expensive program to go from a to a new vapor in the future this will take quite some time. and this is also a life with very difficult social economic problems. unbelievable unemployment numbers, social tensions. but even that is also a very important message. no party neither in germany nor other countries is now against staying in the europe. he makes political movement saying we should get out of here. 70% of the great people are saying they should stay in europe. they are so saying 70% should not feel they go through a

sturdy programs to through that. >> is not on domestic politics? >> maybe we do it. isn't domestic politics are the problem? 34% of people just shows they have not had an economic. you've had nine incumbents voted out of power. you have a new best-selling book and you have chancellor merkel saying that europe will fail if the euro sales and mena pulls it shows how the generals agree with one half of germans agree is that the real question permissible domestic politics support photovoltaic to say the euro or is domestic politics weightiness intrinsically towards the breakup of the euro?

..

will finally decide for us. if you cannot beat the future, simply not. we only united europe and negotiated all these countries have high-level and i think that is some pain which will come through, but we need to be more charismatic messages like that, political messages to explain to people what is finally at stake. and unfortunately, we have no presidents of europe and the

same way you have an american president. it is a bit more difficult. of course we have different presidents, but not someone who's really elected by the peep hole and he speaks for the europeans. and even in sports, the united states faced china. there is no european team, there is no european -- there's a flag, but it's not as important. we still feel as italians and germans. that is very important next message we have to elaborate because after the second world war, the european i.t., which then developed into a single currency was really to have peace and no war anymore in your. now for the young generation, that is not a big challenge because you haven't seen more

for decades. so i think you have to find a new fish in and i think the self-determination for me is one aspect, which we should work on, but maybe there's other ids. but we need some name that people start rallying behind europe, but then start working on proving that government of europe. and the crisis may be optimistic, but if they manage successfully, it may be the first time they europe jointly solves a problem and can talk about and therefore we should really not miss that opportunity and to integrate things. we are seeing a little bit in this debate about what should be done and who should do more and germany thinks that there should do more in other areas. we are creating dissension.

and they are not very constructive because we need is more social cohesion in order to create this kind of europeans. and i think that is one of the major challenges which goes beyond the financial challenges in the europeans set up right now. >> is a powerful statement and is one of the best ways i've heard it put. it has no determination. the flipside is that it doesn't happen, you also have a front end at union and you have a situation or if it is the standup at this point, people make a lot of other judgments as well. let me pick up two questions. >> maccormack, former democratic. as you know, there's a tremendous amount ssm in financial markets here in a massively shorting your prey across the board. some feel that germany will simply not accept the contingent

liabilities that are inherent in some of the solutions and others feel that the southern european countries will simply not bring their people on to accept a reduction in living standards that are inherent and are part of the problem. but i'm just wondering is it your view part of the massive shorting by financial markets could actually be a self-fulfilling prophecy that bring this thing to have much quicker than people think like >> let me pick up one other question. >> i am carlin: i like to broaden the discussion a little bit. one could cause the financial catastrophe is looming, not just in europe, but she looked in china and see if her daughter's gdp in the real estate bubble that some people are really worried about. in the end of the year in the united states, who knows what will happen with eric that cometh better, et cetera. to give me good news. tell me why we not see a tsunami

and all these trends looks a desperate main fact just the looked at us. >> since reverting to his intercession of them at that time for one question i think. we'll see at the end of this round whether we have more time. >> thank you. dana marshall with american university. maybe this is a question of piece together a few points are made and that is whether all you see here and are described as the greatest premium on something you've not mentioned mentioned, the desire to g20 so often expressed to rebalance the world economy to decent and about massive trade deficit trade surpluses, those kinds in the spirit does that go even stronger clients >> the short and question i think one could tie under that when mostert was created you didn't have markets of this size. so, what is it that markets are looking for that they would actually respond to in europe?

and then with thailand and the last question coming together i think would be good for you to be here to believe that the global economy for an overall assessment. a lot of investors say there's not really a pretty spot. and i resiliency to something going terribly wrong would not be as good right now for the reasons you're talking about. >> the scene is actually europe. the different accounts interpreted is a nonsustainable set up for long-term. we have it under the globals case. i mean, we have four countries with huge surpluses and others have huge deficits. and therefore, it was overtime that germany had to contribute. and it's interesting that even in germany now some are saying it may be a little bit more inflation, maybe higher salaries withheld and this tremendous push on productivity and cost

stability is he putting others into a situation where they simply cannot cope with that. so what is true on the global skill in terms of truth for europe. and we have to help them. i mean, today the product ranges from countries just us and allow to be competitive even on the european case and therefore we have to precede that improves also the benefit of the deficit countries. that is absolutely key and something we have to do for american investment to achieve that and we need more infrastructure and other assistance in this country is to create growth. ..

the sure thing is very difficult. i mean, for the last three or four years, i wanted to sell our shares.

i got 98 percent. about the euro. the crisis. some what sustainable. whether we have to the think that one day we will be repaid. the euro. and i always said, if you are sure you lose a lot of money. i guarantee. and i think many have said over and over that we were wrong. i no their is a tremendous impatience about the european response. and as you rightly said, if -- is germany willing to do more? as i said, represents 70 percent of the federal budget. i still think if it comes to a question, do we have to do more or may be substantially more.

on our society, i think the answer is pretty obvious. on the periphery, will the countries to what the programs expect them to do? i must say, greece has done a lot. it is a tough time. in athens, people were in the streets. the same evening. not an easy thing to push through. so far we have seen that things are improving. italy, the program very monte put in place. 8 percent of gdp over three years. these are big numbers. is it sufficient? the finance minister, i think

the view that things are moving in the rights direction. the -- some other measures have to follow. the labor market reforms. spain is doing this. a rather dramatic way. i would say that the countries to do what most people felt, even these countries, the strong political leaders. out of necessity because no one wants to be the weekend bad guy in the eurozone. we have seen much more positive developments. many of us would have anticipated on three years ago. i see the strong political or ideological movement comes out which says we should get out of europe. people see the average person. if you ask him whether you want to state in the eurozone, a vast majorities are still supporting

that. not everyone seems to benefit. that is true. that is something we have to explain. but there is no assistance in the beer political way against. only, do we need a little bit more time in order to achieve that. the question is, will markets be patient enough to give us the time. that is the critical question. so far, the ups and downs, we have done particularly well. if the greek election had not triggered this new analysis, i think we would not have this kind of debate right now. >> the last question. >> site. i am correspondent of italian news agency from serbia. my question is serbia and austerity measures. recently we had the parliamentary and presidential elections in serbia. from the results we seek that probably the same players from the former government will form

the next government. but already we have differences. we can see differences, how to deal with economic crisis. and as we know, serbia is country with high unemployment rate. a lower gdp. what would be your suggestion for serbia? would it be better to go with austerity measures or with measures without imf at this moment? >> are sorry. whenever i see one of our ambassadorial members entered from the baltics, let's take that. >> thank you so much. ambassador, i feel it is an easy question for you. my government, we got probably the only country in europe still having a priority joining with europe. very ambitious. january 1st 1914. i am not surprised. >> you could get a very positive exchange. >> just your comments from the perspective, from your perspective. is it politically liable, is it

the right time? thank you. >> i should never give the advice to the government. as swiss, we stay out of the euro. [laughter] i mean, right now it is a very difficult situation. i still think that the euro is a fantastic achievement. helps us create a lot for many years. reducing transaction costs. of course right now is not very stable. as we discussed over the last hour. so it is probably not easy to convince people that joining this the right thing to do right now. but, i mean, it is your government's decision. maybe other considerations. serbia, grope and austerity -- well, austerity is a big word. i would always go for a

disciplined approach because to imbalances are the worst. the one is imbalances in the real-estate sector which zero was last much longer than people think. maybe in the u.s. as well. but certainly in japan, almost 15 or 20 years. and because this is not a homogeneous. you cannot just move from one place -- one place to the other. they have to like the design, the architecture. so this is a very difficult market to regain. the other one is high indebtedness. that is trouble because you have to have to level your balance sheet. you have to of level the sovereign debt and so on. that, as you see, is very difficult. leveraging means also that you have normally some sort of contraction and then there gdp,

it's just not improving as fast as you would like to see. that is why i think they disciplined approach in terms of a conservative budget discipline and their relative, reasonable, affordable debt to gdp ratio. certainly below 100 percent, some people say it is 90. i would rather go below 60. for most countries. then, i think, gross comes. and without all this obstacles from the not very stable economic environment. that is why i think they're not objectives which contradict each other. you need discipline to have a healthy growth. of course you need grows for employment and prosperity that is based on a sound, healthy, fiscal situation. that would be my answer.

>> last question which gives you a chance to sort of comment on our mission in a way because our mission is renewing the atlanta community for global transit. in this case, in this crisis, how would you assess trans-atlantic cooperation and more specifically, has the u.s. recognized that its strategic stake in europe getting this right, and given the kind of assistance that might help, we talked about how europe helped during our own financial crisis. so far, i have mainly heard about advice that one should have done more than what we have done, taken a big bazooka at this to our program. of course in 2008 the fed provided an astonishing 13 trillion of support. so how would you assess the transatlantic element of this? and to what degree has the u.s. been helpful? to what degree should be doing more? >> well, the u.s. is on all levels, i think, putting a lot of pressure on european policy

makers. is the u.s. or china in that context or russia, willing to invest into sovereign for in your. that is not really the case. of course chinese would say, if you don't trust your own race, why should we do it for you. so i have some sympathy for that argument, but, of course, i think at the end if you could sanction the imf and also give the imf and the funds to help in a worst-case scenario to assist your in bailing out certain countries, it might not be a bad thing to do. but i think the fact that there is impatience, more ambitious on the u.s. side is probably

helpful because it leads to a speeding up of the process in europe. the only thing which people have to understand is that we are somewhat in a different ball game. i mean, that's our program was primarily strengthening the bank's because of the real-estate exposure or the toxic asset exposure. in europe the problem is not banks so far, but the nature of exposure to toxic assets. just normally locked down or liquidated, nor in most countries is real estate because we don't have real estate bubbles with one or two exceptions. the problem is exposure to sovereign risk and the correlation between sovereign risk and banks damaging. i think that is something which the u.s. to not have. so you can now recapitalized banks, but if you have a sovereign risk receptor -- restructuring as i said before,

the capitol is melting away like the snow in the springtime sun. in that sense it is more important that we establish -- stabilize the sovereign risk issue and not so much that we give banks more capital in order to mark down sovereign risk because sovereign risk is not only a banking problem that people always underestimate banks, not the main investors in sovereign risk. insurance companies, pension funds. many others. i mean, the essential banks. so in that sense, i think we have to be mindful of the sovereign risk and daisy have given up, sovereign risk as a risk free asset class, we have a completely new world. and this new world has huge implications. huge implications in the risk premium. this country will have to pay going forward. because there not risk free any more in the perception of investors. secondly, in the availability. now, this is a very good thing

at the end because people will be less inclined to give some much money by capital markets to countries which actually have no strength to service that tight. but that is different because everybody felt this is a risk free asset. and no one actually asked, why is it risk free? because the perception of being and the assumption of the risk free forever. and that this is now, and people say this is not going to happen, we put a lot of discipline on these countries in the way they find themselves. that is a very good thing. if we had not had the financial markets signaling that something is not good, we would probably have gone on for more years. i mean, why would greece have stopped? maybe there would have been 460 billion. and credit suisse was still below. still come parable with the

german and french. and i think that they have changed that. financial markets have given the signal. completely changed the discipline. mess speculators. absolutely yes. absolutely yes. they forced europe to do what has -- what they have to do. as for recognition. what what has happened the last five years, is tremendous. in terms of political integration, in terms of financial and structural reforms, and that is only triggered by the financial markets. no one else. there is no politician he stood up and said we have to change that, not one.

first, they were shocked by the ways and the strength of the financial market. and so this is all nasty speculators. and then they started to say now we have to regain the priority. we have that dominate financial markets. this is unfortunately for a fragmented european country not realistic to do anything against global financial markets. in that sense, the thinking that we have to be disciplined and that we speak with one voice is a good thing. imagine you would have a ceo the company saying something and the cfo two hours later saying something completely different, would you buy a share of the company? note. that is exactly happening in europe. someone, senior people, they're talking about eurobonds. two hours later their is a press conference saying not with us. this is so it works all the

time. we have to have one voice going through that process. that is will we wanted see. and then i think we need more clarity in more reassurance with what we want to do. coming back to your first question, i think we need a road map of what we want to do in europe. if we could say, for the next five years he said the different steps, like the company, and the recession -- restructuring mode, during this the first year, this the second year and so on, being shareholders to, they would start leaving it. and that things european politicians have to do the same. together with the european central bank, and supported by some ways by the imf. >> i think that is a terrific, terrific closing statement. on behalf of the audience of wanted thank you for shedding light on confusing and i would say historically important moment. i think what you said about

european self-determination, i think we should pick that up because that is ultimately, that also means it is about the capability of being coherent transatlantic lee and effective across. so thank you very much. [applause] >> you are watching c-span2 with politics and public affairs weekdays featuring live coverage of the u.s. senate. on week nights once key public policy events. every weekend, the latest nonfiction authors and books on book tv. you can see past programs and get our schedules that are website, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> tomorrow morning, washington journal, an economist looks at last week's jobs report and why

he feels federal action is needed. then do is let men of the national partnership for women and families and sabrina schaefer of the independent women's forum discuss women's pay and the gender wage discrimination bill being debated this week in the senate. and after that, national journal daily editor matthew cooper examines recent polls taken on the health care law. plus, your e-mails, phone calls, and tweets. washington journal live tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> over the next several hours, coverage of the 601st annual convention of the national cable and tele-communications association. and about ten minutes' discussion of advances and innovations and video content and delivery systems. after that, look at digital distribution of video, film, and music. we begin with the opening address by association president michael powell, the former head of the federal communications commission.

[applause] >> welcome to the great city of boston and the 2012 cable show. it is great to have governor patrick welcome us to this wonderful city. you know, when i joined a year ago i set out to bring more creativity and energy into this industry. our efforts are bearing fruit, and you will see it reflected throughout this gorgeous convention hall. and our new ad campaign, which is up in washington, reflects the emotional connection we hope to get across in telling our story. let's take a quick look. ♪

♪ >> cable is thriving. new energy, new products, and a very promising future. as the ad makes clear, cable is the platform that offers instant access to an infinite possibilities, to great programming, the web, friends and family, and the hottest internet applications and devices. cable is how we can next to the world and to one another. now, americans adore television. we watch about 147 hours of tv per month, which may not be entirely healthy, but there is no escaping the immense pleasure we get from the tube. television is the original social medium. watching is a communal experience. sharing what was on last night,

convincing a friend to jump on the bandwagon of your favorite show and to catch up quickly so that you can talk about it, the joy that we feel watching something inspiring, the last we share taking in a great comedy, and the exhilaration we feel when our favorite team heads the winning shot at the buzzer. it is all available to us because the cable industry took a mediocre tv experience and make it better. once upon a time americans had only three channels that sign-off said midnight at the sound of the star spangled banner. there was little diversity of content and static riddled pictures. cable the that -- delivered a technology that improves reception, expanded and diversified what we watched, and gave artists a better canvass for making quality shows. traumas like homeland and madman and educational content from discovery in history, kids programming on nickelodeon,

sports center on espn, cooking shows on food network, and news and public affairs from fixtures like cnn, c-span, cnbc, and fox news. they have all made television a rich experience. the fact that so many americans stuck with cable during the recession is a testament to our value and our stability. you know, electronic communication does not stand still. the internet may be the most extraordinary advance in the history of information, ushering in an age of new and ever been a possibility. now, leaders take risks. the cable industry chose to bet big on the promise of delivering broadband. it was an ambitious and risky play, one that is now paying off for consumers. with cable getting the job done our industry has invested nearly

$200 billion of private capital to build the infrastructure to get america online. the men and women who serve our industry painstakingly and dug it, pulled, and connected homes to the internet across the nation. they did it without shovel ready stimulus bonds from the government. cable broadband now reaches -- that is worthy of a property of applause, i think. [applause] >> cable broadband now reaches 93% of homes rich, poor, urban, and rural. the industry has never stopped pushing forward. we have increased broadband speeds over 900% in a decade. we are on the verge of deploying additional technology to reach speeds so fast that the internet itself may be unable to deliver content to match cables last model. the incredible network makes it possible for us ted tweet

friends and googol, which are now household words. amazon was just a river and south america until national broadband maid service the world's largest online retailer. last week facebook once the richest ipo in the history for a tech company. we congratulate them, and i'm sure that the california department of revenue thanks them. that kind of extraordinary american excess, success is only possible because of the rich and robust platform that supports it . we celebrate these successes and our progress, but there is more to do. many americans still are not on-line, and that needs to change. cable is working to increase adoption by partnering with the fcc to launch a low-cost broadband service to low-income families across america. this is absolutely critical. because childs' with -- children without access to the internet will find life increasingly too difficult in the information age

. for all cable has probably done so far, we of the consumer more. consumers want and imaginative future that blends the power of the web with the magic of television. this industry has never been content to rest on aging business models. it has always looked to the future to provide consumers with the next exciting thing. to many incumbent industries have failed to keep pace with consumer preferences and destructive technologies, but i assure you, carol will not be one of them. we all know the challenges that consumers face in today's dizzying digital marketplace. the consumer experience should be simpler, easier to find the content that we want, easier interface is to control our experience and less reliance on set top boxes. we want the ability to get the content that we pay for here, there, and everywhere. we say to consumers, we have

heard your wish and we are working to make it come true by delivering cable content to ipads, x boxes, smart phones, and whenever the next cool thing is that pops out. you should get greater value for what you pay, including additional services, content and other devices, and content that cannot be found elsewhere. we have embarked on an exciting time of intense innovation. cable is experimenting with more portable services, fair pricing models, and more mobile web integration. it is a work in progress. there will be adjustments along the way. and we face competition, and that is healthy. wireless broadband is enjoying astronomical growth. tell coze remain in the thick of the fight, and satellite companies continue to battle, can desk -- convinced by commercials that you will end up in a ditch, so you're here to

await shop, or have a grandchild with the root -- no strength. that may be over the top, but it is real. there is also a place for internet video providers to compete and complement the cable model. yet, some consumers may even cut the cord. at the end of the day tebow benefits from the competition and will work even harder to compete fairly and effectively on the value and consumer experience. as these changes unfold, you can expect critics to well. compelling change rarely escapes the chorus in washington. rather than dismiss concerns out of hand, we will respect them and will weigh them carefully, guided exclusively by our commitment to ensuring a better experience for consumers. but some naysayers are talking because they don't like the u.s. private enterprise model. they prefer a european-style regulations with a government

effectively owning or controlling the network, pumping taxpayer money into subsidizing service and managing competition they would like the government to have the last word on the pace and scope of innovation. this would be a disastrous course to take it. confiscating private networks that are already roping government on the hook to keep tens of billions of dollars annually flowing into network innovation, letting politics allocate resources rather than economics and a entrepreneurs include kill investment and leave the internet in this state we find today, the electric grid for crumbling transportation systems. the recent "washington post" article recently said, our nation will need to spend $75 billion per year if you want to keep the lights on and draw iphone charged. we will need to spend almost one-and-a-half billion per year to keep toes flushing. and to do it all the country

needs to spend some staggering $2,602,000,000,000. in stark contrast, broadband is driving, fuelled by the dynamics of the free-market. broadband is an american success , a light regulatory model that favors free enterprise and has led to a vibrant, digital economy that is in powering educators, business owners, and consumers no matter where they live. so i hope you are as excited as i am that we are holding our convention here in boston. this is a story city with great people and a proud history. we hope to tap into that revolutionary spirit that gave birth to this great nation and can continue building a great network worthy of the stars and stripes. thank you very much. thank you for joining us. have a wonderful tables show. [applause] >> more now from day in see.

: convention. the discussion of advances and innovations. the heads of aol, time warner cable, and discovery communications for about 40 minutes. >> all right. thanks for having yes. still to be here. i'm thrilled. it looks so packed. there is even standing-room-only in the back. an industry that is changing so quickly especially with smart phones. more people is smart phones and dvr is. people get killed walking down the street because there are on this month phones now. so i wanted to start off by asking each of you, how are things really changing when it comes to video? with reality television that was the hot thing. video games now, what is the hot

sort of next thing that you are seeing in terms of people's use of video? we will start with dividend come this way. >> good to see you. in some way they're is no question that things are changing. behaviorally people are consuming content. we tried to do is break in half. spend more money on content. five years ago we ridge spending 550 million not content. now we spend over a billion to deliver great channels, 13 channels here in the u.s. grow that market share here and around the world. we have been able to do that. the core of that is quality content with great storytelling and characters. the fact that there is now a content -- it allows us to move that quality content in different forms. mostly short form on to all of those platforms. the commission is still the same.

now we have new windows. the windows, mostly 18 months in all other content, amazon, youtube, being on the web. even about two weeks ago we bought a company that distributes short form contents but had 100 million streams in the month. when you see that kind of behavioral change where people are consuming content on platforms that never existed before it comebacks -- it comes back, we think, to the basic theme of quality content, great characters, great stories, and if you are in the content business you can participate all that. >> ducking behind states that you know what everyone is watching. you know. >> i like the way david answered.

we often make fun of the cable package. it seems like an old thing and it is not cool anymore. it is important to remember that close to 90 percent of the homes, the tv homes in america subscribe to multichannel tv for that package, either from cable or satellite our telephone. there aren't many products with that many people subscribe to. so it is a very powerful thing. i think what we see happening is the use of technology to make -- make an even more powerful experience. lots of devices that act like tvs. you used to just have a big tv on the wall or credenza, whenever. now we have more than you can count. the portable, phones, tablets, never. so consumers want their tv on all those devices.

it wants them on the devices outside the home. they want to access programming when they want. when the schedule, so all of that is changing, but this idea of selling a package of tv programming for subscription i think remains very powerful. it is using the technology to make it better. >> ask about the mobile in just a moment. first, you were talking about in terms of you are the biggest investor in digital content, right? and why is that and where? >> so, first i have my own agreement with the notion that content is incredibly important to differentiate platforms. when you look at what is happening in silicon valley today, it is not hard to see that there will probably be more c'mon physician of those platforms. at the content will be the thing that differentiates. one of the reasons we chose the turnaround available to focus on content, we see similar statistics on line that uc in the traditional cable landscape. 70 percent of people use less

than 15 minutes a month. people down low 30 to 40 applications. so the fees on content is significant overtime. when we move forward, the next 50, 100 years, the brands that are existing are going to get built up probably going to get built in the next five years. at the people really rely i carried bundles of contents to up save time. this seems to be an incredible opportunity right now with merging those platforms together to put together the next set of brands. we want to have some of them. >> as someone who is in the business of making content, and i love that content is rising again, but the popularity, but let me ask you, people do want to watch. or, i guess, it is unclear exactly what they want to do. i don't have it with me. on your smart phone you want to watch television or play games or whatever it is. how is cable really delivering

that? is becoming clear as a consumer that could end up being the primary screen for a lot of people. >> people use the devices. they use their fall left often to watch a full-length movie than they might the big screen tv. particularly. one of the things we are doing is we are starting to build out wi-fi places for people to congregate. and the fact, number of the cable companies today announced that we are going to create a common standard for roaming, wi-fi, different tables. the idea, you can then access wi-fi in your tablet. most data usage, heavy data usage is wi-fi now.

not cellular frequencies. so that initiative, are company is building quite heavily in los angeles right now. >> david, to be everywhere, i know, has been -- it was evangelized. a lot of criticism from hands of -- is it going to happen? that is something that seems to me, i think, okay, that has to be an obvious winner. >> i hope it happens. the great thing about tv everywhere is it gives an opportunity for the real business model, for us to participate with the other distributors, which is unusual. we held back most of our content from the web because there was not a business model there. when we look in our library, and we own all of our content for the last 40 years or so, the netflix model was attractive because it was 18 months or older. td everywhere is even more exciting because it you're watching, if you are a time warner cable subscriber watching tlc on sunday night, you can come back an hour later or the

next take to watch any of the shows you want, but it has the commercials. so on some of these other models where there is no advertising and in some cases there is no measurement, it is a particular challenge. here the model really works. the challenges that we as an industry have to come together. if we do, i think that it will provide a real value to consumers and will also do something that is going to happen anyway. somebody is going to come over the top. if consumers behaviorally want to be allowed to see our channels and shows and characters when they want to see it, then somebody is going to figure out a way to facilitate that. there is nobody that has a better infrastructure or a better relationship with the subscribers in the cable operators. and so for us i think it is important for us to put aside differences which we always had this question of the right value, but we got stuck when dod can have a few years ago. the dvr had not been deployed,

and there was this great idea that it would be attractive. in the and we cannot figure out how to structure a deal with the best content. so as a result, the dvr became the platform of choice because behavior of greek people wanted to see this step want to see. dod became a valuable platform, but much more secondary. i think it is imperative for us as an industry to get behind it, but it is going to require us to agree on value. >> in terms of delivery, how does this all work? i know you have a lot of video, a lot of broadband intensive applications on your huntington post, for example. so, how does this all sort of relationship, delivery, wi-fi? >> we really want to be the arms dealer. i think our job is to build the best content from a partner with the best advertisers. then look to distribution partners for distribution. i think today aol hd is on seven different partners into the

space, washington network -- slauson network, a live news show for the web. we hope we can get distributed across a number of partners. when we look at the future with a capacity this significant companies that have direct consumer access that we want to put our content against. we keep a very close eye on one of the things that will potentially grow and have the adoption. we were talking backstage this weekend with my ten year old sun. he was in front of one of the screens at the apple store. he was like, why don't we have this in our house? was like, what you mean have this and other computer? and he said no, the screen. at the apple store they have all the significant content brands basically with direct access on apple tv. i think, you know, from the eyes of a ten year old to does not know the distribution and those things in general, the attractiveness of how easy things are to use and what the content brands are in general. when we look at the world we say, let's make our content

everywhere, a partner with as many people as possible. and then you really have to take a step back. there is destruction potentially, but i think people have a tremendously strong relationships, and they are in people's homes. so we're trying to build our content for where we think our audiences are. >> is cabled suggesting in the way that, you know, obviously we talk about tv everywhere and all these other concepts, is it adjusting to that needs of a digital company the weight that it needs to? >> i think, first of all, in the last zero months there has been a fairly aggressive push in the tv and cable space for people to start pouring more and more of these brands. people move quickly. two years ago we did not seek. the second piece which is critical. the consumer usage of the design of the boxes, consumer interfaces, really important. as a consumer, you're getting the mobile phone.

you can get fast and easy access to content. whoever serves the consumer from the best will have that advantage in the future. it will be easy to work across distribution, and as more investment goes into content and platforms, hopefully it would get even easier. >> we're talking about technology. i am going to keep asking it until that happens. i know you have the technological ability to get rid of the tape to -- cable box. is it ever going to go the way of the dodo bird? >> yes. although, people from cisco and motorola probably don't want to hear that. forgive me. what is happening is pretty simple. there is a whole bunch of those.

and all devices are being made from those standards. stuffer is being written. millions of people that can write software to the standards. that is the future. our old video platform worked very well for a long time, but it is somewhat archaic. very few people can rights offer to. it is not easy. and so to set top boxes and our existing interface. i think listening to tam and talking about the apple store, a lot of what we can do here is create a better interface. we should not accept technology and content and business models. the technology, can create a much better user interface. our goal is to get a video service that we sell at every single device in your home. using the ip devices that you

buy. eventually most people will have a so-called smart tv which is capable of displaying these services without a setup. some people are buying those today. maybe you will do it through and exports to something, playstation. as long as the blue great players, maybe you will do it through that. it is never ending last. but they are all based around ip standards. we want to be on every one of them with the best interface the weekend. that is what the technology makes available. >> you were talking about business models and making money. i was talking. i saw an ad. and david goes, so, you mean. [inaudible] obviously the hopper, you all probably know what it is. if you don't, it is the kangaroo logo. it automatically skips over commercials. i remember the whole conversation with the dvr, the industry. obviously it got adjudicated when everybody was hopping.

it turns out that people would sit at home and end up watching the commercials even though they have the ability to fast forward it doesn't just top right over them automatically. is that technology something that can be stopped or is it sort of going to happen no matter what? the industry has to find a different way to make money when it comes to ads? >> well, the hopper, it is -- i think it is charlie's way of kind of coming in and raising the flag. it will create a lot of tension and get all of our attention. that is probably a good thing. the fact that we spend over a billion dollars a year on content, we do that because we can get advertising. advertising support. in the end technology like that could create real carnage for the industry. it has not. he has not done it yet with the cable channels. i think it will become something double b part of the

negotiations. charlie is a distributor. in order to recess 14 million homes he needs our content, all of us in the content industry. and so there is not going to be advertising. there needs to be a lot higher subscriber fees. one thing is pretty clear. people do love consuming content on television. with all of the discussion of all these other devices, people are spending more time watching tv than ever. so there is tremendous pull. it is incumbent upon us in the content business to preserve the model so that we can reach people and invest. we don't always win. sometimes you can invest in your market share goes down, but if you're doing a good job creatively creating good brands, stories, characters, you can really win in this business. so i think, you know, it is the fat of the moment. it gets a lot of headlines. in the end i don't think it is sustainable because in order to get our content we will have to work together. ..

>> you can look at apple. the apple store does look sexy and it does feel dynamic grid when you go in there, you feel like wow. but it is still just a device. it is just a device. in order to be compelling, unique content. you need brands that people care

about and stories that people want to hear, you need characters that people can identify with. we have to remember that as an industry. the deals that we did with apple, he didn't make sense for us. it didn't make sense for us at discovery commanded you look at the economics, it doesn't make sense for us as an industry. when we take our content that we spend a lot of money on, whether it is charlie or apple or at the cell phones, we just have to be careful. -- or the web. there is a lot of power in our content, because it destroys the people want to hear and characters that people want to spend time with good we have to remember that. we work worked out a great industry model. if we keep doing that, we can continue to grow. we need to make sure that we put our content on platforms that are sustainably economic. >> if i can jump in, if you think about what we sell on tv, it is a pretty simple idea.

that is a that you subscribe to a package of linear networks, subscribing means that you know the cost ahead of time. you pay for it at the beginning of the month. it is their. when you sit down to watch tv, you maximize the choice. it seems a little quaint and old-fashioned, but fundamentally, that is what we have been selling for the last 40 years. i think that the new technology helps us to make it better, but it does not change the fundamental idea of choice subscription. we can have a better user interface, we talked about that a couple of minutes ago. and we can allow people to watch programs when they want, as opposed to when it was scheduled. whether it is dvr or another

taping, letting people sit down and letting them have the maximum choice. i think it is very powerful. dual stream was advertising its subscription. it has been great for the content creators that we have more tv than we ever imagined when i was growing up. it is good for both sides. i don't think we want to destroy one of those revenue streams. >> how would it affect the business if it does become something popular? the ability to get the odds and, you know, you have subscription fee is. >> i think if you reduce the revenue into the entertainment business, if you could generalize that -- either urchin prices will go up, or there will be less content made. it is not magic.

destroying the revenue will not have the result of people that people think it may have. >> when you were thinking about these channels, how does add revenue play for you? >> it is very big. online, the normal display market online, it probably won't grow this year. it might go down a little bit. the internet itself has a mini version of some of the issues that are facing the cable business. i will give you one example. one thing that we have done. we created this new ad form call project double, which had seven to 14 ads on them. it was a long block of commercials. we decided to put one ad on the page. it is about a third of the page. basically, to force advertisers to do heavy design and heavy video, those types of things that advertising rates have and increased seven to 50 times.

consumers like them. when i listen to the conversation about the ad skipping for cable, because this is something we were concerned about. i look forward, it seems like something that is important. one of the things about the controversial piece, there needs to be project double for video and television and cable where things are thought about much differently. in my house we have a dvr. it gets used on some programming and not on others. the reality is you have a super engaged consumer who you know probably a lot about. the question is, what would you put either run a program or in the programming that doesn't look like the traditional hopper top of the area. i am not as familiar on the cable side with what people are working on the advertising side, but i know there is a lot of thinking on the internet side, which is how you make more engaging advertising that is more tied to help people starting to use the media. the second thing, shipping back

to the mobile question, is how do you create digital mobile. you have to think from a mobile first design principle, which is probably every one of your customers has a smart phone 18 inches away from them, even sleeping. if you don't design your experiences for mobile first, if you take advertising into account for that, i think over the next three or four years, advertising will have an advantage. i don't know what is going to happen with the hopper and other things, but there is a massive opportunity for people to come up with different types of formats that are there, mixing mobile in is a new format. >> in terms of mobile, one of the questions people have, cell phones opposed to cable, there

is a problem. they want the video, but it has to load and then you have to wait. how big of an issue is that? how big of an issue is bandwidth? video with no delay in no problem or waiting to i think it goes back to my wifi comments. we are not in the cellular business, if i could wish that. everybody i talk to in that business says that there is never going to be enough bandwidth in terms of consumption and content and what you can do. that is just physics. i think that wifi will need a lot of your needs, but if you have a mobile network, that will always be somewhat permitted. particularly with video, which

is a big user of the band went. >> that is pretty amazing. it is physics. i just assumed it was a matter of time to make these things available. >> hopefully you are not watching tv in your car anyway. >> i have noticed sometimes they do have those movies. they be we should turn this off when we are driving. david, in terms of your planning for the future, you talked about the shorter form stuff that you put on mobile. you anticipate that changing in terms of what you are offering is the bandwidth changes and it gets bigger? would that change at? right now you are providing exactly what customers want? >> the truth is we don't know what the customer wants. we acquired this company rev-3. their streams were between three

and seven minutes. very different from what we do traditionally. we are very professional conduct, highly produced. this is much more raw and authentic storytelling. 100 million views across all of discovery -- we had about 60% of that. we had 60 million. here is a small company that had 100 million. what that is saying is that there are people out there that don't want to necessarily just see professional content. there is other content they want to see. we acquired this company because we are about to sign curiosity on all devices, on anybody that wants to consume. it is important for us to stay flexible and look in the marketplace and see what is working. we have always been aggressive about not using our content on any platform except for a dual revenue stream file form like turn one. we felt like the business model was not bear to put it on the web.

but we did spend a lot of time digitizing our entire library in working with short form. and we found that what may be logical, which is people would want to watch a show on the phone, they would much prefer watching clips from man versus wild order a little piece of what is coming up on cake box. i don't think we should presume that every device has a similar type of consumption. what is going on on youtube and some of these other small, round up silicon valley companies are important. for us, we expect we will learn a lot. years from now, we hope to have a partnership with glenn britt. it's not that people don't want to watch those tv stories in their living room, but we may be satisfying dressy with different kinds of people in a much different way, in a much shorter form in different ways than we do in our traditional business. i think the answer is, we don't

know. we have to satisfy consumer content on the phone, the web, and every device. >> i think that david is raising the challenge of business models. the technology is ultimately all i.t., all digits. video is made, professionally -- everybody wants access to everything. i think if you think about the traditional linear networks are comes from the broadcasting business, so you have one station, one signal, for multiple people -- and then you have the schedule, if not tuesday night -- it is on tuesday night and you put ads in between, the link is now 22 minutes for the so-called half-hour show. this technology lets you have shows of any link.

>> and if you look at rev-3, most of the stuff you wouldn't see on a traditional set. it doesn't tell a story like tlc. but these curiosities are being satisfied on this platform. for us to mark key priority is growing our channels around the world. but we don't want to wake up one day and find out that these video streams have become an important way people are satisfying curiosity, and we are not there. i think it is really apples and oranges. >> when you talk about length of

show, a half an hour or an hour, you are coming in launching something. are your shows when we different in length when someone comes out with different formats of shows? >> we are experimenting a lot right now. we have some appointment-based stuff right now. we are testing a lot right now. we basically service 30,000 other publishers for their video networks, about 300,000 high-quality clips that we send out to other publishers. i think the average length of time, people are watching video and it seems to be short a growing. number two, when you think about what is going to get attraction in these technology platforms, we started to really test out. two weeks ago we launched a program. if we got 10 or 20,000 people next week.

in the following week it was under 50,000. how do you view for the web or mobile and how do you do it across the spectrum of content. one of the things i would say over longer periods of time is that when you listen, which glenn britt and david zaslav are talking about, you may be likely that the web and mobile is headed in the direction where you have a closed network effect, and that people are kind of knowing what kind of bundles they're going to get, at what places and at what time. it is not happening yet online, but even from testing, i think people will start to rally around those types of programs. >> how would you describe demand for packages that include mobile? since more people have smart phones than dvr's. >> we have not seen that. we have tested with mobile quite a bit. i am not sure what the future will bring. at the moment, people see the

purchase of mobile services and devices is quite different than what they buy for their home. i am not sure i completely understand it, but i think part of it is that individuals choose a mobile device by the wireline service. it seems to make it not naturally put into a package. we try to make all sorts of things available, that is why we are so loving our spectrum. >> that makes a lot of sense. individual decision versus the family decision. i would like to ask a question about apple. i am not a test savvy person at all. i apologize if my phrasing is awkward. we look at apple becoming so dominant and sexy, everyone

wants it, their kids all wanted, we always hear about the system being difficult to work with. the perspective of an operator and cable, how is it working with apple and apple devices, as opposed to whatever, same song order other devices? >> from my viewpoint, we want to be on every device in the home. apple is a wonderful company, and they obviously have a brand that is terrific. i have lots of apple devices personally. but we want to be on every device. whether it is an xbox order a sony playstation or samsung smart tv, we want to be on everything. we want to work with everybody. >> can you tell us, david, what people are watching, not just what they're watching global versus home, but what type of device they are watching on? >> we can tell. >> can you tell what kinds of users, but also the

demographics, and sort of what appears to be the big debate of whether people will start to use ipads or regular devices or it a smaller screen in the form of a smart phone. >> be rather quick, we know what you are watching in the house. if it is in digital format. we don't know if you are actually watching or not, but we can tell what channel you are tuned into. the ability to do anything with that information is very much controlled by the privacy laws. we do have some ability to homogenize the data, make sure that no individual can be identified. things like that. because the industry is fragmented and advertisers would like the data across the country,

>> i think there has probably never been a better time to be in the content business. people are watching more tv than they ever have before. despite the fact that we are not measured on the ipod, our market share grew almost double-digit last year. on our channels, people spending more time with our channels. over time, the ipads will be measured and we will pick that up. everyone of these new devices. all content is agnostic. all we have to decide is what window do we give them the content, do we give them one form or short form, and how much do we charge for it. the fact is, there is this development of all of these different devices and opportunities, i think it presents opportunities for us. we shouldn't get lost in the fact that the business itself is enormously healthy. the cable business is very, very healthy. we are investing $100 million more in content this year than we did last year. esther invested in hundred

million dollars more so than the year before. we believe that we invest in channels, people will be able to grow market share with our brands. double be good for glenn britt, the cable guide cells within our shows. as much as the business is changing, the traditional business of great brands, quality content, great storytelling, that is what gives us the majority of value. all of a sudden, there is a line of other people that want our content. we need to be responsible about making sure we give it good value. if we do, this could be and should be the best time to be in the content business. >> i saw a statistic last week. this is that the average household, not the average person, watched watches tv 400 hours a month. that is a whole lot of tv, and it has been going up.

they do all this for about $75. it is actually quite an economic deal. as we think about the tv space, which is mostly what we talked about, we need to keep that in mind. most of these other things don't offer that kind of value to consumers. that is why it remains in the business. >> thank you very much to all three of you. we appreciate it so much. thank you to all of you. [applause] [applause] >> now a discussion of digital distribution of video, film and music. from the national cable telecommunications annual meeting. julia boorstin spoke with edward burns, and the heads of verizon wireless, comcast, and the vivo music network. >> thank you all for joining us this morning. i want to get straight to the news. dam, i understand that verizon is making a new and exciting

announcement about a new mobile video network. tell us what amuses. >> we waited until today. we thought this was the right atmosphere and the right audience to announce viewdini. it is a mobile portal video aggregation and delivery of mobile content. there is a very unique thing going on right now, and that is the desire of consumers to be able to absorb any video on any device that they have any time that they want. that align with verizon's ltd high-speed network, and what has occurred in terms of the tablet and smart phone industry, this all came together. we have been working on this for a couple of years. this is a verizon wireless product, and we are very proud to announce that comcast is our first partner in us. we are going to be showing it and we will are going to be

going over there after we are done and hope that many of you will come by and see us over there. we are very excited about this. it will be in the market in the next three or four weeks. >> so this is a new application to allow consumers to search for contact. they can search for edward burns. they want to see the movies that he is active in, and they are directed to where, comcast? >> it will take all of the partners and services into play, and then you can do the search which is very simple, and then you can do the research. after you do the search, if you wanted to check on some of edward burns's other movies, you would be able to do that as well, and navigate through it. it is a very simple consumer experience. >> comcast is the partner. what does this mean for comcast? >> we have a partnership with

verizon wireless. it has been a terrific partnership. as the content becomes more mobile and people want to consume it in different places, different content, wherever and whenever they want to, that verizon would be a great partner to help our consumers and customers discover the content is all about discovering the content and getting people to where they want to consume it. rio caraeff, what does this mean for a company like vito? how well the videos interact with a service like this? >> i think it will work really well. we don't try to get people to go to somewhere to watch videos we want to put people where ever the audience wants to be. if justin bieber wants to work with youtube, we will make the videos available there. if lady gaga wants to premiere a video on her facebook page, we support that.

in this model, we would be very happy to make our videos available and are metadata available if you search for beyoncé and you want to watch her and asked them powers, you can watch that. or if you want to watch her concert were grammy performance, you can do that through vevo as well. >> i know that you distributed some of your videos through comcast and other treasury systems as well. what does a mobile distribution platform need for you? >> i think it is indicative of the change in the landscape. in 2008, i released a film directly onto itunes. it was the first film to go out exclusively on a digital platform. 75% of all the journalist said to me that you are crazy. no one is ever going to watch a movie on their computer, let alone on their phone. here we are four years later. it is what he said before, the

when, where, and how. the audience has changed. they aren't nostalgic for the way we consumed and got entertainment. they don't want the dictator, and they don't long for it their primetime programming with families going to sit down at 8:00 p.m. and watch happy days. they want when they wanted. this gives him them that. >> i think one of the things that we found is we actually formed an indie film club. >> for independent filmmaking, it has changed radically. across the country, a lot of the indie theaters have closed. it seems like the audience disappears. what we discovered when collaborating with comcast is actually they are at home in front of their flat screens with surround sound. and they still want this content. they are just not willing to get into the car and drive to the theater. >> so it is important to give it to them on their terms?

>> that is exactly what we are focused on. what really enables us and cause us to start the development on this a couple of years ago, is we saw the capabilities of the ltd network. verizon wireless is the global leader in terms of lte. we handle about 60% of the global traffic. we saw the possibilities and the hunger of consumers to be able to get this information whenever they want on whatever device that they have. and we are very excited that we have the right tool to deliver that. >> rio caraeff, i know that you think about the content being ubiquitous. tell us about that. >> i think that is the way to the physics of the web operate. it is no longer but how do i create values for scarcity. it's about how i create value through given my audience what they want. when they started it vevo about

three years ago, our challenge was not how you put music videos on the internet. that is not a problem that needed solving. it was how do you make the audience that loves music as valuable as the audience that was the loves the super bowl or world cup or the olympics. there are billions of people on the planet who love music. it is a pipeline of the soul, it is a way to elicit an emotional response. how do you make that audience valuable? it is not about selling music to people who do want to buy it. it is about figuring out how do you generate value to billions of people who love something. and how do you give it to them in an easy way. we said let's not create a website and help people to go there -- let's put videos in the highest quality possible and create events and new programming and concerts and put it on youtube, because everybody loves youtube. let's put it on facebook, because everybody is spending a lot of time there.

unless put it on apps and i music. let's embrace this strategy that embraces the culture we live in. >> it seems like a real dynamic you are addressing. between consumers want and technology can enable. it is unclear which is directing which. one thing i am curious from all of you, what you think of the consumer demand right now. is this new verizon mobile platform in response to consumers were leading consumers? >> consumers are very hungry for this. we think this is one of our most important announcements of the year. that is why we held it for today. we see the hunger in consumers using their devices in so many different ways. it was only nine years ago that we all started using text messaging, and we weren't sure that that was going to be a business. now, verizon wireless processes

70 billion text messages a month. this is an evolution in terms of the consumer experience from a mobile platform. and that's where our focus is. >> you think now that you were leading the consumer to the options or are they demanding him? >> i think it is a little bit of both. the broadband capacity that we offer -- there is always demand for more capacity and bandwidth. going all-digital, we are really serving that demand. the demand continued to increase. i think the partnership that we have with verizon wireless helps fuel the demand by being able to offer things in home and out of home settings. i think that the cloud-based nature, a lot of the nonsense unction not unction.

>> i think in some ways the technology has fueled the consumer demand. >> you think about tablets and tablets. the consumer to enter nuzzo, but there they were. all of this demand came out of it. >> now there is a question about the content. how do opportunities impact business? >> there are two very different businesses. there is a very healthy theatrical business. take a look at what a movie like the avengers has done the past two weeks. that audience is feeling healthy robust. on the other side of the spectrum, there are folks making indie films. the idea now that we have a

direct relationship with the consumer, and also reach a wider audience, at the moment when your title has reached mass awareness -- you can go on and do jimmy fallon or conan o'brien, and traditionally, slowly he would rule out over the next eight to 10 weeks to the rest of the country. now, when he do that show, that kid at home in ohio, he doesn't have an art-house theater anywhere near him, he can go on to vevo via comcast or other digital platforms and access the title right away. that is the real game changer for it smaller films. some don't have the advertising budget to compete with the avengers? what is this doing to the music industry? the traditional record business has really been killed over the past few years. is this creating a new revenue for this business?

>> absolutely. we are not in the business of selling music. we are in the business of offering access to experiences that everyone loves. a lot of people think of the music business as the business that they know it today. i look at it a thousand years ago. is it was not a business. it was a public performance am a private performance. only in the last 100 years have repackaged it into an discrete object, give me $10, or vcd. give me a dollar and i will give you an mp3 file. that is a short access on the continuum of time. it is about access to experiences. that is what the future of music and film and television is, and that is the future of books is about. not about owning anything, it is about accessing everything. >> accessing it through broadband. >> i have two terabytes of music at home on my computer.

i can't access it here in boston, so it is useless to me. the utility value has plummeted because i can't access it whenever i want to. but if i can access it wherever i want to, i can appreciate it more and love it more. access creates the opportunity to raise the value of my music collection. to raise the value of my film collection. i don't want to own every movie, i just want to access movies that i want. that is disastrous for the dvd business and economics of traditional hollywood, but good for the consumer because it creates more choices and options and takes away barriers to discovery. when i was growing up, i wanted to like classical music. but i couldn't get into classical music because every cd was $27. i didn't have $27 to buy hundreds of cds. so i didn't get into any classical music at all because it was too many barriers for consumption. now, i can spend $9 a month and listen to thousands and

thousands of classical albums. i can discover anything i want, there is no friction between me and discovering and sampling. that leads to greater enjoyment of music. >> access is much more valuable than ownership? >> i think we are going through a generational shift between a generation that values ownership, to a generation that values access. i think that we live in between both worlds right now. >> all this access is enabled through the cloud of broadband. >> i think one of the most important things in rio caraeff's comment, massive amounts of data is that we are talking about. data for it navigation, research, consumers will get overwhelmed. that is one of the principles that we have in viewdini, is simplicity. we want customers to have an outstanding experience.

we want to make sure that they come back and they can use it. but their curiosity is piqued and they are hungry for more consumption of content. we want to make sure that if they are. that is the principle on top of our high-speed network, our lte network that we are focused on. >> i think it is interesting. both you and rio caraeff are content providers, and beer distributors. i think the conversations between content providers are much more interesting these days. it opens up a lot of possibilities that we didn't have before. >> the other thing is best what is changing is the type of content. you are starting to see web series or whether so does get more popular. take a look at something like funny or die and these short

skits. it is the perfect thing to consume on your phone. there is a way to break up the indie film industry to break it up in smaller chunks, taking a program like madmen, changing that hour-long program. it is like digesting a massive novel to the one-off episodes that used to get. it is interesting. years ago, you go down to the basement, their kid sitting down and watching tv. nowadays, the announcers and

their in a beautiful screening room on two different laptops. this is the different futures. >> the other thing that i think that ties into that that is important, we are the largest provider in the united states. 300 million users across all of the carriers, and now with the interests and the desires that consumers have, if you are a content provider, those 300 million customers would be of interest to you in terms of the delivery mechanism and the vehicle. i think we are at the very beginning stages of that information. i think it is an important profile of the wireless industry. >> earlier mention the massive amount of data. streaming videos and movies and music takes up a lot of data. he recently revised your data cap and raise it. what do you guys think, how will

it change with how we pay for and consume data? >> from our perspective, we have a more rigid structure in place. we want to make it more flexible for the customer and give them more choice. if they wanted to consume terabytes, for example, they could be provided for. it is about flexibility and choice. things have seemed well accepted, and i don't know how you guys would look at it from a provider's perspective,. >> i think it is reasonable to pay more when you want to use more. and i think that is certainly see that there is a finite amount of capacity, whether you're talking to a wireless network or not. i think at the end of the day, the worst thing that can happen is when audiences, consumers, viewers, users, feel like they are -- they like their ability

to consume and discover and share is limited. i can't watch that movie because i have a warning saying it was 80% of my capacity. or i can't upload this video for my kids because of -- i'm afraid and i don't understand where i am at in regards to my cab sb. that retards usage and slows adaption and it's not good for anybody. i think that the ability, if i use more, i should pay more. i totally understand that. kicking people off because they hit their cap and cutting off their service, i don't think is great. i would like the idea -- i like the idea of optically changing the way you perceive your limits. and being able to offer people unlamented consumption if you are willing to pay for it. i think that that is always a reasonable thing. >> dan?

>> you mentioned the mornings. friendly consumer reminders is what we like to refer to him as. [laughter] it depends on where you are a. >> at. >> yeah, yeah. on that principle, we get notices for data consumption to consumers at 90% and a hundred%, and we also give them an option to continue to upgrade the data. our focus is to have a phenomenal consumer experience and to never have that consumers surprised. we have gotten great feedback from the consumer community around those notices, and then we have tiered pricing. one of the things that consumers are going through is to understand what a gigabyte means and what -- how much that is. we work very hard at the point of sale and service delivery centers to help educate consumers around that. i think that the industry, the

wireless industry is doing a good job in responding to those needs. i do expect that the consumer interest in data and data consumption is going to continue to increase. and i think that you will see that the cheers for consumption will continue to evolve. >> it seems inevitable that people would consume more data, whether it is wireless or broadband. rio caraeff, are you saying that consumers need to be reeducated about how one pays for this kind of thing? >> i think it is an evolution. i don't think that consumers should have to understand what a gigabyte is. i think it is useful that they understand what it is in the context of what they are paying for. is that a gigabyte or not, if i watch the show, is that a gigabyte or not. it is a logical leap that consumers should not have to

make. on my train ride to boston, i was on my verizon lte i've had. i had a 10 gigabyte ipod. i was not sure where it stood. that is always a red flag to me, if i feel it, other people are feeling it. that can retarded option and consumption. i think at the end of the day, people -- i'm not disputing that there should be -- people should pay more for access, and if you ask us more coming you should pay more. i'm happy to pay more. i just never wanted to have that cut off were never wanted to feel like i shouldn't watch a movie because i may or may not be near my cap. >> it sounds like you need a friendly reminder. [laughter] >> yeah. >> are new services like viewdini, i would expect them to

drive so much more video consumption. will they be driving things to the more four g. landscape? this is something i know we have talked about. is that assuming any more high-level? >> from our perspective, we compare the rollout of our lte network, are data consumption, which is only been commercial for it 18 months, it is much deeper than the three g. network was after three or four years. it is all driven by the quality of the devices.. in the consumer divider desire.

that is why we are so focused on the industry and the spectrum of the industry. we think it will, you know, it is the cornerstone of meeting consumer demand inequity to say one thing. i am constantly in awe of how fast my lte network is and how deep the coverages. if you were to ask me 10 years ago, will i be able to have broadband speeds, you know, faster than what i did in my residential home at that time, on the go, i would've said a radio network never would've done that fast. i am running speed tests and telling people how great it is with friends. it is really amazing that we sometimes take for granted that we have this ubiquitous wireless network that operates at incredible speeds. that is available today.

we blink like it is no big deal. for me, it's like we are living in the future. >> just yesterday, you were going to give your subscribers access to your wifi hotspots. >> that's right. it's a partnership amongst providers to have a common standard so that one could, in effect, rome from one area to another. if you are a comcast subscriber in philadelphia and go to new york, you could access the time warner network. dan might have been speaking about this. and i think it is very complementary. the spectrum and wifi work together in the home. and out of the home. i think that they are symbiotic and complementary. i think it is a great thing for the consumer at the end of the day to have access to both wifi and the lte network. >> and it makes it easier to

consume more of the movies and videos. now, have to ask, on the heels of the facebook ipo on friday, there has been talk about social media. i'm curious how you see social media and facebook impacting this. you see do you see an impact with social media? >> again, it is a complete game changer. facebook and twitter has changed the conversation for us. as far as people accessing content via facebook, i will be curious to see where we go next five years with that. >> for us, it has been a tremendous and powerful evolution in the history of music. music has always been social, it you have always listened to music with friends, see music

together, told your friends about music. it is the best form of marketing on the planet. when music is good and muzio. it is a natural evolution of that. for us, we move to an all facebook registration. we saw only six days ago, 1600% increasing increase in the amount of music shared and music consumed. for us, we work closely with them. >> we do as well. i look at the importance of social media being how fast it is helping change the industry. consumers are the thought leaders now. it is not one or two individuals. facebook and the other social media is really enabling back. i think it is going to help drive the speed of innovation. it will help drive competition, which is very, very good for our industries. we want to see extremely

aggressive competition. if we have that, innovation will occur. consumers always win in a highly competitive world. >> i think we see it as social to an interesting way ensuring the content with friends. because it is cloud enabled and it lets us integrate applications like facebook or platforms and sharing platforms easily into the experience, i think it is a matter of customizing them for the viewing experience. i'm not sure that consumers want to put up a browser on their screen. i think they want to have it integrated. we integrated rotten tomatoes, for example. the beauty of having everything up in the cloud is that we can do that in the matter of a week or two, versus what used to take months. we are able to move at a faster pace and meet consumer demand. >> the question is whether your customers with -- whether they

will feel that they want to share automatically. will comcast television be integrated into the social cost. right now, when i read a story on the news, it publishes automatically. when i watch a video on vevo, it publishes automatically. unless i opt out, it is shared automatically. that has been an issue of debate, and there are even some legislation laws about it as well. that would be an interesting evolution. it is not about sharing a show, it is about what my television service share automatically on my behalf of my preference of iowa to. >> i don't know. i think it's a good question. i am not sure whether customers would want it or what the regulatory implications would be. at the end of the day, i kind of go with the consumer demand -- it will pull the technology in the industry where it wants to

go, but i'm not sure how that will play out. what do you think? >> well, i -- consumers are driving all of this. the technology certainly leads them in certain cases. it always seems to be about the kids. and it may kind of dictate to us a lot of what is going on. >> there is some really cool technology that addresses these consumer demands. we have to wrap it up here, but i want to thank our panelists, rio caraeff, dan mead, and neil smit. thank you so much for joining us. >> we have several lemons tell you about. tomorrow morning come in a senate subcommittee holds a hearing on government contractors. that is at c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span 3, the senate finance committee will cut government programs to assist poor families. the program expires later this

year. president obama: on a personal note, michele and i are grateful to the entire bush family. george, i will always remember the gathering you posted. plus, you also let me a really good tv sports package. [laughter] president obama: i use it. >> last week, portraits of george w. bush and laura bush were unveiled at the white house. it was their first visit since leasing office. >> in 1814, dolly madison famously save this portrait of the first george w. bush.

[laughter] now, michele, if anything happens,. [laughter] there is your man. >> watch the entire event online at the c-span video library. >> over the next hour, more cable coverage. after that, a forum on the future of television. at first, head of the federal communications commission, ncta president and ceo michael powell for a little more than 20 minutes. >> mr. chairman, good morning. it is great to see you. the dynamics of the convention are always interesting. less than a week ago, you finally got your full complement of commissioners.

both of whom have left us by coming up to the cable show in the first week. what does that mean for you? is that exciting? new difficulties? >> and makes it harder to get conference rooms. but it is great. well, i have been very lucky. we have had a very well functioning committee. we have a lot that we have gotten done and we have done a lot on a bipartisan basis. we have been able to disagree without being disagreeable. now we have to very experienced, smart commissioners. i couldn't be more excited. >> did you know them before? >> i did, i did. i think gentry worked for me. >> i think that jessica worked for me at one point. it is great to have you.

if you can tell, if you have been here for a little while, the cable industry is very focused on innovation, even though it is sort of an overused word. it the next explosion of creativity and products and services -- i wonder if that is something you have observed things that interest you most about what you see in the innovations around video. >> absolutely. i don't think that innovation is an overused word. i'm excited about the innovation we are seeing across the broadband economy. starting at higher level, we are seeing german this innovation and investment in networks, wired and wireless. in apps, and a number of important areas. we have regained world leadersh.

three years ago, only 12% of broadband networks on the wired side were able to consist of systems. we set a goal for 2020 of megabits for homes in the united states. we are well on her way to hitting that goal. >> that is traffic. we have been bragging what a difference a day wakes. what a difference a day makes. it was really article for you, as the chairman, to advance the united states to improve the pace of the broadband. would you say to you are relatively satisfied? we always have more to do, but

do you feel that under your leadership, the country and industry is achieving what he set out to do? >> yes, we are working in the right direction. we are moving in the right direction. we gained global leadership in broadband. mobile innovation and u.s. the envy of the world. we are going to be the first country in the world to rollout 4-g. we are making tremendous progress in terms of speed. the applications economy is incredible on all platforms. working together, we are starting to make progress on the adoption issue. the broadband adoption issue. it is interesting. sometimes, i like the fact that we challenge ourselves as a country. it is good, and that is what motivates us. it is also true that when i go and meet my counterparts from around the world, they are increasingly envious of what they see in the u.s. and around rock band and innovation.

it is not time to let her feet off the gas, we need to keep moving forward. we have a lot of challenges we need to face. some challenges come from our success. they come from increased demand. increased consumer consumption and demand, for both wireless and wired services. that is a problem we want to have the country, and we have to work it out. >> you have been a great spokesman about wireless. there is a kind of esoteric dispute about whether wireless is a real broadband service. the real connective access device to the internet. you seem to be a passionate spokesman for the view that it is. it has real value for consumers in that regard. can you say a little bit about that reality, that complement and competitor reality? >> all of the above. we don't know what role mobile broadband will play yet. we don't know yet what people

will want for different services. and that's fine. some of the most exciting things that will happen in the next few years are things we don't know about and can't predict. one of the things about wireless that is exciting, and the cable industry has been a leader, is wifi. in unlicensed spectrum that was put on the market, precisely to lead to innovations that no one would expect. it has led to wifi, which is playing a very important role in consumer's lives and off-road in cable is a structure. it is was very pleased to see the announcement yesterday. a number of different cable companies have said essentially that they are going to enable consumers to do wifi roaming. ..

>> and market the and congested, the importance of

the towers. is that an important role of wi-fi going forward? >> absolutely. it is part of the solution in the category of the kind of problems that you want to have it is mobile congestion. but then we have no demand. we have the spectrum crunch because of the incredible people have innovated and they are hungry to use them. but we have a limited resource spectrum that nobody anticipated the increase. so we have to do that now

like look harder and more carefully at government spectrum. we have to make that available more quickly and think of ideas like sharing the government use and commercial use and why fight is a sharing technology. this is an enormous opportunity to be the world and a new category to matter globally for many years. >> to share the optimism of the deployment story and in a minute read talk about the remaining percentage we have

a fantastic service but five of those that are not there i think this is something the industry recognizes and you challenge us to solve the problem. >> about one-third of the people in the united states to not have broadband access. as you believe this is the essential platform for people to participate and access to education it is nowhere near good enough.

a difficult challenge of meadows silver bullet so connect to compete to the initial initiatives starting this several years ago the etfs of broadband providers offering low-cost broadband to low income people and the family is with kids on school lunch programs. this is a big deal. i very pleased this is happening in recommend the industry to step up and work through the difficult operational challenges to roll this out. but we will see exciting

results and we will see other parts of that ecosystem. the ad council announces it will make digital literacy and broadband adoption of a campaign priority. to help drive broadband adoption and digital literacy. >> one of the things that i thought was unique with the adoption gaap with the component of the story, may not even be the most significant you found at as well.

>> to many americans that lack basic digital skills. study reported yesterday's half of american businesses are having trouble finding people to fill available jobs because they cannot find people with suitable skills. 66% to not have digital skills but to up or the resume it is a major issues and if we don't tackle this we will fall behind in the country it is an important part of the campaign. >> is this something the cable industry has committed

itself fully and and with our self-interest we expect to be proud they give very thing you have then there are elements to innovation that we experience the see if changes breathtaking 1/2 to constantly be reevaluating what you're doing. one area to touch without controversy, in the internet ecosystem, all companies are experimenting with pricing. it is not exclusive to

cable. wireless companies, satellite, pricing based, this is understandable in the past but what are your thoughts today? they are rustling what gig rate. but it is consistent. >> the business model innovation is very important particularly in new areas on broad band. 1.2 view said there is only one permissible pricing model. i did not agree and the commission did not agree. with usage based pricing could be healthy and

consumer choice and competition. and then to resell to and lower prices for less broadband. so it is completely appropriate. >> if you do not walk through this hall is the programming distribution right or wrong ng can influence the dynamic. i take no current position. [laughter] how do see your issue?

>> there is a different set of issues as you mentioned. first, programming has the right to charge for their programming. the framework that covers was put in place 20 years ago was relatively rigid come with their questions if the framework addresses the issues that are coming up more and more agreements particularly broadcasters which is permissible. we have seen blackouts and heard from consumers that they had the effect on them.

one of the things that came up is shared services agreements. there is some broadcasters who in addition to the gift -- negotiating would fade permissible anomaly has agreements with the third station then they negotiate together. that raises real issues. >> shia's the conversation morris for your 2013 through the new telecom law with the industry we hope there could be a way to find accommodation.

every chairman has tried it. as them residents undermine the they do. to strike a balance in the last word on the grounding the achievement. >> of the entire bipartisan basis it would that have happened but for those who don't follow the ins and outs fundamentally about to transform the universal service to focus on television service to broadband. to the main communications platform.

from those fiscal constraints that recognizes and certainly not driving the national broadband objective. with cable providing broadband many parts of the country of this program was spending consumer money to provide broadband without the unsubsidized competitor in the market. that does not make sense. with 93% cable penetration

in with the geographic size. it is an incredible another 7% to live in areas without broad band and the structure. within to shift optimally, efficiently and parts of the country that don't have it. and then for the stakeholders. >> we tried to get all americans on the affordable platform. thank you for your dream to

bring that about. chairman of the fcc, julius genachowski. [applause] >> they q for being with us. in 20008 murrieta game change was a definitive book. has there been a game changing moment in 2012 or what could be? >> i think there has ben for the latino committee and that was even before mitt romney became the frontrunner saying the

answer to the immigration issue is the deportation of undocumented immigrants because the hispanic voter this but the jobs in the economy, health, education that they care about is jobs. 53% unemployment. it is definitely immigration issues. write off the bat obama had 60% of support and romney has 25%. to change that, i don't know what hast happened then he is accused of flip flopping. so it will be uphill battle.

>> the game changing will lead to? >> the call that devolving. not flip-flop think any more. [laughter] >> we had it interesting campaign so far. it could be the showdown with iran with the military conflict and then the energy prices. and search and incumbent the $4 gas went up again and it could be devastating. domestic it is not dramatic but to cede the unemployment report that is the psychology of the electorate. people start to feel better

about the economy it could start to change. >> and then to react to that then will change everything. >> part of the changing technologies we have seen in the industry. with roosevelt the debate of 1960, where are we 2012? >> i remember when i had a pencil and notebook. things 13 team. you can embrace it. if you run from that you are at obsolete -- obsolete. you cannot tell people

especially anybody under 40. in terms of politics changing phenomenally. because campaigns don't have to do that. text messages, they raise money, with the campaign of the old-fashioned way but now it is done on cellphones. technology changes everything. >> bid is more important the way we go at an issue. i will spend the rest of my life highly read win the war in iraq have the president

could talk of santo war. the critical media today is totally different today. those people look at it to your then make their case to say it is the clash of people. the country does not their group of ideologues wanted the war and would question the completion of iraq and not allow people to say let's get even. critical in depth analysis and david the challenge and a reckoning there we did not have been. because of the depth of argument new morrice the

president said get in bet with his thinking. no. question it. we were the bad guys had read change that overnight with limited ability? changing the definition of when to go to war? the media was intellectually embedded. more the safer said it is not winning the war. also with the imbedded thinking we have to be with the military that is why it is different. >> read took three years to realize you could not win that war. the argument and diversity of opinion, that is gone. thank god for cable.

without cable is just thinking and abetted thinking which is dangerous in a democracy. >> the other side of the argument called the cable chatter the left talks to the left and right talks to the right and it is corrosive of our democracy with the rise of journalism. >> i do think it is very dangerous. nowadays they blunt the news on what they want to hear and what to listen to people that they agree with. so there is a fine line between news and commentary. the average voter does not know the difference. visually they look the same.

unless you sell yourself as a commentator, i remember new jobs was very critical when he attacked immigrants i sent him in e-mail saying you're giving an opinion if you are supposed to be a news person. at the beginning of my program it says news and opinion. but it is not clear what moment is the news. >> is very clear. people are thinking all the time. the argument for the vietnam war and the iraq war was commentary. the case for the war was opinion. there is not an objective reason. that was the neocon community.

it needed to be looked at critically. visit and the station wanted to go to war. i don't think ronald reagan would have. that is an analysis. but the idea we should not be argumentative with cable? the imbedded thinking is scary. the president had his own government owned newspaper like we should question and criticize. >> no doubt people the zero he gives his opinion. [laughter] but it is dangerous if they cannot tell the difference

they don't know what they are listening to. you know, how to find the channel because you look for it. your not overwhelmed by msnbc. you are aware of al sharpton but you listen and respect and learn things. especially those i disagree with. >> and it is very important. i do think for those of us who want to be in the middle of we have a challenge to make them more provocative. >> everybody has a different point* of view. >>

[inaudible] >> [laughter] that is an opinion. that is a funny line. >> the people are part of the challenge. [laughter] it is a challenge. you have to study and learn. but people want to make this his fault or fox's fall. you study your opponent. it is also apparent talent -- to reach the age of maturity. >> you want the and check to observe herbert barges offer an opinion there is nothing wrong with advocacy journalism or objective

journalism. >> there are three lovell's that we do at the msnbc. number one tell the argument , never to try to analyze who will win. but i was amazed at the state of why saw with the political mishandling. that the thought all i am routine against yet to all three layers news, analysis and that is useful. >> it is important but when people base political decisions on opinion and not fact. you do need a prospective

but it needs to be clear to the audience and unfortunately they are not as sophisticated. >> you don't think the average viewer knows the irony this fair and balanced they know what is a joke. everybody who watches fox know that is ironic and fun loving by roger ailes. they know that it is a right wing. >> you are underestimating your audience. they get it. >> there should be in on the apprenticeships with english version of latino news. >> exactly. >> in addition it abc and

univision. it will be digital the beginning of the following year it will become a network. we realized there was a void where a specific audience english dominant latinos second-generation and the audience was interested. and they should be 2050 they will be 30% of the population in this country. it is with the latino perspective. they have a choice to watch english tora spanish. not because of the language but the content. and hopefully the goal the

will fill the void to give people what they bought two here. >> calling it one of the most explosive moments known about the affairs and my question is what rethinking? >> take the -- take away the word alleged. [laughter] with the question was one x. y. a. if accused him and then he asked for some fans pacific. we had a conversation their rehab conversation and of think there is any debate it is not a relative news

question. i said no. was story of the day that is the first question i would ask him. i will ask him the question he will turn and watch at me and will say nasty things about me personally and we have to stay there. but that is what happened. i did my job. >> he was doing his job and said this is a great debate. i said i thought i was despicable? >> was said that they great debate? [laughter] >> what does that tell you? insana day?

it is off the wall. >> allot of people said that is part of the primary. i don't know. that they may get it wrong if they'd make it wrong. altmann leed they served a great purpose. >> by the way in all fairness there are two questions. want everybody wants to ask and then the question that david gregory asked about marriage equality that may not have been spontaneous

but it was the news. it catches the% off guard with the talking points and the old stand donald said the question that it bugs you and they will not ask it. the media is terrified of the hostility that is the great quality of what you did. >> this is a quote. yes or no question chris matthews. [laughter] good luck. "2008 come i have to tell you as part of this election the feeling most people get when they hear barack obama speech i find a thrill going up my leg. i don't have that too often. is the thrill there today?

[laughter] >> you had done your reporting act c-span you would check said the exact same vein in 2004. >> this is 2012. >> i know. do you are reporting first. [laughter] i also said after read just had the first african-american president you did not our -- offer that. of that makes me look sharper. [laughter] i have been reading ronald reagan i do have a physical reaction talking about my country. only in this country is my story possible. that gets to me. the matter the politics his

story is amazing. that was my definition of american exceptional loathsome. this is a great country. i am thrilled by it. a mid to say it. tom brokaw would not. i am an traditional% i have traditional values. perhaps i have not said so because i give a lot of jackasses a chance to talk about it. >>host: thank you, chris. [laughter] >> i hope you feel satisfied to ask the most obvious question raised by every horse is asked and the tangle tells me about their orientation. >> including on that note. [laughter] >> not there is anything wrong with it. 1/2 to throw that out.

but think you for giving that souffle last night when your brain exploded to ask me about it. >> maria, finish the sentence, barack obama or mitt romney will been because? >> >> cnn. i cannot wait. >> i think barack obama will win because. [speaking spanish] [laughter] that means it is better to have the bad one that you know, then what you know, nothing about to and the mitt romney will win because [inaudible] >> if obama wins it will be

because unchallenged focuses on the election and the demographics and the easing of it eke that day's economic anxiety but if it is mitt romney it goes back to ronald reagan. are you better off than four years ago? no. mitt romney. nice guy but not ready for the job. >> to quote to our numbers guys, too early to call. nobody knows if the election will be close. i do think it is too early to call. the debates will be spectacular. everybody will watch it and a love it.

24/7 debate about each debate. i think we're in the preseason of the most exciting political season we have never had. it will be awesome. to asymmetric forces after a kid who has run tour three times and bad name is familiar but the democrats get the hottest and. watching him yesterday's dealing with the press conference he still has acuity, articulation to match romney it will be one hell of the debate. baidu think the president's jobs performance is writing on the s&p which is a dangerous place. >> 10 percent turnout will be latino. >> comeback to c-span

tomorrow morning. >> i would be thrilled to be there. [laughter] [applause] >> the theme of this is who is a few were is the? or it should be called a boost user is it? let's start with you because you are my boss. >> you have journalistic freedom. speaking last summer the tv

everywhere concept, how much has that moved and how much have they embraced the concept of tv everywhere? >> they give you. huge success. you just heard the sports guys saying the one of the most powerful things put sports on demand. tv arizona where is being adopted everywhere. this is a huge success and initiative. but the success of netflix that they want their

favorite shows and network. then we've just have to do it faster and faster. they should be proud faster than ever before. even europe they are adopting it hbo. all overseas territories territories, all you did say and eastern europe to the same thing. convergence of the internet to with television. >> there seems to be a more collegial atmosphere. >> it will be fall. [laughter] >> how do you maintain a

competitive edge? >> so work game with lots of other people to get the content. >> there needs to be a recognition day and and day out one of the real challenges it is in experience that works for the consumer. but you kn3 experience that works for the consumer. but you know, what you will get. you know, if you are getting 22 episodes or five episodes but we have to find a way with these experiences, easier to use, more accessible, there is a win-win at one level

with the consumer knows what to find within to see the hodgepodge shows and episodes, we found it by creating experiences. >> nobody is sure if you if you are with that they did not eat their lunch lourdes dinner. >> fell little bit of both. i don't think there is black and white. if there is the are of no way to learning the new lot of the advance to we have

billions of dollars of viewing. >> all of these pacific's but the cartoon network is not with netflix and it goes up. is there cause for concern? for people who go with you see their rates go down? how much of nickelodeons problems are yours? >> with netflix programming strategy is around negative engagement with personalization so people taste is so diverse no specific show has said high a concentration to see cause and effect. madmen in the gap between

season for and seize 105 ruiz brought in 1 million viewers because they could see the show and catch up. whether or not we took 15 minutes of fuelling, by a don't know. put their is the purple way with the right places fee to laughs how fast everything is moving, where it is headed become aware hour the perils wyss family give you want me to wrap up? yesterday reheard something that was fascinating. we were going to a consumer

who once to own it and another who wants to access. and as it relates to tv ever looking at the at multiple channel distributing the fastest growing segment now putting content on tv now we have 10,000 titles and now we are expanding to something that delivers we have made huge progress. you had to negotiate content is inaudible and we are he is somewhere between the two.

my broadband plot form spent years to build that out and 40% of my broadband customers have a netflix stream in their home in march. that is an important product to them. they had teeeleven thousand streams serves in my eighth customers' homes. if i want to live in a row of accidents this would not happen. >> with the waves it shows off it is weird. any of their self-interest? the other way is given the multitude of places. >> dislike hbo.

>> showtime, they don't get paid to make money. the incentive is to deliver service and people want to subscribe. it is interesting and lead to a lot of focus the rest of the networks are from advertising. the fact you can have targeted programming with the big report that same programming also supports a particular brand has been the thing that is why then

television first been around the world. a lot of the economic success of cnn bloomberg comes from the subscribers support. they want to get to the surge in view more depth of analysis this is a very healthy model as we should remember, the television business asking the google people we look at customer use. if you look at television television, everything is up.

programming investments everything is up and the internet use gen makes it more vibrant and healthy. >> >> so the ability to find what you want to find two inaccurate the reflect the business today and purely beyond the mechanics what they don't capture is to get these traces of the opportunity to have events

or programming targeted to a particular sector with new appeal to everybody. said the appeals to a segment. >> you don't care how they watch your content? >> if they have a choice they prefer the opportunity to watch that in your house but it is the convenience and accessibility but clearly there is of value for convenience. watch it when you want to. >> and sylvester stallone

private viewing screen there was a moment to say you have novelty the? they said i watch your show. to have any idea how baby your head is? >> let me bring you in here. is there a conflict of promoting brands over customer's description fees? we all have a release and ship with the user. the network or the pop warm

the all have a relationship. we have to understand this is getting more complex and the customer has choice. and they are more in control with leverage. that is the tata. >> it could be in business. we are all successful. after the sensitive not to the competition but understand the economic model. to monetize the content i

need to work with him doll platforms to consume it. it is not a competition issue. >> this to have a system in the end people watch their tv shows. always in the advertising business. and then to create dangerous moments then to put more pressure on the transaction aside. and then to have been tied

is the long-term future of netflix going that way? what does that leave for your relationship? particularly what we do that is centered around the one hour drama that is high risk generally a the best place where they lay and 3-yard directly competitive and hbo and showtime we have to get those shots.

we have to have a better economic model spending a lot more license a concept. very high the serialized. and i am producing a show with fox television right now. for the single most important focus for your company? >> that is the heart of what we do. and has zero bid up the broader universe as some fragmentation but the pie gets larger.

i the content will get more valuable. we just don't take content here are in their regions is what lowered drive us for word. >> willow that continue? >> it is a double-edged sword but the event content those with of cost if we continue around the world to drive business for word.

to manage the economics. and then to package the support the driving force but it does not get fragmented that is not get a fragmented with the importance is second to none in. >> with the ring goal a number of households without a television set is raising. with the conventional way to get "the daily news" moves very fast from newspapers to online.

remember how this started. it turns out that did not have been. year in the middle of of pretty severe worldwide recession endorse both growth period. but household formation has been flat to. that is why you have not had basic growth of subscriptions. those who put the accord weren't economically challenged households that did not have broadband connections. it is not like it was computer