you think and the

response across-the-board from all the people but particularly educators as well as people teaching at the elementary level from people who even charlie became our partners at georgetown and columbia university is what we had was in the film was the word gold mine and of course for me this was interesting. why were they reacting this way and the reason was, and i open the room you have the same reaction and particularly those of you that watched the film last night and think you for those of you know watched the film was that apparently in a sort of confirmed there is no record in the film how resilient

people can be and you saw from the faces of the end of the clich is a diverse group of people from diverse backgrounds that have diverse relationships to the attacks each one of them, those were the only nine people we interviewed. each of them goes through a trajectory where they have dramatic ups and downs but ultimately figure out how to cope and move on and the message from the educator is we could use this in a variety of fashions to help in our job. so from my perspective there were two things. one was the original intention which was complete to pass on the story in half an accessible and easily transferable narrative that will allow younger generation's to engage in 9/11 and carry forward how they may learn from it and make sure things like that didn't happen anymore and the second party emerged the film and film content could be used in a more

active fashion to help first responders, educators, medical professionals and communities in particular learn how to be better prepared for the psychological trauma and grief that is inevitably part of all of our lives but particularly associated with disasters with the baby manmade or natural. so, that started me on the journey of getting more deeply involved in the project. and then, we started to take the pieces of the film that you saw and engage in programming. i should recognize to of my colleagues are here to read the executive director of project rebirth and frank has been valuable to us and to me is the head of the columbia center for new media teaching and learning, and he took the underlining a film that we had and hundreds of hours of interviews and put them in a digital accessible formula that allows teachers to pull

clips out so why won't go into the weeds. i want to tell you why all that information might be important to you. what you see on the screen, what you saw last night on the film and what is encapsulated in the archives of hundreds of hours of the films and interviews that's why we needed. we made it so that anybody who could find good use for its in a good way should have access to it. and what does that mean to you in the room? it means screening in the community, using it in the classroom, it means using it in the school, using parts of it in the school. so at the end, you can see it's out there now. if you watch the clip, if anything that i am saying is of interest if you were kind enough to watch the film last night please be in touch with us to come to us with ideas of how you can use our content to read

that's the simplest and the most powerful hopefully message i can put forward to you today. it turns out fortunately whatever we do, screenings or even slyke this people come forward and bring new ideas. the last thing i will talk about all the educational concept because i am conscious of time it's that it's fairly straightforward for you to get the film from us and the vv. it will be shown on showtime on september 11th. it will be in theaters, the film is fairly straightforward. our long-term sort of tin year vision is that the wave that you as professionals and educators would use our content to help your schools and communities they better prepared for disaster's cause psychological trauma and grief. our ultimate aim is through the good offices of our partners at

georgetown and columbia in particular to find a way that that knowledge can be shared. and this is the last thing i will say that let me on to this journey of basically giving this as my full-time job for free and giving money is under interesting career path. the cash flow goes the other direction. what i found was after each one of these episodes, whether it's 9/11, columbine, katrina, other countries, there is an astonishing amount learned in the community among the professionals come first responders, educators, healthcare workers. it's learned the most amazing cost because the cost is lives destroyed in the deaths and people figured out how to cope. the figure out how to come back and be resilient but what amazed me was the knowledge wasn't stored in a way that was accessible to other

professionals. it was not made available and shared some of the wheel didn't need to be reinvented any time and that if you are interested in what we are doing and in using our content in your own professional of objectives ultimately where we hope to get to is people learn not just with our film with people who learn how to do these things under very difficult circumstances are able to store and transfer that to similar professionals so the next time things can be a little quicker in terms of recovery in the little bit easier in terms of recovery. i think that's all i'm going to say. should i pass on? [applause]

triet >> ten years we have evil about the chairs we're sitting on. >> thank you, to continue a part of the conversation, a conversation of planning, the conversation of learning to ensure that we have learned across the country and in new york city and not listed in the history of new york city daughter of the country we can assure everybody understands what happens on that day it's been ten years i stood in this position and gave a keynote speech on what happened on 9/11 and how i look back now to see

how the federal government in particular and others around the country have taken heat on the message we learned that day and plan accordingly. so, i want to go back a little bit more and talk about what i can call the untold story if i can as it relates to what happened on that day. as i press the button. okay, great. what you will see is an overhead map that looks like lower manhattan on the timber ten, 2011, ansar, 2001 as opposed to 9/11 itself and in that you will see the grid and around the former towers and exactly where we have eight schools in the former world trade center towers in fact we had one school located in a residential building which was a day care center so of the nine schools there were there from paprika eight to 12 and they were located as you can see on the mat but you also see that two of

the schools were approximately 80 yards or so south of the towers of the stories i've told over the years have become what i labeled the untold story because not knowing that, you get the city and think many schools look like the little red schoolhouse is with flags on them but in this case because they are in lower manhattan we have to occupy buildings that were for its simple from nyu or other locations in the lower manhattan aerie and the wall street area where a lot of the business goes on a regular basis. so as you heard the stories of those unfortunately killed in a disaster but those who were rescued the story hasn't been told often we have schools that effectively in the lower manhattan area. so to going little further, what i will call a day like no other let's talk about that day and i mention nine schools in the grades pre-k-12 in close proximity to the world trade

center towers and they were located less than 100 yards south one of the high schools was a high school in a 13 story building. it was property in lower manhattan. we also need to let you know that the approximate total student and staff population of the schools was 9,000 students and staff and that the disaster itself stroock on the fourth day of schools and you can imagine what the fourth day of school means no matter where you are in the country if you are looking to skirt this in a weird way you'd want this to happen on april 9, june 13th, but not on the fourth day of school because it forced teachers and administrators to deal with others and their stuff and children and parents whom they hardly knew and they hardly knew the school environment. but to add to that was the fact that communication between the schools and myself and my other

colleague at the board of education was difficult because of increased cellphone traffic and the two-way radio traffic and as the first tower collapses on fortunately it also pierced a cable along manhattan's 08 to doubt the ability to use land mines and talk to the principles in the schools sometimes you feel as if you are on an island by yourself in this case they were literally on an island by themselves to read the foot transportation in and out was at a standstill and because of the immediate suspension of the subway service, it was tough to get to the schools. we couldn't send staff to be down there on the school buses and there was gridlock as you saw in video and people were trying to get there and also the bridges and to lower manhattan whether emergency vehicles or others so parents who wanted to pick up their children couldn't get their, some were stuck up their jobs just focused on what

they could do to get to their children but that they became a challenge for all of us the good news is in a little focus on this we were successful in rescuing all 9,000 students and staff from those buildings with nobody missing, killed or injured. [applause] that applause should be detailed to yourselves as educators because on that day my staff and i were miles away doing what we should be giving and doing a command response miles away but the principles and stuff in the building did exactly what they were trained to do witches' respond to a disaster whether it be in the cafeteria or five-year that breaks out we were able to rescue the stuff at children because of fire drills, not

because of a drill in place because of this potential disaster work in place now because the disaster that might occur like that. what i chronicle to you after i left the city schools i went to the national center for disaster preparedness and conducted a study called common sense, common coverage ehud google that under the columbia and university there would be a pd f version and it is history where we interviewed hundreds of people from different walks of life with their it be teachers, parents, administrators and others, custodians, others involved in that day to ask exactly what they did, was their mindset when they do certain things and i'm sure we can have this chronicled because as i mentioned when you have these disasters the best way to learn is to keep it fresh and have a person keep the implementation you are learning and if it does happen again others can learn from it so again go to the

report on common sense and uncommon courage and you can google where to find it on the web. moving forward to what i call that was then and this is now what have we learned from the disaster, what happened since then? he mentioned in opening remarks because this event under his leadership and the staff they convened a meeting in the spring of 2002 brought together about 40 people from different walks of life all stakeholders into a room and we were on a lockdown where he said we have a problem, a new paradigm about disasters. we need to move for it being a response to signs because we know that hurricanes have in certain parts of the country and surgeon are more vulnerable than other disasters and or man-made disasters soldier we doing to ensure they are not just going to do a knee-jerk reaction about what they heard my work about things that in fact work so with that in the emergency management put together the schools and the

preparedness response recovery and as bill mentioned the documents like that you can get to help when your guiding has to prepare for disasters and once did i will refer to that on this well with mike herman whammo is here from the state of tennessee i travel there often to see how it's throughout the state they have different challenges and one part there can be tornadoes or earthquakes in jackson the the question is how you respond in the way others to or are you responding as you should so the issues that happen in your area or what may happen in your area. again moving on we have through online and on site training schools have become familiar with the system known as nims so that somebody is in charge by virtue of their background as opposed to the principal millman de odim who think they are fire chief for would love to be a police chief that when the

disaster strikes they should step back and allow the people who are trained in certain areas to handle that and then when it's finished the will transfer control back to the principle when the disaster is over. we've also had responses that have happened over the years since 9/11 have tested the precious metal as a college facilities for example, after hurricane katrina in august 2005 many schools were destroyed and thousands of classrooms flooded so many students were forced to be evacuated to other parts of the countries of that response is an ability to receive other students as well as transferring records and devotee to make sure they are in a proper way to ensure they don't receive students they don't know about. and what happened in the planning to thousand six if schools focus more on the planning on the operations plans to ensure the function and even schools are closed many schools

are now in some cases billion dollar operations so you are in operation and it needs to function in the business of learning. we also moved to unfortunate even slick virginia tech where there was a shooting on the higher education site in 2006 and that forced educators around the country with our high end ortiz ralf to test their ability to contact. if you know it's happening on campus were told the students to have them go on lockdown or some cases evacuate their taken last week when there was the rumor of an armed gunman on the same campus and worked well so i'm told. but also more recently in their jobs and misery we have the unfortunate events, we had a tornado there in may of this year killed over 100 people and destroyed homes and several schools so that is an opportunity for schools to test their ability to respond to this disaster but also important recovery as i mentioned earlier we doing to ensure the family's

going through trauma know how to deal with that and learning from past experiences. as i close i want to make sure we focus on learning from lessons learned and i found this quote that says chinese the word crisis is of two characters one represents danger and the other, opportunity to read the person who said that was president john fitzgerald kennedy. as i look at that as an opportunity shock about what we are learning and can we learn as a group when it comes to responding to disasters is first of all you have to make sure you don't plan for the motive, you plan for the consequences and the motive is one you can't plan for the tax consequences similar to read things happen during earthquakes where many of those you can trickle in your mind happened during an earthquake or nine nell irvin. we also know that you need to use what i've been told for the

proper planning prevents poor performance. on that day most principles of the school's planned before hand coming years before him and actually months before and for fire drills and the ability to organize to have them respond to your call to begin to evacuate was based on planning and disaster strikes and we need to continue to end our educators such as yourselves to do what you do best which is handling emergencies every day because no matter the scale you do it every day and the need to keep entrusting you will do the right thing because of the end of the day you will and the school that was down is a very important lesson on that day we can only run as fast as our slowest child. [applause]

>> thank you so much for inviting me to be here today. when i was doing the work in new york city, i was on the superintendent's level and at that time governor roy romer and we were in the midst of writing letters to the parents because parents were calling frightened about whether or not they should let their children go to school so even 3,000 miles away we were all -- i am sure all of you were trying to figure out what we should do in los angeles and whether or not there was going to be a subsequent attack.

bill talked about the last 20 years and in the last 20 years these are the defense that change the culture of education. in 1990 in earnest, the school shootings began and i wonder if you can remember back when you opened of your newspaper or turn on your television and wandered is this going to stop? can there be another shooting like this? think about the generational sense that if to were born before 1985 you may not have gone to school ever thinking that such a thing could happen. children and our families born after 1985 were born with the reality of all of these events that there could indeed be a school shooting. ..

i'm afraid of. in 1995, the oklahoma city bombing occurred in that it said showed as the children could he intended targets of terrorism. it just seemed unbelievable, but tim mcveigh and his coat. there's chose the murrah building because there was a preschool and a nursery in thed. basement. they wanted to cause maximum tet damage.acksn new then we have the terrorist attacks in new york city. and on that day in theif th superintended soffits, somehow if the feds want to find you,ll they will track you down.phone . and it was from the organization of great city schools.

followed by bill mozeleski, followed by the office of the chancellor of the new york board of education schools asking if i would please come to new york and help to look at the situation and see what needed to be done next. let me just jump to the case. that time i was director of mental health and in charge of the crisis teams. in los angeles, we have about 2,500 to 3,000 incidents per year of crises. we have about 250 members of the crisis team. i had never confronted a situation like this. the most complex, diverse, urban school district, probably in the world. one the thingies first recommended, i remember gregory and bill sitting there at the table. i said strong, strong, i

recommend that you have an assessment of the impact. think about it, 1,100 schools, over a million children, how is this affecting them? and columbia university followed up with a study that shows six months after the impact of 9/11 that over 26% of the children had some sort of anxiety disorder. many of them had ptsd, as you can imagine. 10% had a phobia. you can call it a gore phobia if you want to, the fear of leaving your house. if in the city on alert and watching for the next event, there are many children who just did not want to leave their families or leave their homes. the second important thing was coordination of community partnerships. and what we have learned and we always knew but was under scored by our spirits in new york city was that those schools had

existing partnerships did much better than the schools that did not. those schools were starting -- that did not have partnerships were starting at step one. who are you? do you know about our school? and those schools who had partnerships were just ready to get those programs off of the ground. the third is that the organization had to be centralized for the disaster. if it too disbursed, and of course there are five boroughs and all of the politic that is go to five boroughs, you don't have a centralized system of response, you don't have a centralized system of training, and you don't have a systemized way of disbursing funding. so that you have some kind of flexibility to for surge capacity for those schools that might be more affected than others. now surprisingly, the thing that

i did that i had never done in any other situation was i worked for several weeks with the chief financial officer of the new york board of education schools. because they had not received fema funding or federal funding, state, or even private funding for services that were going to be rendered at the school sites. the whole idea was what would be the funding formula? how many do you charge for an individual session for your social workers, for your counselors, you are going to be providing this. that formula had to be in place before they could draw down any kind of funding. i want to also mention that bill and the team of us trained faith-based schools. in new york city, the catholic archdiocese has a fairly large school district of 200,000 children in the five boroughs. and it really underscored for me the way that it disaster that an act of terrorism that in a situation with loss of life

there's not only a crisis psychologically, mentally, and emotionally, but often there is a crisis of faith. and the question that the children asked us as we were working with them was why would god allow this to happen? that was the question that many people had. and that's where our faith readers come in and really are a part of our crisis teams. at this conference, there was a session that was provided by my colleague, mona johnson. what we've learned that school staff, educators, administrators, education aides, became the emotional rescue workers for children impacted by crisis. as a result, they become part of the most susceptible list for secondary trauma. if you think that secondary smoke can affect you, there's

such a thing also as secondary trauma. now the most susceptible lists are those who are affected by trauma are children, parents of young children, educators, and administrators, and all of those who response to the children and their families. this was provided in a meta analysis of over 400 large, well math scale, disasters. so the more that you care about what you do, the more likely it becomes that you will experience what's called compassion, fatigue, or secondary trauma. now it's very much a part of crisis team training. not only what we do in the immediate response period and during the long recovery period, but also care for those who care for the children. here's a quote from the leading expert in compassion fatigue, charles. he's written a great deal about it.

there's a cost to caring. we professionals who are paid to listen to the stories of fear, pain, and the suffering of others may feel ourselves similar fear, pain, and suffering because we care. compassion fatigue is the emotional rescue of exposure to working with the suffering. particularly those suffering from the consequences of traumatic events. and i leave you with this one thought, i've discovered that every single person in the school plays an important role in the support, care, and psychological first aid of children. from one of my colleagues at columbine, she put this on the end of every one of her e-mails. to the world you maybe just one person, but to one person, you just maybe the world. thank you so much for all that you do every day.

[applause] [applause] >> daniel? >> i think i'll speak from here, if that's all right. >> yeah, that's fine. >> bill and i first met about two years ago at a meeting in "the situation room" we were at the meeting talking about trying to come up with some strategies to under cut al qaeda's efforts to recruit americans to join their cause. and it was an unusual setting for us to be in the same room as certainly in the situation room and talking about those topics. we decided we needed to put our heads together and we've ended up working on a number of projects that i'm going to talk to you just a little bit about. first, i'll give you a quick over view of where i come from. i work for a government agency called the national counterterrorism center. as bill said after 9/11, there

were a lot of new accra accra a- acronyms and letters. counterterrorism is a cross cutting issue. counterterrorism doesn't belong to any one department or agency. and so congress decided to create a place where small, less than 1,000 people who's job is to coordinate all of the different governments departments as they work on counterterrorism issues. in this respect, it's issue particular to poverty or health care, an issue that cuts across all departments and agencies, congress has decided to create the one small center, who's job it is to try to coordinate work with regard to counterterrorism. we do a lot of intelligencable sis, that's a lot of what our organization is are people who write intelligence products on counterterrorism issues. and then there are a group of us

who do policy and planning. we pull together strategic plans for people across the government to focus on counterterrorism issues. and in that job, my boss, the director of national counterterrorism center, reports to the president. we are really in a support to the national security staff as they work through a lot of these issues. well, my particular job within the national counterterrorism center is to lead the countering violence extremism group. what does that actually mean? we've -- i'll define it just for a bit. our job is to try to look at ways to under cut al qaeda's efforts to try to recruit and radicalize people to join their cause. or how do we prevent people from being interested in joining international terrorism, or being drawn to a recruited by that narrative. we look at the preventive side of of counterterrorism. as bill mentioned in the

introduction, i'm a civil rights lawyer by training. it's a cross cultural experience being at the international counterterrorism center. but the reason why they ask the civil rights lawyer to come and lead this work is because it is what we call hole of government work. trying to under cut al qaeda's ability to to -- al qaeda or thr affiliates and people of like mind ability to recruit and radicalize really is a whole government project. it's not arresting our way to the problem, or shooting our way to the problem, it's trying to win the hearts and minds of people both here and around the world to deal with the issues. this means that traditional law enforcement and security agencies are very intercally involved. it's also true we must include what we call in our world, nontraditional partners. nontraditional partnerses

certainly include the department of education, commerce, and number of others that we work with. mayors around the country and things like that. we try to look at domestic air ya, we try to look at how can civil rights enforcement programs, how can anti-bullying education, how can immigrant integration programs all play a secondary role of helping us in terms of the mission that we have as well. so i hope that you begin to see some of the connections that we have to the school context. my boss is a three star lieutenant general, an army ranger, one the most decorated and successful military leaders our country has had. he has this phrase, you'll get the military flavor of the discussion. he says who has the most time on target with the people who were concerned about? young people in our country and around the world? and that's in the school setting. so i'll just you just a cupful examples to show how our work is

interconnected. bill and i after the first meeting in the situation room, i went over to his office and we started to talk about some of the issues that we see in the counterterrorism world. and the one issue that we talked about that day just one of many. but one that we talked about is the issue of somali, the somali al qaeda called al shabaab and how they were trying to recruit from a variety of diaspora community in united states and europe to come back and fight for them. you could see the lightbulbs go awe in bill's mind. he's a brilliant guy. he began to see the connections. he brought us to a conference that he did in minneapolis with five different school districts that have a lot of somali refugee kids in the school district. the purpose was to talk about what the integration challenges of refugee children, particularly somali refugee. how do we make them more successful in the educational setting? he allowed me to take one small

section of the time to talk about this issue in particular. before we ever got to my session, the very first thing that has happened was a school district from burlington, vermont, made a presentation about issues they see with somali kids. what are the issues that those kids encounter and how do we make them more effective. and they played a video from a school psychologist who had done a really in-depth look at the issues affecting somali kids. she said there were three issues that most impacted the ability of somali children to effectively integrate into the country. i only heard the first one, as soon as she said the first one, we were off and running. she said the first issue that affects somali kids and the ability to integrate is bullying and harassment in schools. i don't know if bill stopped looking, but i turned and looked at him. we knew where to go on the critical issue. we needed to begin talking about

bullying and helping kids, school districts around the country who were dealing with somali kids to really get a handle on that issue. because that's a critical issue as far as those kids. after that presentation, there was a -- an educator from a particular school district who wasn't completely sure she figured out that i was on track with some of the things that i was talking about about how al-shabaab was recruiting. she went back and school a round table of 10-12 somali american kids. 6th graders, 11-12 years old. we talked to her a couple of months later. she was really blown away by the discussion amongst the children in the school library. they told her they knew about the recruiting efforts. one of them told her he got there in three clicks on his computer to see the recruiting efforts. she wasn't sure she understand.

let's go to the computer and you show me. well, of course, the school library had a filtering system, you couldn't get to those pages. so they went down the street to a community center. and the kids turned on the computer, click, click, click there was the al shabaab recruiting effort. she was very struck by an issue that was impacting children in her school district she had no idea about. one last example i give, after the round table, one of the participates there went back to his school district and really had had no understanding of the issues impacting muslim kids and families in his school, in his community. and he told us later that he went around and realized that there were three fairly large mosques right next door to a variety of schools. and he went into the mosque and introduced himself. he found there were issues. he found that all of these mosques told their children that

they could not play on the school playgrounds with they were there for services. that, you know, how the kids always find something to do. they told them they could not go to the school grounds to play on the playgrounds while they were there for services or other events over the weekend at the mosque, because they felt that the school district did not want the children there. they needed to stay on their own property and not go into the school district. he just realized, he told us, the level of communication or lack thereof and trust and confidence between school institutions and religious institutions, particularly the mosque. he began building lines of communication and trust. last example, we're talking about the 10th commemoration of 9/11. it's really important from us from a counterterrorism perspective that the dialogue in our country be one that under cuts al qaeda's us versus them narrative. that's what they are all about. us versus them. you can't trust them.

they are at war with us. step away from them. join us. it's all us versus them. the more that we promote a narrative in our country and around the world and around 9/11 that emphasizes community resilience and the kinds of things you've been hearing and people talking about all of the panelist, the better off we are going to be as we promote that it's all about us. and not us versus them, bill immediately got that and begin working with some school districts around to country to talk -- some organizations around the country to talk about how do we put curriculum in the week of 9/11 that emphasizes character, and other things. it's old hats to you. to us, it's a great development and makes us feel better about the likelihood the narrative will be one that's positive and constructive. i'll just say this, we were in the situation room that day.

i've been there other days in which senior national security officials in the country have been talking about the role that you play in the counterterrorism field. they get it intrinsically and with passion, they feel it. it makes that connection. i think people recognize and understand how important your role is in all of this in trying to make the connections. one thing that's a new paradigm. >> thank you. that was great. give him a round of applause. [applause] [applause] >> i'm going to take the prerogative of asking a few questions. there are mics out there. i appreciate the comments on 9/11. is rita here? rita is a person on our staff that has done the work on our

9/11 activities. we hope to have something posted within a couple of weeks for everybody to go on and we'll send a message out to link on and have quite a few resources so that as you are preparing to go back to the school, we are careful about not calling it curricula, but there are activities out there that schools can engage in in all ages from k-12 to commemorate the event of 9/11. thank you very much. it's hard for me to see out there. let me ask one question, and that is -- there you go. thank you. one the questions that i have is that we are in a tough time. and it's not only us, it's all of the agencies are in a tough time economically. we are in a position of where funds are decreasing, not increasing, the school districts that we wanted to come to this conference couldn't because they

couldn't afford to fly, they couldn't afford to get here. school districts were cutting programs left and right that don't pertain directly to teaching and learning. let me go down and start with you, brian, and go on down. one thing that you think schools could do to make schools safer to deal with the disparities that exist in schools that cost little or no money? >> i'm not sure i'm qualified to answer that question specifically. but wasn't things that you mentioned, i have a financial background. one the things that has very much encouraged me with regard to some of the new media teaching and learning capabilities that are available in the connectivity of our society is the way that information can be gathered and transferred at a relatively low cost. also the emerging power of narrative and multimedia in school. none of which i know anything

about. but i've had the privilege of being with people who do understand that. so i think i would go back to my key message which is things like our film that are viewed and seen as a tool that can be used to teach or discuss events of importance or issues of importance. it's really not a very expensive thing to do. my personal experience, just to, is actually the resistance and indeed the sort of bureaucratic difficulty of bringing new ideas and relatively inexpensive ideas in our school. i live in suburban new york. obviously, we lost people in our community, amazingingly, there's been nothing in the school. not local high school that commemorates the event with the exception of a moment of silence. one the things that drove me again to get more involved in this was actually having kids

and parents come to me whennism talk about how i was involved to say we need something. we need something. my message is we have a film. and go on too long. we have a number of educational experts who were figures out how to use our content. in some ways, it's sort of simpler. and some of the powerful common sense ideas that i've heard. it's a little bit in my mind, just do it. there isn't a huge amount of money involved in viewing narrative and having discussions towards goals that we can all agree are very important for a wide variety of reasons. >> thank you, gregory? >> well, another lesson that i've learned from 9/11, when disaster strikes in the effects of school or school district, here comes the calvary. we had a lot of volunteers that volunteered to help us out with the one particular issue. i would say that schools need to

raise their hand before something happens and reach out to the first responders, who, by the way, may have -- the money mayor come your way for this on the education side, but it maybe going somewhere else. the hounds on deck approach that daniel mentioned how the federal government is more involved now. if you have a challenge that you need to address, you feel you can't do it keeping in mind that schools are build for teaching and learning with that you need to reach out to the local emergency management, police and fire officials to help as you develop a plan whether it be a response, but also things like that more localized. the money may not come your way, but the money is out there somewhere. you have to go back to the people that are initially charged with function every day and ask them for your help. simply raise your hand. you'll be surprised to get response that to. >> one the things i'm concerned

is about the knowledge to response and recovery is here. if you think about your entire school district. i was responsible for an entire school district around crisis response. it's not just the people on the team. it's every teacher, the math teacher in the corner of the building, people in the computer rooms, educational aides, secretary in the office, custodian, what are their roles in the event of a crisis? and, you know, there was a study that was done, i believe, by the cdc. they went to the superintendent and they said do you have a safe school plan? of the 9,000 superintendents they asked, every one of them said yes, we do. then they went down to the principal and say, yes, we do. then they went to the teachers. and the teachers said what? do you know what that plan is? what? that's my concern.

if, in fact, there is something around the corner, there are so many things in our communities we can't control. the important thing is right now at this very minute, does everyone in your school district understand what their role is to preserve the lives of children? that doesn't take any money. >> daniel? >> al qaeda's narrative is us versus them. our country's motto is out of many one. and one of many one is the key narrative. it under cuts everything that the terrorists movement is trying to send around the world. who's better to affectively drive that discussion than local schools? you do that every day for many years generations and, bill,

your question is what do i think schools should do to continue to drive an understanding of out of many is one is the central issue. you are the right people to do it, you've been doing it, and you'll continue to do it successfully. the more you can do it, the better off we'll be. >> thank you. i have one challenge for everybody before we leave. that challenge is not to let that week that begins with 9/11 and ends in constitution day, that week, don't let it pass without doing anything. you sometime during that week is an opportunity to have a discussion within your school about a variety of issues and there's a whole lot of issues out there that relate to governance. so. >> jack? >> are you open for questions still? >> let me see. >> do you have time for one?

yes, jack, we have time for one. >> jack calhoun, by the way. >> terrific panel. wonderful panel. i would like the panelist to comment a bit, i didn't hear it, all of the protection, therapy, legitimate external and internal caring, what about the involvement of youth themselves? because to me, one the biggest anecdotes to fear is saying look you've got a part in this healing. so i would like the panelist to comment on the role of youth as positive actors in this country. >> if i can go first, one thing i didn't mention was that we also had a success in that we had zero hate crimes in the days after the event. and we were concerned about having certain pockets of our schools where we knew there was a lot of muslim americans attending. we were concerned about them

being unfairly argumented by other students because they what they saw on tv and heard in the media or elsewhere. but again to the credit of students who basically just stepped to the plate and didn't let that happen on their turf and their territory, we had again zero hate crimes in the days after 9/11. i know the personal value of educating students before the event, as daniel mentioned, you can't wait until the event occurs. if they give in and just beat the ground before things happen. when things happen, and they will happen, you can just push the button and you know it's going to work. >> you know, i think it's a point well taken. i worked in japan after the earthquake there. and went back every year for about ten days to do some training and also to be -- to go around japan and meet with children and educators at schools. they did a lot more with their kids than we do. i saw high schools where they were training kids. they literally split them up into teams. we had one team of kids that

were cooking for the school, and one team of kids that were shown how to lift children who might have been trapped in buildings, of course, the supervision of an adult. we had one group that helped with first aid and were taught how to do cpr. they did a lot more in -- because they live -- you know, it's the ring of fire, volcanos that still erupt and cause earthquakes. but i don't think we've addressed that issue sufficiently here. and i think they also just spoke more directly with the kids. you know, i maybe -- i don't know. in some school districts, not to be named, if a crisis happens, you have kids jumping over the fence. and running off into the community or going home or whatever. especially in high schools where they have more autonomy. in japan, they sat those kids down and said you are responsible for your own life.

these adults are here to care for you. it was part of the training that they had in terms of earthquake response. i just don't know that we cover all of those areas as well as the japanese have done. >> i would just make two observations, one is that in our local community, the resistance to engage in sensitive issues around 9/11 and the associated questions of terrorism, it comes from the older people, not from the kids. it comes from the principal, it comes from people who are afraid of taking a misstep. it's the kids that say can we show this in the school? second of all, as gregory knows, we've been working for some time with the n.y.p.d. executive training unit. i'm proud to say for the first time this fall, they are going to put in the police academy an emotional resilience training curriculum. i was meeting with a mutual friend of ours, and some of his

colleagues at the police department. i've been work, them for six years. i said how have things changed here in the department and at the academy in the time that we've been working together? and he said, you know, the older generation has extremely resistance to some of the things that we're talking about, particularly as far as emotional resilience, stress management, et cetera. but the younger cadets are actually asking us for. they see that as something we should be provides to them as part of our professional and life skills. as an outsider, my observation is how can youngsters be involved? i think there's tremendous opportunity as outsider watching the younger generation that's much more receptive to these kids of discussions and dealing with some of these very important issues of emotional resiliency and stress management training. >> in our world, i think the projects involving young people

are absolutely critical. we have have have have -- we die with a mayor of a large city in this country. he realized or he decided i'm going to get the young people in my community interethnic, interreligion involved in a major humanitarian effort. they've been working for the past year, they are involved in trying to deal with the famine. it's coming from the young people. in london there's a grouping of people who the embassy pulled together there. young people are going to go online to counter the nonsense that you see. in pakistan, there's a movement -- an emerging movement monday university to try to deal with the ideology that's caught and spread in certain places. movements are critical. i thank you for asking the question. i think that's particularly in our perspective counterterrorism that young people, teenagers and college students play the key

here. >> thank you very much. the panel will be around for a while. if anybody has any questions, feel free to come up and ask questions. let's give them a round of applause. [applause] [applause]

three leading women and media talk about the state of the industry and the impact of digital media has had on their profession. pbs ceo paul law, judy woodruff of "pbs newshour" and the presence take part of this event hosted by the association of university women. it's one hour and five minutes. >> we welcome you and we are in all electronic publisher of

daily people magazine newsletters around the country to be and we started seven years ago and we have now 70 full-time employees. in d.c. where we started, new york, boston, baltimore, chicago, dallas, houston, atlanta, austin, charlotte, miami and los angeles just started last week in san francisco and the next couple months filly, san antonio and amazingly, birmingham, alabama. we try to be short, fun, picture heavy, upbeat but informative. we've got 20 reporters running around creating these free electronic newsletters every day and we try to parallel that by having short, fun personality oriented programs, and we can't be more delighted with the massive media figures that we have got on stage. you'll notice they're all wearing black.

either that is in or they have a lot of money in the stock market. speaking of which, we are covered today by c-span because obviously there is no other news in the world. [laughter] so we can't do this without a tremendous help of our stuff on the ground and i see them here, rachel and tonya anderson, list fritz, frank sasha's, stephen bald, jessica, the nonprofit reporter here in d.c. we have publications every day on the association of the nonprofit world, the legal world from the commercial real-estate world, we also have a very vacuous therefore popular social publication published edited by my wife who is here. we thank the alliance for women

in the media being a media partner of ours on this event and as you'll see in a moment a presented by leonora valvo in the white onstage for the leopard. and our sponsor for today i would like to call forward cindy miller of the american association of university women who's going to spend three minutes giving you some data and views about women in the media. cindy miller of the aauw. [applause] >> morning, everybody. thanks so much and we are excited to be a sponsor here today. the american association of the university women is a 140-year-old organization. we currently have 100,000 members and donors throughout the country and 100,000 branches, and we are an organization that believes a woman who has a college

education and is armed with facts is a powerful woman, and we love men, too as proponents. please, come on board. we would love to have you join us. we are excited because women in the media is a focus of ourselves well. we focus on all sorts of the locations and i feel like i can speak english but more intelligently about this one because i, too, and a woman in media and at the mgm studios for many years i know what you're facing. so let's talk about the facts as we are a group that likes to dig around and find facts about the different topics. today women in the media hold only three per cent of what we call the quote position, those on the top in the industry. so that means 97% of everything we know and highest level was dictated by the male perspective. most opinion writers come 75% of the syndicated writers are men.

some of the most prominent newspapers like "the new york times," "the washington post," have only one or two women columnists on staff and 18 or 20 men. on radio, most of the people on the air and behind-the-scenes 85% are men. almost all directors of major films, 96% are men. sunday morning interview programs which really dictate the news and the policy in washington are all hosted by men. women and people of color own less than 5% of the television and radio stations. studies conducted world wide, looking at how many stories are about with an award include women, the figures are only 21%. it's not to say that everything is abysmal and we are making great strides thanks to the women like these. we are proud of the world that we play braking for the barriers for the women in the media in the long term member of ours was elizabeth campbell, the founder of w. e. ta. so of course she holds a

powerful role for the media, and it's time that we all joined forces to make this the norm of more than the exception. so the good news is that with social media the women are definitely on the rise and making an impact today. the most influential blog in the united states is the huffingtonpost.com. 80% of the tauter accounts with the fastest following are wind and barack obama and ashton culture are the only males to break the top ten. [laughter] cash between 2008 and 2009 the number of women using the web increased by 43% compared with a 26% increase in the number of men. so we are proud we are making strides. we are honored as an organization to be here and we hope you enjoy your presentation. we will be around after the session if you would like to chat and we are raffling off some books say you may see some staffers in between. thank you. >> cindy miller, aauw.

thank you. >> speaking of twitter, our cash tag is biznowmedia -- no, sorry, the hash tag is biznnowwomen. i will get the hashed halgand the handle street. we have the women in black, you've heard of the men in black. good morning, judy woodruff. >> good morning. >> i'm going to have the panel introduce leading up to the moment when someone who knows what they're doing takeover but we would like the panelists to self-interest because we find that it's lively, accurate. where are you from? >> born in tulsa oklahoma, raised as an army brat so i lived there five years and then moved to germany back to

missouri and new jersey in oklahoma again and taiwan, north carolina, georgia where i finished high school. >> how did you stumble into washington in this political thing? the washington media politics? >> why did i choose politics? >> how did you stumble into it or was it a carefully organized -- >> i had a professor in raleigh north carolina where i spent my first few years of college who was a fabulous inspiration and saw that i was interested and she learned of me away from math where i was headed and got me interested in politics and after that, nothing would stop me. i got a job as an intern from the congressman in washington and i never looked back. >> tell us what the high points of the last 30 years of your life on washington. >> marriage to al hunt with bloomberg news.

just having incredibly fortunate career being with nbc, pbs, what was then the news hour, cnn for a dozen years, and then back to pbs and what is now the pds newshour. >> what do you do for the few people who live under a rock? >> i'm senior correspondent and clinker for the nightly "pbs newshour." >> judy woodruff, thank you for being here and all of your years of service. [applause] >> did i pronounce that right? tuna frattali and ancestors? you have some ancestors from italy and if so, where? >> all of them and some of them from outside the coast and some of them from sicily. i think you also have some

italian ancestors. >> not that i know. >> that's unfortunate for you. [laughter] >> maybe i have some vitallium descendants. where did you grow up? >> i had a bold childhood than judy. i grew up in a little town outside of boston massachusetts, lived there and went to college in massachusetts and moved to the washington area in 1980, joined gannett in 1985 and have been there since. >> secure practically lifer but you use your origin in massachusetts as an excuse to run to keep caught all the time. >> i only wish we ran to cape cod all the time, there would be a great thing that we are boston red sox fans so that -- all right. always a good thing to point out. love massachusetts. we have a house on cape cod, don't get to it as often as we would like but our children are

definitely using it in a very significant way. [laughter] >> and that's just the part you know about. >> at least we know about. >> gannett, were the metrics to present the size and reach? >> it is a media company and market service company a little over $5 billion in revenue. we have over 30,000 employees both domestic and overseas primarily in the u.k. overseas. about 21% of our revenue hour from our digital business which is not very well widely known and that is things like careerbuilder, the largest employment site in north america. >> when did you become the president and ceo? >> february 2010. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. [applause] >> good morning to paul kerger of pbs. >> good morning. it's wonderful to be here. >> where are you from?

>> originally baltimore. i moved to new york after i graduate from college where i lived for 25 years, and i've now been back in washington for five and a half years. >> and, you know, as many times as i know many of us have heard this we still can't quite get our mind around it. what is the difference -- what does pps do, why should we not confuse it with npr? [laughter] >> we have images. the nice pictures -- [laughter] we are a confusing organization. we are a largest nonprofit media organization in the country. 350 member stations that cover 99% of u.s. households and one of our flagship stations is weta on not only as a broadcaster the local station here in washington but also brings to the national

audience the news hour and we are glad to see you come back home where you belong. i love cnn that this is about having judy on the news hour. she brings an extraordinary perspectives from the work she's done the past couple years on the millennials generation, which i think is some of her best and most recent work. but also the news weta brings to the national audience and also gwein ifill. >> weekend thinking enough for bringing yourself and pbs. she deserves some applause also. [applause] now the plan of action is we start a little early ander out 915 or so we may be concluding. we want to make this interactive

in case you are taking any depositions today will be bringing the blue books out a little later but we want to at some point just walk around the audience and if you have some questions we won't necessarily wait until the end for them. seek recognition and i will be in the shadows watching for you. leonora -- and i want to counsel the panelists, we are going to ask excellent questions but we want to conversation here as if we are looking on to a living room. feel free to interrupt, agree, disagree, expand, throw chairs, raise our ratings in any way you can. [laughter] with that, leonora valvo -- >> like we do on the news hour. [laughter] >> reminding again for people in the wrong room who don't know anything remind us what he touch is and take it away.

>> i don't get the question. [laughter] >> this is what happens when you are moderating a panel of women in the media. e-touch is an even management software solution and the comment about my address was interesting to get i was thinking about leopard and all i am a serial entrepreneur and i chair to delete to change my spots fairly regularly. we have been a software company since 2007 and it's about life fourth iteration of my entrepreneurial life, so lots of changes and trying to stay just slightly ahead of what is going on in the market which is something that you are all too familiar with. so yes, and we are based in connecticut as a global company. on a much smaller level lots of zeros but we are growing and as

a industry where there are few women ceos and it is an interesting journey for me. >> thank you. what an amazing panel and you deserve a new round of applause 8:00 in the morning showing up on the hot august day. [applause] so, lots of questions really. there's so much to talk about. there's so much going on on the news, there's so much in the media and for women. one of the questions i had was around-the-clock pressure that media companies are under. of course given what's going on the news right now you're not alone. we are all under a little pressure. but i was wondering if you could comment a little bit on how, you know, your organization, gannett and pbs, to a good job of maintaining quality and i know in my own business it makes it a

real challenge but we are also not having to put out content every day to the world. i would be interested in how you are handling that and what methods you are handling to the car using to overcome it. >> for us quality is the guiding star to our organization. and i think as you look at the work that you take up, obviously the pressures to start to cut corners and attempt to compromise but i think at least looking at it from our perspective that's what makes us unique on this landscape. someone sent me a great article from yesterday that talked about the fact there are now 19 programs on pawnshops. there are i think five programs on cupcakes and endless programs. i'm looking for someone who's going to put all of them together.

[laughter] and even animal planet now. >> but without the animal. but i think that for us looking at technology as one opportunity to operate efficiently and stay very focused on putting the resources and to the content because that is in fact what makes us differentiated and a unique, thinking very hard aside from the funny, and there is actually great television on the other networks and cable, and for us we are constantly challenging ourselves to think about where the marketplace is covering different subjects and steering away from that and focusing on those areas the marketplace hasn't taken up and that's the nonprofit media.

taking advantage of technology which does give opportunity to produce content at a lower cost for hours and thinking about bringing revenue to the organization in our case to bring contributions from across the country using the technique for years and open up to us through the web and other sources. so i think trying to keep that entrepreneurial spirit, to keep the idea of the revenue is part of what is helping us get through this. >> yours is a not-for-profit company and mine is a for-profit company but it's a plethora of choices now for the consumers and viewers and readers for the

information and the important thing for us is to find ways for those people to spend time with the news and information that we provide on albert television stations and through our myriad web sites and print publications so the content, unique content it's important to garner that mine share for consumers at the time they are willing to spend with our products, so that is very much the top of the night for us as it is for you but at the same time, we understand the pressure of being a public company, being a for-profit company and so we have had to look at the opportunities to use the new technology so in our television stations we have 23 television stations. we used to do for instance graphic production and every one of those television stations and some of our television stations are small and the resources are limited, so the quality of the graphics may not be as good as

the larger stations and what we did was consolidated all the graphics in denver colorado and now our smaller stations get the same quality which is an improvement on the quality they had before as our larger stations. so again, using technology to do a lot of things just more smartly and then we are blessed as a company having 82 daily newspapers, 22 television stations, a great iconic national brand in usa today. and before we never shared content so if we were covering the tornadoes in joplin missouri and we had a newspaper there and a television station in st. louis they would do their coverage and it would only for themselves and now we are creating a culture of sharing content among ourselves so that we can improve the quality of the print web sites by having the great video coverage of our tv stations can provide. we can improve the coverage that

usa today is doing because we have feet on the street in the communities where the national story was happening. so it is sharing a lot of the generation across the company with each other, doing those things that we used to do in hundred locations and a consolidated we using technology to help us be more efficient so we can spend our time and resources on generating that quality content that we need to generate. >> would you say that -- the media world traditionally has been fairly silos within their own company. are you saying that technology is facilitating the devotee or is the pressure on the media generally causing you to have to rethink that approach? >> i think it is a combination of all of that, its cultural change and the necessity but it's also understanding that while you are one of many

choices and not the only choice in the marketplace you have to have better compelling content, and in order to do that we can to get advantage of all of the assets we have, so on our website we have 23 television stations. they can provide us with a great video content of around a lot of things we simply couldn't have if we were not sharing that across the company. >> if i can see from the perspective of the news hour the technology has meant an enormous change and how we reach our audience. we have a web page for years been the last few years it has become an absolutely in trouble component of who we are as a program and as we think about covering the news through the day and the news hour we standalone the end of the way we are committed in one hour to covering just the stories that we think to be covered that day.

on the web page we do that as well but are able to expand that and dive deeper and offer more detail. and frankly allow some of us who are on the air our main job is reading the news and interviewing guests, reporting the news on the web page we are able to do some analysis. gwein ifill writes a blog, i write a weekly bald. there are stories that wouldn't make it on the air and just one other thing. you know, all of us in the media these days are facing more complicated news. the world has gotten harder to understand the and it has ever been. at the same time, those of us in the media have shrinking resources, less resources to cover a story that is more complicated than it's ever been so all of us have to think smarter and a streamlined and

think watergate trying to do and i would tell you at the news hour we rely on the mantra of jim lehrer who said many years ago we waited in the morning and we don't have to think about who we are or how we cover the news. all we have to ask is what is the news, what are the most important stories today and we are going to go after them. so it makes our job a lot easier. we of a lot of banks about what in goal are we going to do. because for the most important stories and that's it. >> i would add news hour has been extraordinarily well and part of it is enabled by technology is the opportunity to build partnerships with other organizations. you ask the question about the silos and the organizations but also from the journalistic side we have worked with organizations, news hour worked

with bnp our ability to send the crew is out and with a single cameraperson with stories back from overseas via internet connection through eighth laptop. the possibility that this offers to expand the journalism and in which it so yes, we do have less resources and would like to have more absolutely, but i think that what the current economic climate as well as the current climate in the media in general has allowed is different ways of operating which i think is exciting and the end of the day we benefit from the richness of the journalism by bringing together different perspectives and organizations is exciting. >> the attitude of which she was saying, we have to follow consumers and viewers and readers wherever they want to receive their content with that is all the mobile device or a

tablet or the print form or television. and so one of the things we have to change is you can't just write a story for the print product and expect to take the same story and put it on every other platform and ephriam device. we use our smart phone in a different way for very quick updates versus the ipad or tablet where it is more of a leaned back experience and you want to get a little more content out of that and the sign was incredibly important verses the website, where as you said there's more opportunity for analysis and more in-depth reporting to so it's incumbent upon us to understand what each of these platforms are all about, how consumers use those platforms and be effected at communicating and providing content to that platform. >> i want to talk a little bit

about consumers because in my world we talk about stickiness of time and we think that is a relatively easy problem to solve in the management software business, but i huge problem for people in the media particularly with what i observed in my own kids, their ability to stay involved and engaged in any one thing in the period of time is pretty low. also there's a shift -- there was a time when you got on the train and 90% of the men, half were reading "the new york times" and half or reading "the wall street journal." >> a couple of them were reading usa today. >> i am talking way back. but that has clearly changed. so on the one hand i think it is a double-edged sword, the

internet, the content, the ability to deliver is a demand to deliver it and in a way that is going to engage younger audiences. how are you seeing that? >> i think a couple things. one, there's no question people are consumer concerning the media. >> we have the same job except we have a low. we think constantly about where people are, are the consuming the media, how are they considering the media. i think your description of considering content and trying to figure out what content fits what platform is something we spent a lot of time wrestling with. we have a large audience historically under five and a large audience over 50. and for us the challenge is one,

figuring out how to figure holum to that because it is all curriculum base and over the course of the last six years we went through a fairly rigorous process where we basically tore apart our entire kids schedule and worked with some of our traditional producers. sesame street is now on its 41st year and worked with them as they -- the reason it's been on the air for 41 years to continue to reinvent itself and think about how children are learning but what about the content we are delivering in broadcast but also how do we take the power of what you can accomplish online by helping children develop basic skills and in foley that in a way - skids and opportunity to test the skills they are learning. it's a much more engaged education process and the result of the extraordinary, we are the

top number one destination for kids online for video streaming an average of 110 million a month and an average of 85 minutes a session of the average of 45 minutes a session, if you spent time in the internet will you know how large those numbers are. and so that is the ultimate stickiness so we are looking for ways that not only are we reaching a lot of people but making sure when they are interacting that they are not just clicking away on television or on the internet. some of what we have learned through our holistic approach and thinking about kids is we have applied to prime time and i think what the news hour has done in particular bringing together the journalism of what we put on the air with what they are able to do online really

does create and actually for the radio is distributed in many places around the country including washington on weta as a radio broadcast and you have a greater opportunity of connecting with people as they want. >> i was just going to say endorsing everything paula has said that once those young people get used to getting information and learning something on television one of the challenges is how do you keep them on that learning track for fi did a project which i think that you or mark mentioned a minute ago, looking at the younker generation a few years ago and frankly it was a broad ranging projects looking at their attitude, their values, how close they are to their parents or the generation in american history, how technology is changing. but one of the things we looked at is how they get their news.

we found them remarkably well informed, considering the fact that there is this dedication to picking up the newspaper every morning for watching an evening newscast every night they are getting information. how are they doing it? we talked to one consultant in los angeles who said what young people tell us is we'd figure of the news is important it will come to us. even the young people who aren't just genetically inclined to follow the news or hearing what's going on through their cellphone and they're smart phone, their device, whatever it is they carry around because they see on facebook. their friends will say did you hear about so and so. that may sound shallow to us but in many cases they then have the opportunity to get more information right away in a moment and that's why i think technology is making for a much smarter, much better informed

yen per generation that i think they are often given credit for. >> you are referring to the next generation project? just a quick question on that. did you notice, were there any notable differences gender wise in terms of how people will be hitting? >> surprisingly not. i went in looking to see differences in attitudes that we found in terms again of the closeness to parents men and women equally to react to the parents when u.s. about what's important to them in life without an equal number were interested in having a family and left young men say they are having a stable life and they've been influenced by their family in that way. and if sycophant percentage sing something else. i'm not ready to settle down. but in terms of the role that technology plays in their lives, women, young women, every bit as affected by technology. young men, diversity. that doesn't know any gender

barrier. so i went in looking for gender barriers and didn't find them, or gender differences i should say. >> i think that the media consumption is at an all-time high in the country at this point some recent studies were pointing out and one of the things we found about television viewership is that when the folks are watching television about 70 or 80% of them are also using some other kind of device in december and whether they are on facebook or twitter or interacting or talking to their friends with each other, and what that is doing is actually increasing the level of television viewership because it isn't just a passive experience any more, it is becoming a more interactive social experience, and we are finding with the social tools that are all there between the facebook fan page and all the rest, for instance, nbc came out with a show called

the voice monday night and it has become a hit, and we have 13 nbc affiliates, of the top five affiliate's that have produced the best viewership for the voice and that is it because we have just done the traditional promotion of that program on our channels but rather which engaged the audiences with contests and san discussions and really promoted social interaction and media tools to get people to be more focused and we see that as being much more successful and important to a younger audience and that is what is enabling us to drive the young audiences. unlike you we don't have a big crowd under five that looks at our products on the basis, but we are seeing that the age of the folks because of the social media tools is coming down and

then at usa today dhaka, where we have the adjunct print product usa today, we are finding that our tablet ipad application has a group of viewers that is probably a decade younger than the traditional user and it is one of the most successful of applications in the ipad store so we are very pleased with what kind of the worship and the demographics of the viewership is rising. ..

which is that people are consuming media in many different ways, and it is surprising i think for most people to hear that television viewing, just pure television viewing is at an all-time high. one assumes that because of all the other media options that television must be suffering and that people are going away at drugs and staring at their phones, which is described is actually what is happening is that people are watching television and they are on line and they are tweeting to their friends. it is just a whole other environment. >> certainly multitasking. sometimes i've had to get out of the habit of assuming that if my kids were on their iphones while they were watching a movie that it meant that they didn't like the movie. i would always say if you don't like as we can turn it off. by daughters would say no i love

it, but you you are doing is everything. >> moving onto a slightly different task around your lives and careers as women in business, one of the things that, when i was wearing one of my previous spots in a management company, and i observed from many of our customers that there weren't very many women keynote speaker so i decided this was going to be my cause. i was going to be sure we do know found, identified and secured female keynote speakers for our clients events. i found that the really difficult task. i found most women would say i will be on a panel. i will do a breakout session, but i don't want to do the keynote. what is your point of view on how women move into a place where they are very comfortable being in the limelight and i know part of that is just general security with you know your accomplishments, but it is a very different i think

mindsets to be the kind of person who wants to stand on the stage and you know, be the center of attention. >> i think we have come a long way. i mean, i see many women today who are actually are willing and eager to stand in front of an audience and tell their story or talk about the work that they do. i think we have made enormous strides. i will tell you, when i started out so long ago i started out as a reporter. i was first hired out of college as a secretary in the newsroom of a television station in atlanta, and i've been there for a few months and my only goal was to become a reporter. i kept saying this to the news director and his answer every time was, we are to have a woman reporter. [laughter] which they did. they had one woman reporter. she did the weather at 6:00 and she reported. my point is today, more than

half of the anchors on local stations around the country are women, and i know we have heard mark's statistics earlier. there are more women now showing up on the air behind-the-scenes, producing shows, reporting there are covering the war in afghanistan. they are at the pentagon. they are everywhere. now, do we have enough women in management? no, that is another topic but in terms of getting in front of an audience i think women are much more willing to do that than they ever have been. i think sometimes they need to be encouraged, because i think women often have a tendency to say well, i don't know as much as i should. i need to study up more about that. but i find that young women coming along have more confidence in their ability and what they know, and i think it is just a matter of time before you see as many women. i still think and i will come back to this in a minute. when it comes to taking positions of management and

executive positions, i would like to see more women stepping up to do that. that is probably a more compensated subject on why there aren't more women like paula and like gracia. we do have an issue there, but in terms of standing in front of an audience in speaking out, think we have come a very long way. >> i've been very fortunate to be here for 26 years and one of the things that attracted me back in 1985 when i joined the company was the fact that in looking at the board make up, and looking at the officers of the company and in looking at people in positions of influence and importance in the communities we serve, that gannett's -- annette's management team continuing through the entire time and in what the company has been focused on reflecting the communities that we serve. for me there were a lot of tremendous role models that -- at gannett when i joined in 1995

out of the banking industry that was not exactly a bastion of progressiveness when it came to hiring women. so i would just look around the net and i could see women leading great newspapers and great television stations that had a tremendous impact on the communities they served and i looked at our board of directors and there were probably 15 people on our board of directors, and three of them are women. and i looked at the senior management teams and i found that for a lot of women on the senior management team as well. the great thing for me was reading the report before it joined the company and in the chairman's letter pointing out that i think we had 5000 openings that year at gannett for new employees and 47% of them were filled by women and about 20% of them were filled by minorities. so for me, gannett was a tremendous place to be. it was a company that was always very focused on reflecting the communities that we serve and

always had a great role model of women being in positions of influence and power and importance in the communities that we serve. >> i think part of what we think about pbs is that diversity and in every aspect of our organization is one of our core values. so we really do attempt to reflect the communities that we serve. i think he said that very well. on our board, and our staff and particularly our management team, and the work that we produce, in our per chairman as we think about organizations that we do business with and it is part of the metrics of how every manager in our organization is evaluated. and i think if we are serious about seeing more women, about seeing more people women of color and key roles in organizations, then you really

have to put front and center every single day and stay focused on it. i think it is good business. it make such a much stronger company. i think having a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives really is and has been critical to the work that we do. so we try to live this every single day. >> and in terms of, you know, getting back to being on the air and in front of an audience, we think every single day on the news hours we put our guests together where there is the economy or politics, we think, all right who is it out there and we think about women, we think about minorities and it is constantly not just in the back of our minds but in the front of our minds. and does that mean every single lineup is perfectly diverse lex know, but it does mean over the span of a short period of time we want to reflect the country and we want to reflect the

people who are in that area whether it is economists, politicians, people in elected office, whatever it is, experts in health care. we are looking to be diverse, because that is our mission. we believe we are as a news organization in a sense holding up a mirror to the country, and you can't do that if it is all frankly white guys. no offense to the white guys. >> present company excluded. gracia judy made the comments you would like to see more women leading their organization so for many of us who are aspiring who are trying to be women leaders in our companies, can you share any words of advice? you have the cfo role, which i was fascinated by, because it is not all that common and i can imagine -- i would love to hear with your peer level outside

gannett was when you were cfo, but also any advice for women who want to be able to lead organizations. >> you know i wish i could give you this grand plan that i had of how my career was going to go but i have to tell you that it was really very much more focused on number one, doing the job that i had at that moment in time and doing it to the very best of my abilities, and i always had tremendous stake in joining gannett. the thing that really attracted me as well with the fact that gannett was an absolute meritocracy. it wasn't a family affair. there weren't people with a certain pedigree. we are going to do better than other people that didn't have that pedigree. it was very much a meritocracy and so what i realized simply was that do the job if you are given in to it to the very best of your ability. somehow miraculously people would notice that and give you additional responsibilities. one of the things i also realized in my career was that,

and i think it is true more of women. we tend to worry a little bit about getting out of our comfort zones and over analyzed wow in my really prepared for that position? do i know everything that i absolutely have to know to do that job? i find that is not as true with men, but i think for women that tends to be true a little bit more. and, you know pearly you have to force yourself to come out of your comfort zone. i can remember a time when i've been vice chairman came to me and said gee, our investor relations person has left and one that you handle that? i sort of said, oh sure not a problem and went back to my office and said oh my god what i got myself into? i don't know how to do this and if i do something wrong our stock prices will plummet and it is going to be very difficult. but you know what it was a great opportunity for me and has enabled me to widen my skill sets. i think the other thing is really to learn something from

everybody that you encounter along the way. i know that from every relationship i've had, from every person i've met throughout marketization and all the organizations i interface with, i find something that i can learn from them. sometimes i learn what not to do, but mostly i learn how to be a better executive and how to be a better manager and leader of people. >> so paula, when i heard a little bit there is women and risk-taking. so generally i think by nature we tend to not he is willing to take risks as men traditionally have been and taking risk means standing up on the stage when you are not quite that prepared or taking that job you are not sure you can do. do you think this sort of appetite for risk is a factor in women's success? >> i am not sure. i think that you know particularly as more and more women rise into positions of

influence, and you are no longer the first -- i think it was sandra day o'connor that said it is not who can be the first, you don't want to be the last. i think that for a lot of women who have risen up and they are the first to feel i think this enormous pressure that you have got to do a better job than anyone could possibly do because you are not just representing yourself but somehow you are representing all womankind or something, i don't know. but i do think -- i spend a lot of time really trying to mentor young women and men actually. i believe that it is a special obligation for all of us who have been able to achieve a certain amount and have been given opportunities to remember what it was like when you are graduating from college and you don't have your life figured out and he feel like you should have because everyone else seems to have their life figured out.

how many of them this -- of us in this room actually did have your life figured out after college graduation? none of us. maybe you did, judy. you are you are always the overachiever. but i do think that for so many people, part of us, whatever words of advice i can share, is to not be afraid, and i think men do have this issue. a lot of them, maybe they just don't verbalize it, moving out of your comfort zone and trying something different and not saying no particularly if you feel like you have your whole life planned. sometimes opportunities come to you that may seem so off the path that you thought you were on. and, to have the opportunity to try something that seems risky or not quite in a nice, neat box

is terrifying, but i think for many of us, in order to continue to rise up and to have opportunities you have got to be willing to take that risk. to me the saddest thing is to look around organizations of people that have been in jobs for a very long time who have been afraid, you know, to sort of put their hand up and be willing to try something different. i think that the people that are able to then go on and lead organizations are the ones who have been willing to do whatever it takes and that means standing on the stage if that is what it takes or agreeing to take on an assignment where you actually may not know all the informatio? and i think recognizing that every person -- there was a man i knew a number of years ago who told me, and this was a very successful man on wall street. he is running a major company and he said every time i've gone into a new job he says there are all these little voices in the

back of my head that says what they find out? [laughter] i can't tell you how empowering that was because i thought i was the only one that had that thought in the back of my head. but everyone has it, and i think recognizing the fact that unless you have such an overriding ego, everyone has that little nasty voice on the back of their mind and i think if you can just quiet that voice and recognize that you bring a lot to any new opportunity and if that you are never going to know the situation. >> is really important to think about and i want to say this in a kind of takes us in a different direction that you were asking. one of the things that has reminded me and i think a lot of my fellow journalists about frankly to be able to put things in perspective. whenever we get frustrated with the fact that the industry has changed and the challenges have morphed into something that nobody expected, the resources

are down, we think about you know, the problems we face in the media here in this country. they pale in comparison to what journalists face around the world, and i just want to take a moment to put in a good word for an organization i have been involved with for the last couple of decades, the international women's media foundation. it has voted -- devoted to promoting opportunities for women in journalism and communications around the world and we have been able over the course of 20 some years to identify women who are literally risking life and limb in places far away from here, in most instances from mexico right next door, latin america, south america, asia, china, the african continent on and on, the middle east, women who are risking everything in order to tell a story. we bring this to the united

states and we recognize them with something we call the courage in journalism award and we do this through programs every year. i won't go on and on except to say our executive director liza gross, happens to be right here. say hello to liza. [applause] what this does and i'm going to hold up the global report on status of women in the news media. this is something we collaborated with folks to put together this year. i urge you to contact it to get your own copy. it is fascinating and an easy read but an important read about the role that women play. but the bottom line for me is that yes we have a tough in the united states, but women around the world are facing incredible obstacles, and they are putting themselves out front. they are having the courage to speak out and to face, looked power in the eye. as we look at them frankly, it

makes what we do i think seem important and frankly gives us the kind of courage that we do have in this country. >> do we have time for just a couple of quick questions and to the panelists and a concluding thoughts about things we might have missed? who had a question here? >> hi, i am to win ceo and co-founder of -- we have had the privilege of working with the few traditional media companies and we have heard a lot about how media companies are resource challenge. one of the things that i have seen is that with traditional media companies, they appear to forget that the people who are investing in advertising with them wanted to see a strong return on their investment and for a long-time traditional media was the only game in town. if you wanted to advertise, part of the challenge now is having

to reinvent and re-understand how are we going to match advertisers with the users you are bringing in through the great content. i am curious what you are doing to address that and what impact you are seeing as a result? >> i think probably i should handle this. we are little but advertising today. >> pbs is a nonprofit as well, right? if you are on to every source you have to be a living in those resources in many forms. >> it is true. >> i'm going to be rude and say that i have to run because the markets open in 10 minutes. we have to figure out what we are going to do on the news program. i'm so honored to be here and i hate to go. >> judy woodruff. [applause] >> judy are protected by the first amendment. make your report totally positive. [laughter] >> we could use a little good news. with regard to the whole issue

of metrics around advertising, you are absolutely right. what we hear from advertisers and marketers is they want to understand the roi associated with their market and the advertising dollars they spend with us. obviously in areas like digital and mobile, there are more established metrics that we can share with those folks who choose to advertise with us, to show them the return that they are getting on their investment in a more meaningful way. on the television side, we always had nielsen to help with ratings and other metrics that we can provide on television viewing and understanding the demographics involved in that television viewing. it has been more difficult on the traditional media side that we in fact have been working with a number of folks to try to come up with some standard metrics that we can use to better address the issue of return on investment for those marketing dollars.

absolutely an important question when there is a lot more choice these days. >> and we don't take advertising. we do have underwriters and so we do have relationships with corporations, which are very important to us and also the companies, the underwriters associated with specific programs. and to get the same nielsen numbers at the commercial broadcasters use. we are looking very carefully at all of the ways that we are showcasing material and actually look at the web and not just measuring clicks but really trying to understand the impact of messaging. for us, people associate with public broadcasting because it is an uncluttered environment. we don't have every 10 or 12 minutes on broadcast, and people that associate with programs in public broadcasting are doing it as a way of extending their

connection to our organizations but also in reaching the people that are watching public television. so we think very carefully about how we are presenting that information to prospective corporations and we are always looking for ways to build those partnerships. we have stations across the country's in community so a number of our stations are involved in doing events with donors during our fundraising drives and a lot of companies will use the opportunities for volunteerism. so we are constantly thinking about how can we strengthen those partnerships and really deliver back to the companies that are supporting us the value for their underwriting? >> i should also add that we own a little company called.role that is based in pennsylvania, and they serve up on an amazing number of ad campaigns for a lot

of fortune 1000 companies, and the metrics that they can provide around those advertising campaigns, around just 30 different metrics around the results that those advertising marketers are getting is pretty phenomenal. so absolutely an important issue. >> how about a couple more quick questions? >> hi, catherine newell present at president of cayenne s. promotion. i'm wondering what organizations are doing to address the issue of news literacy, that is to help people think more critically about the news they are getting from any platform and to be able to differentiate between their fight verified news what you are doing and the proverbial blogger in pajamas? [laughter] >> go ahead. >> i will start. we are thinking a lot about it and as we are looking for ways to help people decipher news, one of the big initiatives we are focused on is helping kids and parents really understand

how to navigate, particularly the internet and the veracity of information there. and i think you know, from our perspective, being able to not only help kids develop some basic literacy in media which i think is going to be even more important as we go forward as there is such an array of access points for data, that is the way we can make a big impact. we have a fairly large project that we are involved and nationally called pbs learning media, which is a project to bring our digital assets both video as well as animations and others into the classroom for classroom use. if you think about the content we produce, american experience and so forth, they have a lot of direct classroom applications. and so, we have been involved over the last couple of years of taking a very large library and breaking up into small segments that can be used easily in the

classroom which are usually five-minute pieces. part of it is standards teachers are using and delivering that are free to any school available through broadband. as part of the work we are doing there, we are thinking carefully about the tools we can give teachers to use in the classroom around media letters they and we partner with a lot of organizations that have concerns and issues because they think that helping kids and actually frankly kids back to their parents figure out how to navigate through the space is going to be critically important. and really helping people analyze truth, fact, sources, all of that is they think is really going to be critical for our democracy. democracy. >> similar to pollack, we have been involved in newspapers in education programs where we supply newspapers to schools and promote literacy programs in schools as well through our philanthropic arm the gannett

foundation, where we give back and contribute to important causes in the communities we serve throughout the country. we know that a good slug of that money goes to literacy programs and literacy initiatives and other initiatives to promote reading and viewing and those sorts of issues in those communities that have been identified as priorities in certain communities. and to your point about cutting through the clutter of information and misinformation, think of the interesting things is that we are all inundated with so much information, so much news, far more than any of us can really deal with on a daily basis and that obviously was not the case many many years ago. and so i think some of the research that we have been doing talks to the fact that what a lot of viewers and consumers now are looking for is someone to curate the content and edit that content which is in the traditional job of our editors

and our newspapers and in our broadcast stations, because there is so much information. what is real information, what isn't real information? it is another reason we believe the trusted brands that we represented those communities where, if we make a mistake, we print a correction on the front page of the newspaper or in our broadcast, or as we all know bloggers on the internet does this information. i don't see a lot of corrections going on. so i think there may be some movement back towards those trusted brands that have credibility and stand for a certain level of accuracy and ferocity in content. >> one last question. >> keep moore from katie and associates. this has really been a great talk on diversity in the media and today with our economy technology collaboration and

participation is the executive order from the white house on open government. industry in today's economy, we have really need your expertise so we are in media for united negro college fund. we are engaging young people in social media for the first time ever. we cannot do that as greatly as you and your resources, so would you be interested in pbs and learning more about how kids collaborate to expand both education advancement and the media driving our economy? thank you. >> we work with a lot of organizations and in fact our both for children as well as adults is shaped by panels that we put to