blown up by a u.s. missile strike fired from a drone while he was eating lunch with his cousins in yemen. the u.s. government is still imprisoning 166 people in gitmo indefinitely without charge. you know, the u.s. operates secret prisons all over the world at so-called black sites where torture still occurs to this day. a yemeni journalist -- i'm sorry, a somali journalist is currently being imprisoned right now at the request, direct request of barack obama himself for lotterring things about -- for reporting things about, actually, cia black sites and prisons in somalia. so the notion that the u.s. government is a democracy and other governments are authoritarian nightmares i think is really something that needs to be contested, because i don't believe it's true, actually. [applause] and i think, i think it's really

incumbent on people in this country to focus on what our government is doing. i believe that it's important to look at what happened in places like tee news ya, you know, using surveillance equipment that is produced and sold by united states companies. those products are being used by the cia as well which kills people in drone strikes even when it doesn't know what their names on in strikes based on terrorist patterns or something that we don't even get to understand. so, again, you know, the u.s. is involved in extensive operations that violate all sorts of basic human rights all over the world, and the cia and nsa and the fbi are using these technologies to pursue those programs. so i just really want to caution the dichotomy that people draw between, you know, the u.s. on the one hand and china and iran on the other. i don't think it's so simple. >> i'm getting a lot of really great questions in.

a lot of them have to do with what are we supposed to do with all of this. about half of the questions are what are we supposed to do about this. i believe it's an hour-and-a-half long panel, if it's not, someone should tell me some. with that in mind -- okay, it is. i am planning on dedicating at least the last half hour of this talk to the what do we do about it question. and maybe now is the time to get started. i thought this was a really interesting, um -- well, actually, there's one more question i have before we dye into that. dive into that. i think that this is a particular issue we're sort of delving into. are there particular groups that suffer more as a result of surveillance than other groups? anybody on the panel want to kind of speak to that or have some insights into it?

seeta? >> so historically, you know, there are certain kinds of communities that have been targeted more than others. you know, in the work that i've done around data profiling, i've looked at historical cases of nonviable profiling, so thinking about red lining, thinking about racial profiling, thinking about medical research and bio profiling. that's happened across time in the united states. so thinking about the tuskegee case, for example, when african-american men were targeted as research subjects and used unethically to discover or, basically exploit, them for discovery of causes and impacts of syphilis. so there's a long history of surveillance and targeting that happens, and that unfairly in

the united states falls upon the most marginalized communities; mostly african-americans, increasingly latino, increasingly new immigrant populations. and, again, it's, for me it's not just a question of government surveillance, though i think that is a really important area of concern. i think it also relates to corporate surveillance. so now we see these technologies being used to categorize. one person has looked at advertisements they're getting, and, in fact, some of the advertisements they're actually getting are related to, i think it's called insta check me. it basically facilitates the process of pegging an african-american-sounding name to incarceration history, right?

and so there's a way in which we're categorized by these new technologies that i think really adversely affects both how you're per sued online and what -- perceived online and what you receive online. and i think the repercussions are dangerous. sometimes as dangerous as being targeted one-on-one by the government, right? because it means that you are being welcomed into a world where you're systematically excluded, or you're systematically tagged in a particular way. >> yeah. i would just add to that as far as government surveillance is concerned, it's very clear who the targets are. the targets are people of color, poor people through the drug war which is a massive driver of government surveillance, through targets are immigrants, immigrant populations which are profiled extensively through programs like secure

communities, they are muslims, especially right now in this country. muslims are the new communists, basically. and dissenters. anybody who raises their voice against the government and says i don't like what you're doing. documents just came out last week showing dhs was involved in extensive surveillance of the occupy movement. two people standing on a street corner warranted a report and all sorts of e-mails between people who are supposedly involved in protecting us from terrorism. so, i mean, yeah, hardly anything has changed, i think, since the bad days of cointelpro, and that's one of the reasons why we need to actually look at home as well. >> um, we have a bunch of interesting questions, and i want to ask some of them. one of them was about ecpa reform which we talked about earlier. we referenced the electronic communications privacy act. this was the bill passed in 1986 which was supposed to protect

pryce but now has dangerous loopholes that are allowing courts to make the argument that they can have access to your e-mail after it's six months old, or maybe they could have access to your location data. we've fought back pretty effectively and also to your data in the cloud. the question is, given the willingness of intermediaries, those are companies like google and facebook and such, to voluntarily turn over data to the government, how meaningful is ecpa reform? and what can we do about it? does anybody want to take that? >> i did, but i've talked a lot. [laughter] >> as a nonlawyer i can take a stab at it which is to say that part of what we've been talking about on this panel is legal solutions are not the only solutions that are in place or that are in our tool kit to do something about the problems we face with the ever-shifting sands of surveillance and pryce online, right? from where i sit, i see very

little hope in reform for not just ecpa, but also other interesting privacy legislation. partly because it's such a complicated issue, and it's so entrenched, and lobbying is really powerful. and exactly as the questioner kind of implied, that, you know, corporations can and will do what they want based, you know, given a set of circumstances. so today may, in fact, turn over -- they may, in fact, turn over data if that is in their best interest, if that doesn't interfere with their bottom line, for example. so, you know, for me -- and we can talk about this later because i do actually want to hear what peter has to say -- i think that we have to think broadly about how we engage in this issue and where we engage in this issue and what kind of long-term struggle we want to commit to to make things percent. >> peter? >> yeah. i'm not going to speak against

the power of some really interested congressperson to force some change by the corporations. representative markey just sent letters to the major mobile telecommunications providers asking about their assistance to law enforcement, and he got back some very revealing responses from every, every major u.s. telecom showing their 1.3 million requests for user data in 2011. that was, you know, two years ago. think about what it's like now. these weren't voluntarily given, but this was an effective action by a congressman, and it sent precedent. we've got transparency reports from google, microsoft, twitter, dropbox, others. >> what is in those reports? what do they show in those transparency reports? >> so they differ a little bit, which is good. we're still working out the formula. the basic day saw the number

of -- data is number of requests, user data, different types of data from your basic sub subscriber information to your content, your location. >> i just want to jump in there. so he's talking about reports that are produced by companies voluntarily -- google, facebook -- that say how many times the government has come to them and said i want to see user data. go on. >> yeah. their policy is for complying with those requests, for processing those requests, you know, who it goes to, what team of lawyers, how it's translated. you know, these are quite often from foreign governments. and how many they complied with and how many they rejected and on what basis. this is just the start, and, you know, google has shown this information for the copyright side as well. dmca removal requests and, you know, we want more transparency which lets us see, you know, if the government's not going to reveal it, u.k. government

reveals it. they have a whole office that issues a report every year issuing just the this kind of transparency data. it would be great if the u.s. government released their own data that we can match against what the corporations say, but it's one area where they've been responsive. and we're pushing telecoms to achieve their own transparency reports voluntarily. >> i'm going to go to jonathan, and what i'm going to ask jonathan to do is talk about sort of -- because i don't want to run out of time -- what should we be doing? so you can respond to what he said earlier, but what is the takeaway for people in this room? we all have heard what i hope is terrifying examples of government surveillance and privacy invasions by corporations and how those two work together. what do we do about this? and if -- and i am afraid some of these brilliant questions that came in i won't be able to get to, but i want to hear from each of the panelists. all right, we get it. it's terrible. what do we do about it?

>> all right. so i'll start with the ecpa question and then transition into -- >> you've got to talk into the microphone. >> okay. [laughter] so first i wanted to -- and i'm cheating a little bit here. i promised i was wearing my tech hat. i'm going to wear the law hat for for just a moment. ecpa would be a heightened judicial requirement. the law enforcement agency requesting user information would have to make a greater showing than they do under the current ecpa statute. and so clearly, it does provide greater protection. so i wanted to be very clear about that. the second point i wanted to make on ecpa was just a why reform might finally pass. one reason is companies want their users to feel comfortable in providing their data, and that's one of the reasons why they've put together these transparency reports. and so it can be a good thing.

tech companies, that tech companies are starting to get their act together on lobbying, are starting to be very active in washington. they do sometimes fight for their users. but i do also want to make sure to flag that there is a downside to that. to the extent tech companies are willing to fight when it comes to making sure their users have information and control about information that gets shared with the government, they're a little less, less pro-user when it comes to giving information control about sharing data with the companies themselves. so, in fact, in the e.u. right now there are some proposals for toughening up consumer privacy legislation, and u.s. tech companies have taken positions that would undermine the law as it stands. so these initial proposals were to strengthen the law, proposals out of tech companies would actually wind up diminishing the legal protections from where they are now. so just to emphasize that

organized tech company lobbying good on some issues, not so good on others related to security and privacy. and then the other reason this might, ecpa reform might finally pass is the courts are kind of doing it anyways. counts are starting to say this statute so out of date that it's gotten trumped by the constitution. and so if law enforcement agencies think they're going to lose in the courts anyways, it becomes a lot easier to agree to a deal on capitol hill. okay. that's all i wanted to say about ecpa. >> okay. you have one minute to say what you think we should do about this. >> okay. one minute, go. i think the low hanging fruit on the policy and politics side is pushing for transparency. so getting consumer control into law is really tough. you need to get a coalition in many cases of regulated entities to agree, getting data brokers or consumer data aggregators or advertising companies or companies that are in the business of providing data

processing services to government, all of these to give really easy and comprehensive user information control. that's a pretty long-term project. it's a lot easier to say, okay, at minimum could you just tell people what sorts of stuff you're collecting, how long you keep it for, what your internal processes look like even with some level of generality. let's start there. i think that's a reasonable place to start. and in particular, i would encourage taking a look at legislation that's pending in california right now that would require some transparency about consumer data collection practices. ..

when you do the aclu and we e-mail you click this, click it, really. because actually makes a difference. so please click the button and then third, for like, much more involved things that you can do, you can get involved at the local level. we talked a lot about sort of meta big brother issues and we haven't talked about little brother very much and little brother is extremely real. local police are increasingly acting more and more like intelligence agencies collecting own surveillance from all of us. they do this through advanced surveillance technologies, license plate readers. how many people in this room have heard of license plate readers? that is excellent. i hope in part of aclu's

work we're trying to drive the issue home. we have a bill in massachusetts that would limit data retention of license plate information. what i'm getting at, you can actually go to your chief of police in your city or your town where you live and say, what kind of surveillance equipment do you have? what do you guys use? do you have license plate readers? what is your data policy? when do you delete the information? write letters to the local newspapers. write op-eds to the local newspapers revealing what you learned from the police department. ostensibly we live in a democracy. citizens should control what the police do. we should exert some of that power and try to take control over the police departments back from the federal government which for the past 10 years which has been showering these departments with literally billions of dollars to buy all sorts of surveillance equipment then essentially sucked up by the federal government ultimately. getting involved by joining aclu. give to groups like eff and

aclu. take action. please click the button. get involved at the local level. if you want to learn how to do that, go to my website, a whole lot of police there. please contact me as well if you want to do that. >> [inaudible]. >> privacy sos.org,/local police. and, last but not least, at all. agitate. agitate. organize. get involved. doesn't matter if it is about union stuff. fighting the banks, antiwar activity because, what we saw with occupy wall street and with any social movement when you provoke the surveillance beast it rears its ugly head. surveillance by its nature is secret, right? we often don't know what is going on. when things like occupy wall street happen, all of sudden you see giant surveillance towers everywhere on the corner in new york. provoke the beast. it will elucidate a lot of information what is going on behind the scenes. agitate the system. [applause]

>> so, i'm going to say, yes, to all of the things that have been shared already, but, i do want to focus on a few things that i think are particularly pertinent to the worlds that i live in. so, yes, agitation is really important but it is also important to invest in some long-term education and community-building whereby the communities that are most likely to be affected, to be targeted, are empowered to know more and do more. what i mean by that specifically is, there are ways in which you can teach people about privacy and counter surveillance i guess maybe we'll call it. and, it is reasonable, for them to engage in that kind of learning, right? so what i'm talking about is

empowering organations the frons of speaking for and serving poor communities, communities of color, immigrant communities, immigrant rights and so forth. and what needs to happen is those organizations themselves really need to become privacy aware, right? there is currently a huge deficit in how many of our activist organizations and social movement groups use and share information readily and advise their communities and constituents to use and share information. i think that is an important area that we can improve upon. i think five or six years ago, there was an incredible push in the philanthropy community, the philanthropic community to really support social media and social networking without questioning some of the privacy and surveillance problems that might arise being part of a networked communication system. we need to start thinking about that now and i think

the community groups that are closest to the most affected communities or individuals are a great place to start. second to that, and this is just my personal thing that i like to get across is, for people are using public access internet points, public computer centers and so forth, please ftc, federal trade commission, national telecommunications information administration, federal communications commission, state attorney general offices, please stop advising that these users buy virtual private networks subscriptions to better protect their activities. it is simply ineffective and unreasonable to expect that the person that is unemployed and really desperate to find a job or has been kicked out of housing will be able to do this, right? so we need to think about,

specifically for poor communities, better solutions that are the least burdensome on them. i think that, again, what jonathan has alluded to in terms of privacy by default including technologies in public computer centers that are already ready, they already come to you as a user, able to filter out some of the problems that we're seeing, some of the types of surveillance we're seeing, that is one step towards, having a more equitable, having a more equitable situation. >> and peter, what do we do about this? >> yeah, seconding all what has been said i want to just highlight a couple things. we've had some success with the freedom of information act. it is the muscle that we need to flex constantly. there are some great letter generators online. i think there is reporters committee for freedom of the press has a great guide on

this data protection regulation that jonathan alluded to in europe, it is not only u.s. companies that are lobbying but the u.s. government is very heavily lobbying. and so just we'll be releasing soon some preliminary e-mails and documents that we've gotten through foia requests, freedom of information act requests, that reveal the extent of the u.s. lobbying to, because they realize the interconnectedness of, privacy laws in europe, 27-member-states which are copied by latin american countries countries all over the world copy data protection laws. i understand that could change the conversation in the u.s. and the u.s. is governing hard there. online campaigns, we the people, new white house tool is pretty fun and, i think most of our group at access

we've done great work in collaboration and campaigns are one thing to look for right now. as far as your telecoms, i would say, one major step for security is getting them to update the operating systems more often to push these updates rather than forcing you to buy a new phone and so, that's one thing you can push for on the consumer side. also, watching the deregulation process in the u.s. the common carriers are trying to say that they're no longer, they're no longer obliged to provide access to everyone. that is something, that is hurting rural communities right now. so, keep a close eye on that. there are some great civic groups working on those issues. and, of course talk to your ledgetors about privacy and, you know, get more letters to the telecoms and the tech companies. >> coming up at 1:00 eastern

here on c-span2, the carnegie endowment for international peace holds a panel discussion looking at the political transitions and reforms going on in egypt, libya and tunisia and the future of those three countries. also at 1:00 on c-span3, education secretary arne duncan talks about innovation in technology and education and will be joined by chris paul of the nba's los angeles clippers. that forum hosted by the department of education. with congress off this week for the memorial day recess we're featuring booktv in prime time as we showcase three books on american foreign policy. beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern, david rhode, beyond bar. at 8:55, richard haass, author of foreign policy begins at home. the case for putting america's house in order. we finish with vali nasr, he discusses his book, the

dispenseable nation. american foreign policy in retreat. tonight as people return from their memorial day holiday we'll look at new recommendations from the national transportation safety board that members say could reduce deaths from alcohol-impaired driving. we'll show you some much our recent discussion with chairman debra hersman as well as portions of a recent meeting where the board aproves the recommendation. here's a look. >> today we meet to consider the safety report, reaching zero, actions to eliminate alcohol impaired driving. this is critical because impaired driving remains one of the biggest killers in the united states. 25 years ago today our nation saw the deadliest alcohol-impaired driving crash in u.s. history. a drunk driver drove his pickup the wrong way on interstate 71 near carol ton,

kentucky. he hit a school bus, and killed 24 children and three adult chaperones. injuring 34 more. today our thoughts are with those families in carolton, kentucky, who are recognizing the 25th anniversary of that crash. that same year, impaired drivers would kill thousands more. let's look at how well we're doing as a nation to address the national epidemic of alcohol impaired driving. as i will explain, we have made progress since that deadly night in kentucky. but it's been not nearly enough. in 1982 the first year of nits at that -- nhtsa's fars tracking system, 21,113 people died in u.s. crashes

involving alcohol-impaired driving. this represented nearly one half of all highway deaths. today, the percentage of deaths due to alcohol-impaired driving is about one-third of all highway fatalities. moving the percentage from one half to one-third of highway fatalities has taken great effort by thousands of dedicated people in many organizations. >> watch more from that meeting as well as comments from ntsb chairman deborah hersman and milwaukee county sheriff david clark joins us on the proposed rules. it begins at 8:00 eastern over on c-span. president obama is in new jersey today to examine the recovery efforts since hurricane sandy struck the region late last year. the president will tour the

affected beach communities with new jersey governor chris christie in his first trip back to the area since right after the storm late last october. earlier this year the federal government authorized over $50 billion in aid to new york and new jersey for the relief efforts. the president is scheduled to deliver remarks at at asbury park convention hall at 1:30 p.m. eastern. you can watch live coverage on our website, c-span.org. on friday joint chiefs of staff chairman general martin dempsey addressed the families and loved ones of fallen soldiers at the annual tragedy assistance program for survivors seminar. the event known as taps, brings together survivors and leading professionals in the grief and trauma field and serves as a 24-hour resource for anyone who suffered the loss of a loved one who served in the military. >> my name is bonnie carroll and i am a hugger.

[laughter] we, we come to this family because we have lost someone who served in the military but far more important than that, we are hear today because we are bonded forever by our love for someone who served in the military. we wear a lot of pins. you know, we have different gold star pins. we have got different unit pins but what we say here at taps is our pin is a photo button worn over a broken heart. that is what brings us together. this is our family reunion. this is our safe place. this is our treehouse, our clubhouse, and you're part of our family. we say that grief are in the address book and it is pretty special to have everybody in this room now

forever in your address book. it is my great pleasure to introduce today the 18th chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey. i want to share a little bit about him. he first came to taps speaking at a very formal setting at our gala and it was such an honor to have him address our donors, our sponsors, our families, our volunteers. when he was first thanked after that wonderful speech that he gave it was little justin stuben who knew how to present a military challenge coin. if you have ever been a part of that. sits in the palm of your hand. justin was so proud he knew when a challenge coin was presented it was for doing good. so he said to general dempsey, you have done a good job. [laughter] i think that was a great welcome to our family. general dempsey came to the

good grief camp. it is pretty daunting. this year we have 1200 children, mentors and staff who are gathered right next door. [applause] it is, it is absolutely awesome what happens over there. it is magic, that occurs. and, he is, bravely taken questions from the kids and there was a little girl who had a very special thing to tell him and he leaned over right to her, stayed there with the kids and she wanted him to know, she said, my daddy is an angel. and that was very, that was kind of telling. this is, this is what our kids are living with and thinking about. that their daddy is a hero and an angel and doing good things still. this, the next day, after

this particular good grief cam, the very first one, general dempsey was with us, he saw the kids out playing duck, duck, goose. so he stopped and he said there were taps kids. he said, hey, can i join in. so they got involved in a game of duck, duck goose. that was incredible. but this next photograph is, our absolute favorite. [laughter] this is, this is -- [applause] this is your chairman, of the jon chiefs of staff being, being loved by and loving back our taps family. general dempsey thank you, sir. [applause]

>> thanks very much. that's kind of the same, the same reception i get when i go over to capitol hill actually. [laughter] didi and i are honored to be here. when we build our calendar we actually look to see, it is always or has been always on memorial day weekend but we always build it around this event because i find you to be an incredibly inspirational group. it's, we're so thrilled to be here and so sad that we have to be here because of what it means. i mean you're here because you have suffered some incredible sadness and loss in your life and yet, this event, and you will see, bonnie said i think there is 300 or so, who are here for the -- you are really cute, young lady. bonnie, you are too but, would you come up here with me?

yeah, let me have her come up here. she wanted to get in my picture a minute ago. here she comes. can you come over and say hi? is your name avery? what do you want all the people to know, avery? you want to say hi? >> hi. >> let's give avery a round of applause. [applause] >> you want to stay with me? you want to stay with me? you can stay here or go back, but if you stay here, you need to move over a little bit because nobody can see you. there you go. [laughter] she is welcome to stay. the country entrusts me with about a million .4 men and women, i think i can take care of this one although i bet she would give me a run for my money.

bye. watch your step. there you go. >> i do get to go after i leave you and have some time to spend with your kids. every year i make it a point to take some famous song and he had it. at some point i will probably get sued but i'm willing to take that chance because it's a great way to interact with the children over there. but for you all, i just, want to compliment you. i want to start by complimenting bonnie and the team that, this organization so many years ago and you have continued to grow it. again it is up with of those sad things that it has to grow but it will continue to grow for a while i think. just before i came over here i signed nine letters of condolence to nine families who are recent members of your community and i hope that the a some point when they're ready they will join you because i do think it is extraordinarily important that they have someone who they can connect to who knows exactly what they have been through and that's you.

and so i really appreciate both what bonnie and the team do but i appreciate the fact that you're willing to come here, not just to get something but to give something and that's really what makes this such a powerful gathering of men and women, and children by the way. so, on this day in history in 1844 samuel morse actually conducted the first live test of the telegraph. now you probably knew that or you should have have from your education but what you may not have known is that he actually invented the telegraph because his wife had passed away and he hadn't received the news as quickly as he needed to in order to get back to be at her side. so he he will developed the telegraph. it was his inspiration to develop the telegraph so people could network more quickly. that's really what you're doing, you're networking. in today's technology you can network at the speed of

the internet but getting together every year physically the way you do and in the interim at different events that taps runs i think is a very powerful symbol who we are. speaking of symbols, you know, i listened to the national anthem, i don't know, maybe sometimes, two, three times a day, almost every day of the year. for some reason or another all of the events that i attend the national anthem is played, the colors are posted and they're retired. but it occurred to me listening to it today as it did last year, i had forgotten bit, it must be something extraordinary for you to listen to the national anthem because no one has had the experience of being handed a folded flag. you have and we don't know what that, those of us that haven't experienced that don't know really what that, i can't even conceive what it must be like. but that national anthem and that flag on this day, at this event, is very much yours. that's your experience, uniquely.

and i hope that you think about it in those terms. you're the one that sacrificed so we can play that national anthem and you're the ones who have sacrificed and your loved ones who are allowing us to lead the lives we lead and on this memorial day weekend at all these barbecues and parades, events across the country their national anthem will be played. people will respectfully pay attention to it, but they won't know what it means the way you know what it means i just want to tell you how proud i am of you, of your loved ones, of your children, of bonnie, of the taps organization. i promise you despite all of the complexities of life in washington these days and all of the uncertainty about the future of our budget and all the things that make headlines make for good 24/7 news you can be sure that we will remember what's most

important about our nation and that is the care for soldier, sailors, airmen, marines, coast guardsmen, our families and our veterans and for those who lost their life in the service of their country and their families. so god bless you all and i hope you have a rich and productive even enjoyable weekend. you certainly deserve it. thanks very much. [applause] >> general dempsey also spoke with some of the children of taps families talking with them about the losses of their loved ones. the general also led the children in singing a few songs. it is about 20 minutes. >> general dempsey taught us a song last year. [cheers and applause] >> all right. if you loved it last year you must, you have to love

it this year. are you ready? i need help now. we're going to do two songs eventually. one at the beginning and one at the end. the one at the beginning is aimed at the demographic that is shorter than three feet or so. some of you fall into that category, let me know. by the way, thanks mentors for being part of this extraordinary experience. secondly, we want a little more contemporary. that is to say you might actually hear it on the radio from time to time. you will not hear this next one on the radio. but i come here every year specifically to make sure that the taps kids know about the bible. and here's how you learn about it. about noah and the arc and the unicorn. so maybe there wasn't a unicorn. you guys have to help me because you were here last year. my wife will help you. and everybody else, you have to join in. and you mentors, that includes you. you might feel it looks a little silly but it is going

to look sillier if i call you out. [laughter] so here we go. >> along time ago when the earth was green, there were more kinds of animals than you've ever seen, they run around free when the earth is being born, and the loveliest of all was the unicorn ♪. ♪ well there were green alligators, and long necked beasts, humpbacked camels and chimpanzees, there were cats and rats and elephants assure as you're born, the loveliest of all was the unicorn ♪. ♪ well the lord seen the earth and it gave him pain and he said stand back i will make it rain. hey brother noah, i'll tell you what to do, build me a floating zoo ♪. ♪ get some of them green alligators and lon necked

geese and hummed back camels and chimpanzees and rats and katsds and elephants assure as you're born, don't you forget the -- >> unicorn. >> well noah was there to answer the call. he finished up the ark just as the rain started to fall. he marched in the animals two by two, and he named them, as they came through ♪. ♪ hey, lord i got your green alligators and long necked geese, some humped back camels and chimpanzees, some cats and rats and elephants and lord, i'm so forlorn, i just can't find them unicorns ♪. ♪ well noah looked out through the pouring rain, those unicorns were hiding playing silly games ♪, laughing and splashing as the rain came pouring ♪, all those silly you know what is ♪ there were green

alligators and long necked geese, some humped back camels and chimpanzees, there were cats and rats and elephants, lord i'm so forlorn, i still can't find those unicorns ♪ will the arc started drifting, this is the end now. [laughter] ♪ what are you clapping for? there is one more verse it goes like this. this is why, i was almost going to say you don't have to go to church on sunday but bonnie would be angry with me. ♪ the arc start the drifting, drifting with the tide, those unicorns looked up from the rocks and they cried ♪. >> boo-hoo. >> all right, quit your whining. ♪ then the rain came down and sort of floated them away. away.

>> and the moral of the story, and that's why you will never see a unicorn to this very day. ♪ but you will see green alligators and long-necked geese, you will see humped back camels and chimpanzees, you will see cats, rats he will grants fans as -- elephants assure as you're born, the loveliest of all is the -- >> unicorn. >> one more time. the loveliest of all is the unicorn. all right, give yourselves a round of applause. ♪ . >> okay. before we get some real, some real talent into the mix here, by the way, that is the u.s. army --. let's give them a round of applause. [applause]

it has become my tradition to take a few questions from the taps kids and so who has a question they want to ask the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff? all right? no? no? that was a false start. okay. here we go. i saw her first. let me bo over to her. okay. great. okay. what's the question? >> i just about my dad. he to be in military. i would like to know if i could sing it? >> i love people. okay. [laughter] >> by the way, don't be nervous. they just did this really stupid-looking thing with their hands. don't worry about it. >> ♪ my beautiful country, for a flag, he was -- ♪ .

they wondered how the heck he died ♪. ♪ . ♪ he fought in afghanistan . ♪ . >> all right. future "american idol." [applause] [inaudible] anybody else have a question? somebody right here did. oh that young man right there had a question.

he wants to talk about his dad. i love to hear about your dad. go ahead. >> my dad, he, he was in war once and he was in afghanistan two times. and like, he really liked to play games with me and my brother. and then, my mom, -- [inaudible] she had a baby and then like my dad had to go back into the army. and then he died. i don't know how he died but he died. in war. >> let's give this young man a round of applause and tell him you love him. [applause] okay. who else? this side of the room, here we go.

we got a couple that sat -- let's balance it out. can we get a picture? >> can we get a picture? >> sure. let's wait until after we got through the questions here. there's a really, there's a young man over there with looks like a superman cape on. he has a question. >> why did you join the army? >> why did i join the army? well, you know i joined the army because i thought that it stood for the right things. that it would allow me to, you know, to be around people who knew that there was something more important in life than just making money and having a job, you know who might actually some day have to protect this country. which by the way is exactly why all your moms and dads joined of the army and in the case of your moms and

dads, some of them gave their lives for that. so that's a great question, young man. thanks for asking. go ahead? >> my dad died. >> my dad died. >> i know but where he is now? >> buried. >> you know, you got to be careful when you ask these questions. sometimes get a literal answer but, i was actually reaching more for like heaven, you know? well, god bless you and your family. who else? here you go. there you go, right next to you, use the microphone. >> ♪ . [inaudible] ♪ they don't know which path to take. but they saw the right path ♪.

♪ . >> all right. [applause] >> let me ask you a question. whatever happened to kids being shy? what happened to that? who else? how about this -- >> general, right back here? >> where? >> got it right back here. >> i gotcha. >> what is your favorite part about being a general? >> seriously, being able to interact with the young men and women who serve. just keeps you so, just keeps you so excited about this country, when you see the quality of the young people that are still willing to serve. even though they know, for example, your loved have

been killed protecting the country, they're still willing to do it. the best part is getting to meet men and women who choose to serve their country. >> what is your favorite thing about taps? >> my favorite thing about taps? well first of all, taps as an organization is my favorite organization because it allows you to come together, not just, this week, or weekend but throughout the year. it allows people to share their, that is why it is called the good grief camp. grief doesn't always have to be sad. grief can make you feel better. i hope that makes you feel better this week. good grief camp does a great job of that. how about we give miss bonnie carroll a round of applause for that. [applause]

this is going to be a good one. >> i know. why -- [inaudible] ? >> could you repeat that please? >> where are the airplanes that come takes, takes us to the airport? >> did you ask me a question, if i have an airplane? >> she said, -- >> now they're huddling. >> i say it again. what takes you out to the airport so --. >> okay. let me tell you a little trick about being a chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. one of the things you learn when you go to a press conference, you answer the question you wish you you

were asked. not that i would do that in this case but i do have, i do get to fly around in air force aircraft as i travel around the world trying to make sure i get to know my counterparts. i think we got time for one more and then i'm going to sing another song unless you tell me not to. [shouting] >> okay, go ahead. we got one there and then i have got to break. >> i lost my dad by an underground bomb and car went over it and shook like two people in the front, two people in the back. but the back people are still were safe and, but the front people technically died because it shooked them up real bad. they tried to wake them up but they didn't know what happened. so, but they, but the army

men that were in the back of it wrote the story of it about what happened and i have it in a book. >> well that's terrific. i'm really sorry that your dad was killed in a car accident and there is no way for me to make you feel any better but i think everybody in this room has had some kind of sadness like that. i'm glad you told that story. let's give her a under are of applause. [applause] okay. what we're going to do now, every year i have taken some popular song, this particular year we selected the song, "drive-by" by train. this supper echelon in the room, vertically challenged. we'll put the words to the chorus up there. now, what i have done, the taken the words and turned them into something for you.

so, when you hear the words, this not the usual words for the song "drive-by". some of them are close. this event, this day, this event, is not a drive-by in terms of our relationship with you. our relationship with you goes through the whole year. it's not a drive-by. we don't do it once and forget about you and we don't want you to come here once a year and forget about each other. so listen to the words of the song, okay. and i've got army downrange to back me up in case i fail. [applause] ♪ . you come from west l.a. or new york or sante fe ♪.

my greek would think. oh, but that one site was more than just right, i didn't leave you, because i was all through, oh i was overwhelmed and just too sad to tell because i really fell for you ♪. ♪ oh i say to you, you will be there for you, this is not a drive-buy ♪. just to leave us, nothing comes between us because your that i know ♪ whether you're with us, everything is glorious, the way move us. oh i swear to you, we'll be there for you, this is not a drive-by ♪. >> ♪ army on the side of a downward spiral, my love for you went viral and i loved

you every time you smiled at me, but now here you are defend, so let's just be friends and get down to more than friends at last ♪. ♪ oh but that one sight is still the highlight, i didn't need you, until you came to, oh i was overwhelmed and just too sad to tell because i really fell for you ♪. ♪ oh, i swear to you, we'll be there for you, this is not a drive-by ah, a h ♪ just believe us, nothing comes between us us ♪ when you wither, family friends are glorious, the way you move us ♪. ♪ i swear to you, we'll be there for you, this is not a drive-by ♪.

♪ please belief that when i leave, there is nothing else my love for you and real time to get my head together ♪. ♪ on the other side of sadness is true, stood a child that looked like you, i guess that deja vu but i thought it can't be true ♪ because i oh i swear to you, we'll be there for you, this is not a drive-by ♪, just a deliver, nothing comes between us, nothing can hold us ♪. whether when you're with us, everything is glorious, ♪ the way you move us, oh i swear to you, i will be there for you, this is not a drive-buy ♪. . .

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

♪ ♪ >> coming up next live here on c-span2, the carnegie endowment for superb national peace finish international peace is looking at the reforms going on in egypt, libya and tunisia and the future of these three countries. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> good evening, and welcome again to another event of the middle east program at carnegie endowment. i'm marwan muasher, i'm vice president for studies at the carnegie endowment. as arab political transitions stumble and parties clash over the pace and direction of reforms, analysts are largely focused on differences between political actors; islamists, salafists, liberals and others. and the implication for critical development. but critics argue that this distracts attention from trying to understand the critical institutional changes underway in these countries. we're fortunate today to have three excellent scholars and

people who have studied the region for quite some time. elle listen lust, jakob wichmann and our own fred wehrey to talk about these three countries that are undergoing transitions today, egypt, tunisia and libya. ellen lust is associate professor in the department of political science at yale university. she's also a dear friend. she's the founding associate editor of the journal middle east law and government and has lived, studied and conducted research and led student and alumni tours in egypt, israel, jordan, morocco, palestine and tunisia. she's also authoring a book, co-authoring a book with our next speaker, jakob wichmann, who is the founder of jmw consulting, a management consultancy that specializes in countries in transition,

postconflict environments and social and political research. founded in 2011, it serves international ngos, companies and political parties in the emerging democracies in the middle east and north africa. and fred wehrey who's a senior associate in the middle east program at the carnegie endowment. fred's research has focused on political reform and security issues in the arab gulf states, libya and u.s. policy in the middle east more broadly. he has just returned from libya where he has spent three weeks. >> two weeks. >> two weeks. and so he has very fresh information coming back from that country. ellen and jakob also have conducted survey studies in tunisia and egypt and will also comment on the result of their work. so with that, we'll have jakob go first. floor is yours.

>> i just need to -- thank you very much. it's -- for giving me the opportunity to speak today. i'm jakob, and i will talk about sort of going back to the, to the first elections, the first postrevolutionary elections in tunisia and egypt looking at the role of religion there. this is a question that has been posed by many, so the victory of the islamist parties, this is something that is sustainable. how is this tied to religion and so on. but before that, okay, i just want to introduce, so ellen and i work together in a larger project with a larger group of scholars. we call it the sensational governance project, and we work together with -- [inaudible] from portland state university,

another middle east scholar. we work together with dhafer malouche, and gamal soltan. so what we'll present here today just to emphasize this is part of a collaborative effort and not sort of solely our own work. so let's very -- i'll go with these slides very briefly. so, first, i would like to sort of just briefly discuss on the key dividing line in the elections of sort of religion or the role of religion in the state. then what, how did religion factor in in sport for the islam -- support for the islamist parties, and then we will sort of discuss how can you

sort of operationalize a political center along this guiding line of religious -- dividing line of religious and secular parties. and lastly, conclude very briefly on the presentation. so in egypt and tunisia, these are the two places where we've done extensive postelection studies. both of the studies were conducted last year in november. in libya we have a postelection study at the moment but no results yet. so in tunisia and egypt, you see, you see sort of in due eyes ya you -- tunisia you see one party -- [inaudible] and in egypt we have sort of three major parties or two major parties, really the justice party and the, and the new party of the salafi party.

and this is -- and then on both sides you have a host of sort of more secular, smaller-orr credibilitied parties. -- oriented parties. in the elections just to establish this, you see that in egypt -- and here we are not talking the votes, but we are talking the seats, the proportion of seats in each of the parliamentary elections, you saw that the islamist parties got almost 75% in egypt while they got 45% in tunisia. so one, so what were sort of the one of the defining factors for the success of the islamist parties in these two elections. if you look at the, a at sort of how the party landscape played out in these elections, so first

thing is these elections were devoid of sort of public policy, there was very little said about what are solutions to the key problems of, key economic problems, for example, of tunisia and egypt and social problems and so on. the whole debate or the main debate in both of these elections were about what role should religion play in the states, what should be the influence of religion and so on. and this is, it's very well shown on these two graphs. so you have, you have sort of the voters of the parties placed on a horizontal and versal axis. the horizontal axis is sort of the traditional sort of economic policy axis where you see to the left more socialist policies, to the right more sort of capitalist policies. the vertical axis, you see the parties placed on parties

that -- voters that vote for parties that have sort of, that have a more sort of secular, more secular parties meaning separation of religion and state, and islamist parties that are, do not see this separation. and what is sort of very sort of obvious from this depiction of the placement of the parties is that the economic dividing line -- left/right economic policy dividing line -- is collapsed, and the main dividing line in the elections are this question about the role of religion or secular versus islam parties. you see that in tunisia, you see that in egypt on the voters' positions, but you also see it on the party as' position.

one -- parties' position. one key differences in the egyptians' case is that in egypt you see a much more polarized picture. you see the polarization between islamists and nonislamist parties is much greater in egypt than in tunisia, and this also sort of is an important information in terms of how the two transitional processes have proceeded. if we look at -- we've also tied these two service to operationalize. so what is the role of religion in the vote for the islamist parties. is it because that large proportions of these populations have very religious political values, or is it because they are very sort of devout muslims making them vote for the islamist parties, or how does religion play into this, these election results? so we have tried to look at sort

of regression analysis on both countries where we have, of course, you have sort of the demographic background variables; age, gender, education and so on. and we've looked at sort of three ways of conceptualizing religion. one way is the extent that people sort of have what we call religious political values, namely to the extempt that they feel religion -- extent that religion should play a part in the state. another way of organizing is do you have religious identity, is your first identity, is that being a muslim, or is that being an egyptian or tunisian? and the third way of operationalized religion is sort of behavioral. do you, how often do you go to the mosque, and how often do you pray.

this is our extensive analysis, but i'll give you the main conclusions here. so what we see in, what we see from these results in tunisia is that the people who voted, who feel that religion should play a role in the state clearly voted for islamist parties. and also in the tunisian case, but interestingly knot in the egyptian -- not in the egyptian case, the sort of religious behavior of being, going to the mosque very frequently and so on had a influence, was part of the explanation in the tunisian case but not in the egyptian case. it's not a significant variable in the egyptian case. in the egyptian case, there were two factors that played a role in terms of religion that, again, if you feel that you, that religion should play a role on the state, then you tend to

vote islamist both the muslim brotherhood party and the salafi nour party. and similarly, if you have a, if your first identity when you're asked you are muslim for an egyptian, you also tend to vote for islamist party rather than, rather than a non-islamist party. so these are the key things. and then in the egyptian case you have the sort of another distinction that is important to make namely between the muslim brotherhood, justice party and the salafi and nour party where the salafi voters tended to be younger, less educated and rural. so what does this tell us about the political center in egypt and the political extremes in egypt and tunisia?

well, if you look at sort of the variable that is, that works across both countries, namely the extent to which you feel should have an imprint on the state, you see that around 30% of both egypt and tunisia disagreed to the statement that religious leaders should not have an influence on the state, meaning they feel religion should have an influence in the state. so we have nearly 30 percent of the population in both countries that feel religion should have an influence on the state. in terms of religious identity, you see that, you see that there's a much stronger religious identity in egypt than there is in tunisia. around 42% of egyptians, they identify themselves as religious ly, first, and then, second, as egyptians, while only

21% of tunisians identify themselves as religious before tunisians. if you look at worship, you see in tunisia you see a very big center, you know, people going to the mosque sometimes and not other times. in egypt you see a much sort of, a much -- yeah, a much distribute. and if you combine sort of the fact of having the variables that worked across both countries having what you could call religious political values with the fact that you voted or did not vote islamist, then you get a interesting way of looking at the political landscape or the voters in egypt. you see that if you are on the

one hand, say, well, either the voter has secular values meaning religion should stay out of state or religious political values or you have voters that voted for islamist parties and non-islamist parties, you get an interesting picture. you see that in, you see that in tunisia you have only 20% of the population of what we would call consistent islamists; feeling voted islamist, feeling religion should play a role in the state. in egypt by comparison you have only sort of 24% of the egyptians feeling the same way. you have a, in both countries, a significant proportion of what you could sort of call the political center in these countries where the election was all about the religion's role in

the state. you see that in egypt there's a rather large proportion of the population that has a mixed values. they have sort of secular political values, but at the same time voted for islamist apparentlies. that's more than half of the voters. and tunisia you see that around 35% of the voters have these mixed values. you see secular -- >> no, no. >> you see in tunisia much stronger secular trend, you see stronger support for the secular parties and combined with secular values, but you also see in egypt a significant sort of secular part of the population. so what does all this tell us? i think, i think the key here is to look at, look at the election

results in both tunisia and egypt with some caution as to predicting the future and the future elections. in egypt you had 75% of the seats going to islamist parties, you had 45% of the parties going to the islamist party in tunisia. but you don't see a sort of similar proportion of the population having what you would call religious values. helps, there's a big proportion -- hence, there's a big proportion of both the populations in tunisia, but especially in egypt that voted for the islamist parties for other reasons than sort of having these religious political values. and what we saw in both cases were that sort of the islamist parties in egypt, both salafis and the muslim brotherhood, were standing sort of on the shoulders of social movements, had a much stronger

organizational capacity, were able to go to the rural areas or had much wider spread in the rural areas. and you saw a similar, albeit less significant trend in the tunisian case. so just to -- and this means, basically, that there is still a large central vote in both countries that can be persuaded toward this or the other way. i would conclude, in each of the countries. thank you. >> thank you very much, jakob. i'll ask ellen to go on and then fred, and then we'll open it up for questions. please. >> thank you. and thank you for coming to engage in the discussion, but also thank you for inviting us and being here today. i want to continue a bit where jakob left off and discuss some of the differences across the

trajectories that we've seen in libya, egypt and tunisia. and to think a little bit about why it is that we have in some ways, i think, such varied experiences, right? i mean, one could say, okay, we have very different experiences either because of, you know, the fact that, you know, libya is very small, and it has, you know, a fair amount of natural resources and wealth, and so it doesn't face the same problems as egypt which is, of course, much larger, you know, it faces economic -- much sort of greater economic issues, etc. so part of the, part of the reason for these differences that we're all witnessing are, indeed, related to size, the population, the distribution of the population and to natural resources and wealth. but i want to argue that that's not the only -- and i would say it's even not the primary difference why we see, you know, libya sort of having the kinds of struggles that it does that constantly make it feel like it's on the brink of a much greater conflict, why we see egypt with these sort of never

ending struggles over what seems like freedom of the media, whether or not morsi should be, you know, basically sort of recalled or in a new election should be held. so in other words, there's very -- obviously, sort of striking differences in these experiences, and i think that sort of the difference that we see in terms of this, you know, size, economic positions, etc., is really only a part of the story. i think a bigger and sometimes overlooked part of the story is to understand the type of cleavage, the type of contestation that's taking place, that is what is at stake and also to understand why that's at stake. and so i sort of think of the world in two main types of distribution, one of which is you can have as, basically, sort of a contestation what i'll call on a universalistic basis. the issue is that we're all egyptians, and the question is are we going to sort of have a

more islamist or more secularist state, right? so what is the nature of society, what's the role of the state in society, what is it that's the vision, what is the vision that we're looking at, right? sometimes those kinds of contests or conflicts take, i think in a sense, grand terms. and i would actually argue that's part of what's taking place in egypt. the terms are not similarly about who gets what, right? are the lower classes going to get more than the upper classes, but they actually start to take place, you know, should we have a green movement or not a green movement, but it is sort after after -- of a more all-encompassing vision. that's a very different conflict than what i'll refer to as identity conflicts. but these are where the groups are relatively defined, right? so if you thinking about someplace like iraq, it's relatively clear who's shia, who's sunni, and there's a

contest over -- [inaudible] but i want to use class as a bit of an example because there's a very big difference between a general class conflict, right, the lower classes want more from the upper classes and what we might sort of think of as the communist capitalist struggle which fits more in the we have an entirely different vision of the world that we're trying to put in place. so that's really the crux of the issue. and when we think about it, what about? in -- what about? in the case where the stakes are what's the world we live in, first of all, i'm concerned if i'm on either side of this debate. i'm very concerned that you could actually persuade others to your side, right? all of a sudden it's much more fluid game. you can convince somebody to be a communist, you can convince somebody to be an islamist. it may be harder or easier for some case, but the idea is that

these are not fixed groups, not fixed conflicts. they can't go out and say i know how many people we have, and it's going to stay within this balance. now, in general when we're talking about particularistic conflicts and the ones that are distribution is that this group or this region or this set of people should get more or less whether we're talking in terms of class conflicts, you know, lower classes, should they get more from the upper classes or not. if we're talking about in terms of regional distributions, there is a sense of how many people we have in the east versus how many we have in the west we pretty much know how many people are kurdish versus sunni versus shia, for instance. you can argue there's some ways in which you try to expand that. i try to convince people they're one or another. we can know that group chat sizes can change and identities can change. but in this short term, and i think a lot of what i'm going to be talking about really should be understood as what are the tensions and challenges that emerge in these first stages of

transition. in the short term, people don't think that they're going to be changing the identities of people, they really think they're engaged in a fixed sort of struggle. the result, i would argue, is that where you, where the struggle is this broad sort of, you know, incompassing struggle, you know, at a universalistic level, in those cases then things like freedoms of speech and association, the kinds of freedoms that allow me to convince somebody else or allow somebody else to convince, you know, those who would otherwise support me away from me become actually very problematic, right? and that's, of course, if you're interested in democracy, that's a problem because those are exactly the same kinds of problems that help to underpin democracy. the very institutions in parliament, the presidency, those become, in some ways, problematic if you think the other side is willing. and you're willing to undermine those institutions in order to establish and maintain what you've got. and partly that's because of the second part of it which is the

stakes tend to be seen as higher, right? they tend to be seen as much more zero sum, much higher stakes, and it's sort of a hotter battle. the second part, of course, is that where you have these as group conflicts then, of course, we have greater threats of secession, greater threats of group conflicts emerging. so in some ways i want to point out that the challenges that emerge tend to be quite different, right? so the challenge if you're talking about these kind of universalistic struggle is the that, you know, i can undermine you and i, therefore, have an interest in undermining the institutions that are out there. and that's why we hear, actually, people who would otherwise think of themselves as good democrats questioning whether or not the military actually should step in you're in egypt, right? that kind of struggle, that kind of tension is exhibited that way. whereas, you know, like i said, you know, when we're looking at the groups, a question of conflict breaking out.

now, i want to think about why we get there. so i'm laying out a vision of two different types of conflict that i hope sort of resonates with the way that you see the, you know, the progress and the transition period of libya versus egypt and tunisia. but the other question is, why is it that we get these very different conflicts? you can say, okay, well, there's in some places like iraq you can say, well, sort of major ethnic and sectarian heteroyes nayty, and that helps to explain why somebody would look at what's happening in syria, would say, okay, this is the sort of kinds of concerns you should expect in the future. but if we're looking at egypt, libya and tunisia, it is true, of course, that there's a higher percentage of cop -- coptics, but in general we're looking at fairly uniform, homogeneous countries, and that's extremely true if we're looking at egypt

versus libya. rather, we have to pay attention to what the parties do. actually take parties and actors seriously and think about the ways in which they're affecting what kinds of struggles are taking place and how people are seeing these struggles and, therefore, how they're viewing the practices of institutional change. and i want to draw our attention to two kinds of parties, these are not the only parties that have emerged, of course, on the scene, but the two main parties either emerge out of what we would think of as social movements, right? the muslim brotherhood is a great example. it emerges from a social movement. it had taken place and gathered roots and actually fairly deep roots within society during the authoritarian period. it's able to form a party when it goes into the transition period. so that's one type of party and it's, obviously, a very important type of party. another type of party i think of as rent-seeking parties. these were often parties that had existed under the sort of, you know, that existedu . mubarak, ben ali, etc., but they

were parties that never really thought they were going to win because they were able to convince the masses that hay had the right -- they had the right position. they were able to gain rent from the state sort of in return for participating as good citizens or as good parties in the political game. so they're very different. those tended not to have developed very strong links, particularly outside of urban areas, something that we see in the election. and they tended not to sort of have developed these sort of strong positions and ties with the people. now, those parties when they come into the, into the sort of daylight, right, of the transitional period have certain challenges that they face. for the social movement-based parties and here again really the best example is the muslim brotherhood and the fjp in egypt, then they can obviously shift their position, and some

people would argue they have. they can take very broad-based positions particularly on things they didn't have a a clear position on to begin with. you can get a wide range of muslim brothers' positions with regard to the role of the state in the economy, right? there's a fairly broad range. but with regards to the positions that they sort of had staked their credibility on, the ones that were really at the heart of the movement, you can't move terribly far can, in particular not when you've had people who have, essentially, given up a great deal under the authoritarian period to be a part of you, right? so there's the core, essentially, the core constituency matters, and it holds their position to some extent at a position that wasn't with necessarily the median with voter position if you're into an account of politics, it was a position that they firmly believed in, right? the rent-seeking parties, of course, have a different issue. the old authoritarian parties have a different problem, and that, the of course, is the fact

that they don't have very strong tie, right? but they have also -- they don't have strong ties, and they don't respond quickly and develop constituencies very clearly. but they also don't really, never really placed their positions either at the point of where they thought the median voter was. these aren't necessarily parties that reapplicant positions -- reflect positions. they're not necessarily a sort of going out and really thinking about where the population sits. now, again, just to recap, these parties can be based either on sort of more universal or more sort of particularistic cleavages. i would argue that those cleavages that emerge are in part reflecting these kinds of positions that they've taken, right? that that's pushing them into it there. so what we think of, want to go back to the diagram said that at the beginning, i think they're very el telling, right? what we realize is that when we asked the first time on the

left-hand side of saying to the voters what is your own position with regard to the role of religion in the state, what is your own position with regards to the role of the state in the economy. so this is the voters' position, right? and you'll see that they're actually fairly centered. they're not that widely distributed. when you ask them what position do you think the party takes, right? then the voters are now recognizing or seeing the parties as holding, again, more extreme positions with regards to religion in the state than they themselves hold. okay? and, actually, interestingly enough, holding slightly less varied positions with regards to the state and the economy than they themselves hold. so part of this is that the, you know, the sort of dialogue, the positions that the parties and especially had already taken and, therefore, other parties took it in response to them is partly being driven by where the parties themselves, their own

histories, their own backgrounds, their own positions. it's even, i think, more clear when we look at the egyptian case. and, again, you know, here what we're looking at on the left-hand side is where the egyptian voters place themselves, those who support the different parties, right? many they're on these scales of 1-9. and then if you're looking at the right-hand side, then you're looking at where they place the party itself. and, again, what we're seeing is that the parties were, in many ways, more extreme, more polarized than the voters themselves were. importantly, when we look at this with regards to libya, and here we've done a slightly different study. like i said, we're in the midst of doing the survey in libya, so we'll be able to look at it in exactly the same way we've looked at it in tunisia and egypt, but it's a moment we're only able to ask the parties themselves where they place themselves. so we asked them the same thing,

what do you think your position is on the state in the economy, what do you think your position is with regards to religion in the state. and we find that there's quite a variation in terms of where they see themselves with regards to the state and the economy, they also see themselves pretty center of the line with regard to religion and the state. they don't think they vary that much on those measures. a lot of people i think would, you know, essentially agree with that. and i have no idea what i just said. and i think part of this actually comes out of the authoritarian strategy itself, and what's interesting is that, you know, in egypt and in tunisia you had a set of parties that were legal and a set of parties that were illegal and set up exactly these kinds of debates and the tensions between, you know, sort of the social movement parties still think about it and those sort of secular legal parties that then come out and attempt to mobilize. and the same thing has really

happened in egypt, right? so, you know, while it was obviously the muslim brotherhood who had existed as a legal charity and was able to run in elections some of the time and when it wanted to, it certainly wasn't able to always, and there were costs that were paid by people who were muslim brother members and, therefore, these are costs that have meant that you try to stay in some ways close to your core constituencies. of course, there's also a sense in which some of this is coming out of historical cleavages, right? and it's there, of course, the great example is libya, right? where the very history of libya has sped up regional tensions, and then those were exacerbated by the ways in which gadhafi had essentially favored regions versus each other. so you're looking at, again, parking lot of this being about sort of historical experience, but it's about historical experience that has shaped the ways parties act i think in very particular ways, okay? and then again the results of this, of just sort of, you know,

wrap up to where i started is that we then see that the very trajectories of these transitions play out quite differently, right? so, you know, in libya, you know, you look at what the tensions are over, and they tend to be over -- they're both over sort of the, you know, the exclusion law and the question of what do you do with those who were in and sort of how much do you move the revolution forward. but it's also overregional distributions. so, you know, the elections, major issues about the elections were over these questions about, you know, what would be the distribution of seats? of course, if as we're going into the constitutional elections, it'll be exactly the same idea, sort of the this interest in faking sure it was $making sure it was 20/20/20. so in many ways the concern that you move into the transitional period are with are these questions about, you know, whether or not regions fight regions not just in the big

east, west, north, south ways but also within them. so it tends to be these group conflicts. nobody's thinking that a person from x tribe part of y tribe. in tunisia, to some extent, though they're that lower level of polarization is important, and egypt to a larger extent, the ways in which the debate and the cleavages tended to become about these really big questions about what was the nature of society and whether or not islam would play a role and what kind of role it would play has really taken over. and i want to make it clear. it's not simply because that comes from rhetoric or positions of the muslim brothers and the fjp, it's also because that becomes the response, right, of what we think of as the non-islamist parties. but the dialogue and the debate becomes one in which people feel that much more is at stake, and so that's why you'll see, you know, journalists arrested

because of, you know, the statements that are seen as anti-islamic. you'll see sort of the pressures on the courts, you'll see the pressures on the presidency, on the parliament. you see, essentially, pressures on, like i said, the kind of liberal institutions and this democratic institution that essentially are the wary ones that would sort of underpin democracy. so final world, i think it's probably clear that i want to make it clear this isn't actually about the content. this isn't about islamism, right? it really is about the nature of that debate, the extent to which it's totalizing, the ways in which they feel that this is really -- it goes much farther than the a distribution of resources. you know, we can fight tomorrow and get them back, right? and it's linked to, it can be linked, again, you know, what we're seeing it's linked to is a question of islamism, but the it

can be linked to all sorts of systems. it's not a simple issue of a fist bump. >> be thank you very much, ellen. a lot of questions, but i'll keep them til later. [laughter] fred? >> well, thank you. let me say i was just very encouraged by the thesis of this study that, you know, we should really focus on institutions rather than trying to characterize islamists. and this is especially true, i think, in the libya case. having just returned there and also having spent time there before the elections of last year, i think it's incredibly important. let me just offer some observations to sort of complement the excellent analysis that was presented focused specificically on the case of libya. obvious; it's well known that there was no civil society, no political participation, and

this this has really affected the transition. but more importantly was gadhafi's very divisive style of patronage politics. i mean, when we go to libya today, we often look at the tribes as sort of this organic, you know, grassroots movement. but what happened in the latter stages of the gadhafi regime is that he retriballized society, and he elevated certain towns, he provided them with favors. and what you're seeing in the post-gadhafi transition is really a turning of the tables. you're seeing locales and towns that were suppressed under gadhafi try to reassert themselves. and it's creating cleavages that were not there before, ask much of it has to do with this struggle for resources whether economic resources or political resources. from my visit last week, there's a real sense -- and i've been traveling there, um, i've been there four times since the end of the revolution. there's a real sense among my friends, people i see on a

repeated basis that with this last visit there's a sense that the goofy state is per -- gadhafi state is perpetuating itself. that it's going to be very difficult to escape from his highly centralized and personalized way of governing the country. why? because there are no institutions. and so the government, however well meaning, reverts to what it knows, and that's this sort of back room, patronage-style politics. then the revolutionaries, the opposition says, aha, this is just more of the same. and all of this is taking place in a very dire security vacuum. let me speak briefly to the political fault lines that we see today in libya. again, i think it's absolutely accurate that we should not try to impose an islamist liberal divide on this country, because it is very different in the

libyan context than we find in tunisia and egypt. the most important line in this country i would argue is really sort of almost a chronological one in terms of where were you during the revolution, to what extend did you accommodate the gadhafi regime, what were you doing under gadhafi, where were you during the revolution, did you join the revolution late, were you an 11th hour joiner? these debates are being spliced out to very minute degrees. so the point to where this debate on the political isolation law, there were some islamists saying if you were not in benghazi on february 17th with us, then you should be excluded from government. and, of course, this is nonceps because people came from abroad. this is the type of debate we're having in this country. it's really about revolutionary legitimacy defined as your proximity to the old regime. the second major fault line, i think, as was mentioned was between the center and the periphery. and it's regionalism.

and much of this, again, is an artificial construct that was the party of gadhafi's divide and rule. you know, when i talk to libyans, they often surmise or lament that their country is becoming another somalia or iraq. i served in iraq in 2003, and i can tell you that the southerns of exist -- sorts of existential fighting we saw in iraq, sectarian and ethic, we don't see it in libya. the idea of libya exists, certainly there are eastern grievances about political power, about a distribution of oil revenues. but the idea of libya still exists, and it's territorial unity. that said, there are some worrisome steins. there's different power centers emerging. a key center of power to follow if you're following libya is the city-state, really of miss rack ca. this is the economic powerhouse in the center of the country where the most vicious battle of

the war was fought. misrata is really claiming the mantle of victory. we defeated the gadhafi regime, therefore, we deserve the preponderance of political spoils. and this is creating a tremendous backlash among other libyans. there was a saying that for 42 years gadhafi tried to get all of libya to hate misrata. he kaled, and in two years -- he failed, and in two years they've done it for themselves. [laughter] because, again, this a previously-repressed town that is now trying to reassert itself. again, the eastern question is very important. libyans talk about federalism. but, again, we have to say what do they really mean by this? and money of this comes from the sort of political immaturity of their vocabulary. when they talk about federalism, they're talking about knew necessary pal government because everything was so centralized under gadhafi, people had to

travel to tripoli just to collect their social security benefits, renew passports. so people want decentralized local governments, but sometimes this gets expressioned as a degree for d expressed as a result for federalism. let me talk, finally, about the islamist dimension here. again, i think one of the saving graces of this country -- and it was well con vied on the slide -- is that the i'd lodge call spectrum of the areas parties is fairly narrow. they define themselves as islamists, centrists. you don't have these real stark divides among the parties. in the runup to the parliamentary elections when you looked at the different slogans, some of the islamist parties were trying to convey a moderate image by showing women, the national forces alliance was trying to play up piety, so both were sort of converging on the

center. now, it's often remarked that in the parliamentary elections the main muslim brotherhood affiliate, the justice and construction party did not do well at the party list, and this is true. why? was it has a very thin -- because it has a very thin institutional base, it didn't have the sort of grass roots support that its counterparts in egypt and elsewhere have had. many libyans that i spoke to said the muslim brotherhood really got lazy in their campaigning. they sort had these slogans, they talked about social piety. they .realize there was this real thirst by voters for fixing the country, for neck no accuratic expertise. and they sort of assumed people would vote for them. a friend of mine said that the muslim brotherhood in libya thought that somebody throughouteddal act bar during the revolution, that doesn't mean he's going to vote for them at the polls.

some other factors, they were tainted by this perception of outside influence especially from qatar, and this played a huge factor with the wonton party. you looked at their fancy campaign ads, they were very well produced, cleary with qatari money, and there's this real phenomenon in libyan politics that, again, is rez due from the gadhafi era that gadhafi drilled into people's heads that political parties are pawns of foreign powers. and you find this time and time again when you hook at the national forces -- or the national salvation front, people say, oh, that's a cia front. the mb is a ca qatari front, so people associate parties with some sort of outside power even though it may not be the case. we are seeing islamists exerting themselves, retooling themselves, the muslim brotherhood, i think, has learned some lessons from the

election. the salafis are regrouping as well. much of their influence is occurring at the informal network through personalities and key figures such as the grand mufti, such as ali slab by, and, again, this leads me to sort of a last observation on elections. elections in this country are still very much at the level of personality politics. why did the national forces alicense win? it wasn't because, i mean, they had this sort of technocratic aura but, again, it was because of the popularity of mahmoud ya a brill. jab ya brill. people know him, he's a wise person. so, again, this idea of actually campaigning on a program or an agenda hasn't really reached maturity in this country yet. people still vote along locale, tribal, family lines and based on personalities.

i think i'll leave it at that, and in the q&a i can talk about some of the key institutional hurdles that this country face in terms of the political isolation law and the constitution. >> thank you very much, fred. may i take the first shot at questions which then turn it over -- and then turn it over to the audience. i also was very impressed with the presentations that were given. and they are in line with some other studies that have shown that, basically, very few people in the arab world, certainly in the countries that were studied, want a totally secular society. they, you know, very few in egypt, i think less than 5 path want the sort -- 5% want the sort of government to be totally secular. having said that, there's a nuance which is that these same people who do not want a totally secular state also do not want

their elected officials to worry about ideological issues. they want their officials to worry about the economy, basically, and not about whether people -- [inaudible] not about whether there are, you know, whether they're out drinking or not, etc. so i'd like you to comment on this, she. is this a discipline, or is it actually just a sign that people want devout, pious people but not the surly people who would tell them how to conduct their lives. the other comment i want to make is that, again, your polls seem to show that you have a consistent core support for islamist forces in these countries. probably in most of the arab world, around 20-25%. of people who, you know, consistently vote islamist because they identify with the i'd of these movements before ideology of these movements.

but then you have a large center which does not. is this a, you know, is this electoral support of 20% which is, actually -- sorry, popular support, which is transferring into much bigger support of 45 president in tunisia, etc. is this a sign of just a lack of organization on part of the secular forces, and how likely are we going to see that change with time? a lot of people argued that as these governments enter the political sort of foray and are supposed to deliver results to their people, as they, you know, do not deliver results partly because of the lack of experience that we're going to see a shift towards sec tar parties. that has not happened yet. while islamist parties have, indeed, lots support, we're not seeing that supporting with translated into gains for the

secular forces. again, a question probably of organization. but it also might mean -- and i'd like you both, ellen and jakob, in particular to comment on this before duh it also might -- but it also might mean that islam you can parties in this country might not care. if they know they are going to win the elections anyway, they don't seem to care. so is -- egypt is facing a fiscal cliff, but nobody seems to be doing much about it. tunisia is in a bit better conflict. and another, fjp don't really seem to be without warrant about the lack of economic performance. to fred, i was very struck by your comment about libyans thinking of themself as libyans. this concept of citizenship in the arab world.

and it is probably also true, i would say it is, in egypt and tunisia where we are, where despite automatic tepgs, we're not seeing the kind of tensions that you're seeing in writer ya, rack, lebanon even before the group rising. this sort of -- this a result of not just -- [inaudible] which artificially divided, but more importantly, of a hundred years in which governments of the region never sort of gave citizenship any due attention and so for the next 100 years after saxby, a trueceps of citizenship was not cultivate inside this country leading not to just tension, but the civil strifes you are sewing. and i wondered if all three of you can comment on there. >> you want that take the first

shot, jakob? >> yeah, yeah. so in 'em thes of the islamists being so sure about stay anything power that they don't care about sort of economic policies and economic solutions and so on, i don't think -- i think that they do care about economic policies, and i do think they care about providing good economic solutions for the country and the here i'm speaking primarily on egypt, they also acknowledges that it's bad politics to do the necessary economic reforms and so on. and in egypt right now there's no sort of reconciliation between the non-islamist parties and the islamist parties. it's extremely divided, and my take is that the islamist parties, they know they need to

do reform, they also know that they need to influence and so on. but they would wait until the next elections, until they sort of would do something about subsidies and so on. >> so, well, i do think they camp out how to manage the countries. so i think it's accurate that they do have a sort of a core support of 20-25%, in egypt's case maybe even a bit more. i think especially in the haas election the salafis conducted a very, very good campaign where he were able to reach above and beyond sort of their core voters of devout salafis. they engaged the sort of social networks and to f so on. this

is change. the non-islamist parties have an opportunity to perform much better, but not in the states with a relatively fragmented conversation with very little sort of platform or very inpuff sort of platform and with, very importantly, that the discussion is sure along the lines of religion and not, and not along the lines of solving sort of the economic problem. i think that's, that's my first, my two comments here. >> um, so with regards to the economy, the one thing i would point out which i think is interesting is there's a question of people are manager being shah consistent, they sort

of get on religion, right? so to some extent this gets back to the point of supply and demand. there's two issues. one is that the sort of supply of differentiation across the parties, right, was one about religion. so on the one hand the debate starts to be centered on religion and, therefore, people end up choosing what they're choosing based on that. and in some ways people care about the economy so much, you know, you ask them and say do you think democrat's the best thing? at the same time, you ask them what it is, you know, there's a sort of great deal of them who actually think it means equality, economic equality, it means that everybody has a bake standard of living. more them, democracy is not about rights and elections and turnovers of government. it's actually about economic el with fare, right? so people are a little bit, sort of have complacency there. so in some ways they ware on the

it, yet they're voting for reapplication. because they care about these things, and they want to have economic problems fixed, but there's no great debate over how that should happen. their own beingses tend to be they want you to do something. in egypt it required a lot of policies that are going to be extremely unpopular, right in and that debate, that discussion has had some few got niecely as much as to the other debates. this question, i think, is an interesting one, whether we're going to see the lots of support for islamists. we ooh that us ram, if we're talking about fjp, hen we did the polls at the end of last year in 2012, we asked who you'd vote for in the next election, and what we'd find is those who

had voted for the fjp were much more likely to be return voters than the other parties were. .. of the same policies that took place under mubarak and the ben ali regimes are still taking place now and as you said with regard, it's not as surprised people decide in some ways there's an attractio attraction, so what they see as the ruling party and there's not a lot of clarity about the extent to

which what is discerning a of te party versus making sure you're on the right side of it. but think of the issues that have to be taken into account. the issue is interesting one because i'm not sure how to read. i'm not sure that means that, for example, syria is a great example of the fragmentation breakdown and where at the moment one could argue sectarianism is something, is trumping satanism. i'm also not sure that that's the only way to read that situation. but even they are not sure people don't think of themselves as syrians. again, our notions and our relationship with citizens often become injured in what context are we in. so i'm not sure that it's a stronger in north africa than it is in iran. >> i guess on libya with regard

to citizenship i think we got to look at this sort of, the polls global trajectory and this idea of legitimacy when contrasted with the -- before gadhafi the monarchy the road there, added degree of legitimacy. it was not hoisted up on libya and in the same way it was forced on iraq. the idea, the state i think still resonates. the shared experience of combating the italian occupation. and then it's difficult to sort of quantified as the talking -- in talking to libyans there's a collective civic responsibly that stems from the revolution that this was truly a revolution that everybody participated, perhaps for their own motive but it was sort of, you know, the wikipedia revolution. everyone contributed content to this. there was not a single established opposition movement that led the charge like the splm or the northern alliance. this is truly bottom up.

you get the sense from people that the sacrifices of the martyr should not be in vain, that people should vote. you had a relatively high turnout and voting. 60%. and i think this really forms this idea of civic responsibility. and you really have seen this and a lot of the protests that you see against the militias that are besieging the ministries, that in the wake of the tragic attack on our outpost in benghazi. this idea of civic action is very strong in society. >> okay, let's open it up. we will take three questions at the time. if you can identify yourself, please, where you come from, ask your question. >> i came from the other building. the question is this one, i understand that the problem is that so much between religious people and sacred but is also

inside islam. for instance, just to give an example, the attack, the destruction against -- can you elaborate a bit? >> okay. please. >> i am from as aig. and one of the charged you brought, the threat in egypt, military intervention versus islamist. nowadays, big argument in egypt whether the military should be involved or not. could you give any thought to that? >> let's take another question. >> thank you very much for lovely presentation. oh, howard university. for jakob, excellent finding that there is a center that most

of these debates are not really taking into account, but what happens to that center as political class continues to push for polarized discourses as well as policies? well, i me, what happens to the center as this continues? and i realize that in this transition we are really dealing with a moving. i mean, there's quite a bit of motion that is to taken place in these societies and, therefore, sort of like difficult also to predict where that is going. and then for alan, -- ellen, i like this idea of two definitions of what politics is all about. but at the same time i'm thinking that again it is a split between the political class and the rest of the public

in which there is the political class seems to be largely focused on vision, vision things, let's put it that way. and the rest of the population, and i'm thinking of the neighbor movement in both countries where, i mean clearly the issues are more important. and then to complicate matters in response to the first question you seemed to indicate that people were voting for religion even though they were concerned about distributed issue. for instance, they voted for the muslim brotherhood is because they delivered services and it was about distribution and in. therefore, it's not a question of religion versus this, but that religion and distribution

are actually, well. >> okay. do you want to go first? >> sure. thank you, great questions. and i want to basically to step back for a second, right. because the first question, right, the question about what happens to the center over time it is an interesting one because it illustrates the concern about, you know, peoples position six or do they actually change over time. which i think is exactly sort of the crux of the issue in these kind of universal sort of socially transformative debates. so i think it's a great illustration of exactly fat, that part. -- exactly that, that part. with the distances between the political, both of the political classes sort of on positioning, at least with the diagrams, right, but also their own concerns. i've actually not more concerned about these big debates and

this, these sort of him a religious dimension than the labor movement than others. another thing that everything is only universal but it's only universal if we can transformative, only distributed. but the question is when it comes to the debates, when it comes to the major debates and the ways in which local elites are they fighting over things like institutions are whether or not, what they're trying to mobilize supporters for, right, then part of the question, what is the dominant, what's the dominant basis of the debate. so it's interesting that there are all these people out there -- there isn't a real kind of source of support for parties that would come in. a little like ones that argue, come in and say, we're a good muslim party, right, you can be a good muslim and vote for us and yet this is not about the rule of islam.

so in other words, there is a center after. when i said earlier part of this is about what's the short term from what happens in this immediate area transition is because this tells us what opportunities are out the. there is an opportunity for people to take on distribution what issues. there is an opportunity parties to come and. there's a lot of opportunities. to get to your third question from what happens if the networks, the organizational capacity that is so much more developed with some groups than others that voting is about that mobilization, it's about that social distribution or economic distribution much more than it's about the ideology. it doesn't detract from the importance in which those ideologies shape those debates but you're right, and i'm not saying by the way that these are not, i mean, when i started at the outset saying here are two that the party. the rent-seeking parties clearly did not develop these links and ability to decline parties in the same way that the social movement parties do. and one of the questions is how

much that can be developed over time. i think it's always interesting, from the west with the notion of programmatic parties. those can put together. as if there's something about a programmatic part that has to say -- the reality of course in the middle east we see both coming together quite handily and more importantly the people who would really like a programmatic party recognize the importance and that no issues with a programmatic party that they support going out engaging and, i mean, many people of new issues. with a programmatic party actually engaging in -- it's not as antithetical as we may all see that. cannot answer a quick question about military? when i say military, not about the military commanders about the question people why the military. there's a certain sort of call for some people, not by everybody by any stretch of imagination of the military coming in and being, playing a

guardian role and that's what i was referring to. >> okay, i will just -- a few comments on identifying. so there is a center among the voters, the attitudes of the voters on the religious scale. i also think on the economic issues and so on. and anyone who is spent some time in egypt knows that it is a fairly sort of moderate country and moderate people. the issue is there's sort of no parties that have taken this into position, and again as ellen also underscored. the parties are very polarized. and especially since, so doing the parliamentary election in egypt back in 2011, there was a tendency for the freedom of justice party to move to the center and tried to catch the center vote and so on, and leading the more sort of radical

islamist groups to the newer parties. sort of the political development since the elections have just polarized the environment even more. and then the question is, as you suppose, what then happens to the center that we can identify among the voters, and it is sort of a danger that gradually that people are forced to make a choice between one of the two sites because they don't have the option of going to the center. and also being on one of the sides has an advantage that is a very clear position for the parties. and you also saw that in the presidential election where the two candidates that had in the presidential election, you actually had sort of center candidates, they were more

center, center candidates but it was the two candidates that represented each extreme, the secular or the poor islamist extreme that went to a second round, and for the, contribute to the polarization of the political environment. >> to address the question on into islamist conflict as illustrated, i think you're right, this is a real phenomena in libya where, because, yeah, islamism was kept so suppressed for so long, navigator open and as one is was said to me, it's blinded us. it's disorienting to us and they're so much competition going on, people are trying to stake out positions. obviously, the two main currency, for now they are a think united against on the issue of this isolation law, but you will see real competition but, in fact, there was a

solitary figure who is sort of looking ahead to the next elections and he said, we are want to kind of let the muslim brotherhood take a stab at government and then we're going to run and our slogan is we're not the muslim brotherhood. this is their approach. but more important and i want to speak of this just a bit, this idea of divisions within the salafi current because we typically lump all these individuals together but in libya israel debate between what we call the quietest, those who stay away from politics, the politico's i decided to run in elections and then the rejectionists strand. and i think one function of this competition is acts of violence, as people try to assert themselves. i think the attacks are one symptom of this by this rejectionists strand of salafis in libya. there's a great deal of dialogue and negotiation going on among these different players. any of them trace all their sort

of genealogy back to a notorious prison in tripoli where gadhafi kept all his political bridges. this is a cauldron really where these guys became politically active. and you see many of them take different branches. i think a key hurdle is the constitution. i've heard in benghazi when i was in the east that some of these rejectionist groups, they are waiting to what the constitution looks like before they give up their arms and integrate into the police or integrate into the state. i heard that there's delegations coming over from egypt from the party to try to talk to some of these rejectionist groups in sort of the salafi for cabinet and say it's possible to preserve your purity and still participate in the elections in the state. so these discussions i think a really fascinating and they are ongoing. >> great. let's take a second round. please.

>> thank you so much. my name is layla. professor lust, you mentioned that you are put on democratic institutions, including the judiciary, the media, but what about civil society? can you speak to the state of civil society in egypt, libya and tunisia? and to what extent a civil society -- that can be for all the panelists are. >> regarding the point professor lust raised about that if you ask egyptians, i think egyptians might help -- i am from egypt. regarding when you ask egyptian what you want and what to understand about democracy, they say they're looking for more economic welfare. then jakob said that muslim brotherhood do care about economy and they know how to run the country. but they wait until certain

problems. and i find this very -- you think egyptians would wait for years, and then you say also that if you ask egyptian who elected muslim brotherhood they would reelect muslim brotherhood again. i don't think they can do that again. they have very, very, now we have like 40% poverty rate in egypt among, i mean 40% of egyptians are poor. you think they're going to reelect again the muslim brotherhood if they are suffering more? >> other questions? >> hi. i'm for middle east policy. actually i wonder if you can shed some light on rebuild campaign egypt, tomorrow i know, i don't know -- is now almost 4 million people signed for no

confidence in president morsi calling for presidential elections on june 30. and actually i wonder why you didn't mention this in your presentation talking about the public opinion in egypt and my point of view, the popularity is declining so fast. thank you. >> okay, who wants to go first? why don't you do that, jakob? >> so, so one, just to go on the declining popularity of the muslim brotherhood, i think we should, according to my experience, we should be careful of the, overestimating want, in the polls we usually have consistently, vis-à-vis the opinion of the supreme council of armed forces and also we see

similar trends whether the public opinion, vis-à-vis the muslim brotherhood, that you see in cairo there's a sudden discourse of critique and dissatisfaction with the ruling party, while you see in the rural areas and so on you see a more consistent, a more consistent support. so definitely egypt is facing tremendous problems, and these need to be solved for any ruling party to continue to be successful, but one should always be careful, sort of taking sort of the main intellectual discourse and seeing this as reflecting sort of the public opinions of egypt. in terms of, you said contradictory to say that the brotherhood will win again and so on, i think in the short

term, and i was big in the short term, in the short term. i think that they are, they are aware that there are tremendous problems, especially in terms of subsidies and the current account deficit in egypt, so on so forth. problems that any government has to address in a three or four year period. but in the short term of also because there is no low house of parliament. i think they are playing a waiting game right now to get the elections are now scheduled for october. i think it before the october relations i think they're trying to wait it out and win these elections and then possibly an

act reforms after the elections, which would be very, very unpopular. >> the last statement i think is what is the critical issues. it's the fact that a long-term their improving economy would you be a very proper thing to entering a rabbit in the short term there's almost no way to do it without having a lot of people who become very much hurt. and the question is okay, so what do you do? and i think the answer for many is nothing, right clicks are nothing but with the modification of then these some of the same techniques that have been used before. with regards to the civil society, what's interesting, right, is that in some ways both of civil society and also the petition, good demonstrations in the case exactly an talk about, right, it is the interest of people who otherwise would think that you elect a president, you let a president carry out his

term. i think a lot of people are signing up addition actually fundamentally believe in institutions but at the same time in democratic elections and allowing, you know, them to be returned democratically. but it seems like the stakes are too high and it seems like the problems are too much. you know too much. you know, nbcsl laws, at least the last week and a half or so ago the draft in egypt of course is being very heavily criticized. it's considered by many to be worse than what they've had under mubarak. the same have questions about both sides trying to innocent play and make sure that the other side can't get a fair hearing. it's all of a difficult in places likely because exactly, they are the institutions that are in some way quite absent but that is a different definition. >> just to add in i think the living context, i mean, i think

civil society has, you know, has really stepped into certain degree to fill the vacuum of the official state. but up to a point. and again i think went to be very careful about how we define civil society, especially when we go there attempting to. i mean, the civil society representatives that are in the hotel lobbies in tripoli are very different -- by what we made from civil society in this country or informal actors and much of this is still very traditional forms of authority, tribes. i think we need to sort of reconceptualize what we mean by militias in this country and look at the revolutionary armed groups that continue to provide funding, a sense of identity, medical care for a number of these armed fighters. and isn't a political identity, that that is, in fact, civil society. they do have legitimate

grievances and they are playing a role in the absence of the state. so it's a very complex situation. but again i think his idea of people power has been very effective. i was in tripoli and i witnessed the march of protesters moving to confront these armed groups that were in front of the ministry, and the siege was broken precise because of this mobilization of power. people power spent i want to comment if i can on two questions that were raised. one having to do with the popular support for the islamists in egypt. recent poll showed that on one hand, if people are asked if the elections were held now with a vote again for president morsi are not? 37% said yes. 45% said no. so certainly you have a lot of support. at least for the president which

is different maybe then parliament. on the other hand, of the people who said no, two-thirds of them could not name a person, you know, that they would elect in place of president morsi. so that by itself, and all the traditional sort of opposition signals and the presidential campaign, 2%, 3%. i mean can you still have of course a situation which is by the way not unique to the arab world. in every other region of the world, you know, emerging political parties took time to organize. that's not unique to the arab world and hope nobody -- a out e highest standards than the rest of the world. so the question of democracy and what does democracy mean, you know, it is true that maybe if

people asked to rate their cars, people in the arab world like most people around the world would rank the economy condition as the number one priority. it is also true that they also rank corruption very highly. they need to address corruption. equity very high. they need to have equitable treatment, world of law applying to everyone. and i think maybe part of the question is most people still equate democracy with principal parties only. but other than, you know, equate sort of addressing such issues as corruption and equities to take care of us, with the development of a system of checks and balances, which necessarily means political reform and democracy, that sort of correction is still messed, i

think, from most people's mind. but i think that if the correction is made, people are asked explicitly you would see a much larger numbers, agreeing with the need to reform it into political reform is only way that corruption or equity can be addressed in an institution and manner. have another third, final round? please. spenreporter fromegypt.my quest, last point, the definition of democracy or definition, let's say, civil society or institutional reform. my observation is that last year as this year were asking the

same questions and you are trying to understand the same people in the same way. is this something reasonable? is this the nature of the town or the decision-makers are the professors or scholars to ask the same question and try to find the same answers, or try to justify, or sometimes even in the name of appeasing or appealing, or whatever can call it, to try to say this may take time. but people are not using communication. they are using reform. so it's not a matter of taking, -- [inaudible] the page into the telephone or to understand democracy. because i see that there is a large lowering of standards and democracy or civil society or transparency, even the title of this, today's discussion.

thank you. >> this is for all the people by the way. >> please, sir. >> steve winters, local researcher. i hope i have my facts right here, but it seems that i heard president morsi was on a trip to moscow not to long ago. meeting with putin, after the idea has been floated that egypt might join the bricks grew. as the idea of such a grand realignment received any reaction from the populist in egypt and opposite would have economic implications. >> one final question. >> okay. jakob? >> in terms of, institutions, i think one of the key issues in the sensational process in egypt has been sort of exactly the

development in terms of the institutional development. i think it was a big mistake for the process, the parliament was dissolved. .. this may also be one of the differences between tunisia and egypt and that in egypt you hav had an assembly where you have had a debate on the constitution

. you have had an elected parliament that has not been deferred and so on. while in egypt you are in a continuous assembly, the partie to of actually don't have a parliament as one. so i do think that in terms of promoting interparty democratization on the use of institutions command has played a major role in that different trajectories that we see. >> so your most direct question as professors like to ask the same questions over and over again. i guess we do it until we think we've gone unanswered. think, frankly, we are quite fa from but understanding democratization. that's one reason might my approach and wide ticket is to think that it is actually usefu to think about.

certainly we think about packages of it, in other words, when do we get it, what institutions self-destruct to know which ones don't, and out of those deferred. think it is important to realiz that part of what i'm saying today is obviously about what i think is taking place in libya, egypt, and tunisia. the better part of it is to say if we were to see a change in, you know, in syria or a transition in human that was a bit more than we have seen so far, or in jordan or elsewhere, what kinds of sessions with to want to ask. and my argument is, the first one would want to really understand is, what are the actors and what positions and how much grass-roots support do they or don't they have, when they enter into those debates. in a place like libya where you really did not have a very open -- a political party, you know, it was capital punishment not only if you were in one but if you knew somebody was and did

not say. that is a very different institutional environment. that creates very different expectations about what kind of cleavages come to the fore and what kind of implications that has for whether or not, you know , there is a lot of struggle over things like the media and civil citation and speech or whether or not those are the critical and main focus is a complex, but other things are. so hopefully we get a bit farther, but, yes, we asked som questions over and over. >> just said briefly with this, in the case of libya, it's very appropriate to define democratization in terms of these institutional terms because libyans themselves see this as absolutely crucial to the success of their experiment. they did have elections, but everyone knows it is not -- they're looking at the aegean sea right now. they cannot get anything done. the gmc is incapable of forming a committee. they lack basic amassed to cut capacity in terms of taking

minutes. that governments even working because there is not this large institutional framework. you have well-meaning individuals trust entities can' deliver the new positions. people undemanding institutions and, you know, prophecies. people, i think, really definin democracy in terms of the constitution. really holding on to this. we talked a lot here about libya's lack of experience in this area, but libyans themselves remember that data constitution in 1951. people are revisiting that and trying the lessons from that. i think that is very encouraging . >> i just have one comment on the question of democratization which is that as our world is democratized and, again, no one should expect this to happen. we have not had a culture of

democracy for a long time. one key issue, i think, that we would need to press again and again, and it is brought up in several points, the issue of th right to be different. i think that is a principal pillars of democracy. that has not yet been totally embedded in our culture. when you ask people if they agree to women's rights or if they agree to, you know, fellow citizens being ethnically or religiously or culturally different, you do get the majority, actually, in many countries in the arab world, bu not overwhelming ones. and so it is not in us to have -- enough to have 55 percent said believe in women's rights. is not enough to save 55% are t mike live next to a christian. the less there is this fundamental right to be different not just agreed to but , in fact, celebrated as a sign of strength, you know,

diversity will continue to suffer in the middle east, and think that is something is goin to take a very long time. it's going to involve a change and education and system, not something that just because you have a revolution it pops out. we're already seeing it. it's still the zero some battle gain. i think with the islamists are trying to dominate, the second part is also, as was said, ther are sometimes willing to echo through undemocratic means to dominate as well. so in egypt government behaves as if elections mean everything and the center of opposition behaves as if it means nothing. but that fundamental right to b different and to accept that difference is something needs a lot of work. with that, thank you very much. i truly appreciate your coming. please join me in thanking the

parents for an excellent presentation. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> more coverage this afternoon from an event looking at u.s.- russia relations.

>> with congress of this week for the memorial day recess we're featuring book tv in prim time as we showcase three books on american foreign policy. >> tonight as people return fro the memorial day holiday, we look at new recommendations fro the national transportation safety board that members say could reduce deaths from alcoho impaired driving. we will show you some of our

recent discussion with chairman debra herdsmen as well as portions of a recent meeting with the board approved the recommendations. here's a look. >> today we need to consider th safety report reaching zero, actions to eliminate alcohol- impaired driving. this is critical because impaired driving remains one of the biggest killers and the united states. twenty-five years ago today our nation saw out the deadliest an alcohol impaired driving crash in u.s. history. a drunk driver drove his pickup the wrong way on interstate 71 near carrollton, kentucky. hit a school bus and killed 24 children and three adult chaperons, injuring 34 more. today our thoughts are with those families in carrollton, kentucky recognizing this 25th

anniversary of that crash. that same year impaired drivers would kill thousands more. let's look at how well we are doing as a nation to address th national epidemic of alcohol- impaired driving. as i will explain, we have made progress since that deadly nigh in kentucky, but it has been no nearly enough. in 1982 the first year of the tracking system, 21,113 people died in u.s. crashes involving alcohol-impaired driving. this represented nearly one-hal of all highway deaths. today the percentage of deaths due to alcohol-impaired driving is about one-third of all highway fatalities.

moving the percentage from one half the one third of highway fatalities has taken great effort by thousands of dedicate people and many organizations. >> wants more from that meeting as well as comments from ntsb chairman deborah hersman. also milwaukee county sheriff david clarke live joint to give his take. all tonight with your phone calls beginning at 8:00 eastern over on c-span. >> their tends to be a denigration of the u.s. militar by some historians. whenever one german battalion fled an american battalion or one regiment fought an american regiment, the germans tended to be tactically superior. that there with a better

military. think this is just nonsense. it's pointless. global war is a crash of systems , which system, produced the wherewithal to project powe in the atlantic, pacific, and the notion, southeast asia. which system can produce the civilian leaders to create the transportation systems. the civilian leader setter able to produce 96,000 airplanes in 1944. >> sunday, june 2nd, 2-time pulitzer prize-winning author and journalist right back and some will take your calls comin in else to my facebook comments and tweets three hours live sunday at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2. >> next, a panel looks at onlin teaching and its impact on higher education, specifically the increase in massive open online courses that a number of

colleges have incorporated as part of their curriculum. speakers include author in new york times columnist tom friedman, education undersecretary of martha cantor the co-founder of the leading internet coor's provider. this was arrested by the university of pennsylvania, one of the first colleges to offer free on-line courses and is jus over 90 minutes. [applause] >> good afternoon. it is wonderful to see so many of you here on a beautiful sunn friday afternoon. welcome to our 2013 forum. i would like to that extend a special welcome on behalf of al of us pay into over 350 wonderful guests from as near a philadelphia and boston and as

far away as and burro, jerusalem , hong kong, singapore, and melbourne. it is quite remarkable that as we gather together on this sunn friday after an to explore open learning in the future of highe education, we have lots of skeptics in this country and th world about what their education , especially higher education changes. so i would like to ask those of you here today that you join with me and think about this. we will have many other points to exploit today, but i would ask that no one ever again the endless capacity of education and innovation to inspire great minds to work together, and we have some great minds here today

. this is our fourth foreign. it is a public discussion of global the important issues featuring some of the foremost bankers are betting, and it is made possible through the generous support and inspiratio of university trustee david m. fill sen and his wife who are here with us. would you please stand up so that we can thank you. [applause] so, i would like to begin, just to give an overview, of our topic with our representative " about new educational technology. this writer is skeptical. he says, and i quote, it is to be mistrusted because it brings the appearance of wisdom and said of wisdom itself.

now, this could be a critique o online learning, but the author is none other than plateau. he was recording a dialogue between two people in the year at 370 b.c. the. what is the technology in question? what is the one that gives the appearance of wisdom instead of wisdom itself? the technology is spreading. socrates is suspicious that writing is, and i quote, an invention that will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it because they will not practice their memory. new educational technologies ar almost always met with suspicion , with great suspicion, with skepticism, if not cynicism .

similar concerns were voiced again. 1800 years later, the redemptio of the printing press and the widespread introduction of the printed book. at that time, the purpose of th faculty was challenged as never 04, but many times since. why sit through a lecture to gain knowledge when, on your ow time, you can simply read it in a book. and yet, from that time until now, our universities have not only survived, they have thrived . and they have changed dramatically as well. and we are here to talk about one such change, which certainl seems dramatic. so how do we wisely judged and prudent the plan for the new internet technologies and educations, particularly as we

experienced an explosion of massive, open, online courses, what are now called -- a new word in our vocabulary, moocs. this new educational technology burst onto the scene just five years ago. now, you know you have heard th failure is an orphan will success has many parents. countless individuals and universities are willing to claim parentage of moocs, but i was stanford, and it was a stanford course on artificial intelligence that drew 160,000 students in the fall of 2011 commanded really caused everyon to set up and pay attention. the following year, 2012, began the year of the moocs. three different university collaborations emerged to

promote this new technology and offer very high quality courses to anyone in the world with an engine that connection who coul speak the language and offer it for free. and then it turned out even if you didn't speak the language there would be someone on line which has led for you. one of the founding partners, i'm pleased to say. there were four founders. and that was less than one year ago. our faculty have since complete ten courses on the platform wit a total enrollment of more than 450,000 students, and those are just the courses that we completed. there are another 400,000 students enroll right now. so those four under and 50,000, wrap your mind around that, mor than 18 times the total enrollment. so you begin to understand the possibilities and the average

into these that this the technology provides. but none of us know exactly how will play out. i have come from the beginning, called this a bold experiment. are we headed for an educationa revolution, or will this just allow us to do more of what we have always done and as someone new way? one of the opportunities and what are the most likely and fo scene consequences, and i am delighted to say that we have a stellar group of panelists with us today to answer by probing questions. i have the privilege of asking the questions, and there on the spot for answering them. those are the rules. that is one of my privileges as president. a pulitzer prize-winning journalist and columnist to has been with the new york times fo more than two decades serving incapacities that range from

middle east bureau chief ted chief diplomatic correspondent, white house correspondent, and international economic correspondent. since 1995 he served as a new york times foreign affairs columnist for a as written extensively on the ways in whic new technologies, like moocs, transform the lives of individuals and societies and once they left. his best selling and pill was a prize-winning books are read avidly around the world. i have every one of them on my bookshelf marked up and really of jordan. it is fabulous. welcome. tom friedman. [applause] martin has been the undersecretary of segregation and the obama administration since 2009. she overseas policies related t

post secondary education, adult and career technical education, federal student aid, and allied range of other white house educational initiatives. president obama has set a goal for this country to have the best educated, most competitive work force in the world by 2020 as measured by the proportion o college graduates. the president has charged under secretary kantor with implementing the policies to make this happen. prior to appointment, she serve as chancellor of one of the largest community college districts and the nation, located in the heart of california's silicon valley. so if there is someone who combines an understanding and appreciation of education and innovation, it is certainly martha cantor, the third

community college leader ever t serve and the undersecretary position. welcome to martha. [applause] william has been champion of th university system of maryland for more than a decade. we were just talking earlier. i spent a year at the universit of maryland college park, a marvelous year i should say, ha a spectacular center. previously he served as president of ohio state university, and before that as president of the university of maryland college park. he is a widely respected, sough after expert on the biggest challenges facing higher education in america, especiall affordability, cost containment and innovation. the chancellor chairs the

national research council -- council board of higher education and is in frequent communication with business leaders and government official about the educational needs and requirements of the 21st century work force. welcome. [applause] daphne is a professor of the computer science department at stanford university. the broad expertise including machine learning with applications for its systems, biology, and personalize madison . in january of 2012 professor kohler helped usher in the era of moocs when she co-founded because sarah with fellow stanford professor and truth in. a social -- social or to perish a company that works with top

universities to create exceptional online classroom education for free. by january of this year it included 62 university partners offering of 300 classes with more than two and half million students enrolled. welcome and thank you. [applause] so let's distorted. a great. you're on the spot. the last shall be first, as the say. so, the new york times calls th year 2012 the year of the moocs. but on-line education has been here for two decades of peace. so is this type or is there something special?

>> i think there's something special. hasted to with several things. first of all, massive aspects. neither of these are really characteristic. that's exactly right. i think that what we have been able to do by a combination of the pathology and design is to provide a truly outstanding educational experience to peopl everywhere with the almost zero marginal cost per student and would reach people who otherwis would never have access to the kind of an educational experience that we as institutions like pain are stanford take for granted. >> so, moody's said that moocs are good things for ely's schools. but there will be negative effects on smaller colleges tha

may be less out of on-line networks. your system runs the gamut from what you would call a flag ship state university to a community colleges and someone. do you see or do you expect dramatically different effects on different campuses? >> i do. in fact, i think college park, for example, will be a producer of moocs. but my hope is that all of higher education can take advantage of new ideas, new innovations like moocs to address what i think is the mos pressing issue facing our country, and that is our abilit to educate the next generation of population to the levels and quality that are demanded.

and i think we are at great ris in the united states. we talk a lot about the competitiveness requirement for producing more greatness, but what cannot be overlooked is th social equity aspect. to come from a family in the lowest quartile of income, you have about an 8 percent chance of getting a college degree. if you're in the upper quartile of mankind it's about 80 percen chance. colleges become the gateway to good job and a successful career . we cannot be the america we hav been if we don't reach out and educate more low income students . this issue of cost and access can only be addressed, in my mind in this era, her innovations like the moocs, and that is why i'm so excited abou the potential that they offer.

>> i think of this as moocs 101 the basics. so the basics are, you can deliver a lot with a very low marginal cost. is it going to work? we are talking about the basics. you said, low income students o the most left out, and it is absolutely true. no matter how much outrage places do, and we do a lot, we are not calling to capture all of those students. but i began by asking about -- are we promising or are people in your neck of the woods of journalism who really are excited by this, are we promising too much? >> well, you know, i can speak to the journalism side of it. let me try to just put it in th context. i think we tend to talk about

all of this in separate boxes, the technology, education, and the workplace. to me they are actually some wa slick connected, the technology is intimately connected with what president was talking abou in terms of the social inequality aspect. so i will do the one minute version of the low world's law updated because i think it's relevant. >> all this in one man it. >> may be too. so i have one rule of business and life in a flat world. and that is, wherever can be done will be done. the only question is will it be done by you or to you. just don't think it will be done . >> what i think when you say by you or to you, whether it be done by the united states are t the united states.

>> at his word starts. >> and those of you for miles o the country, this is constructive competition. we want you to compete. go ahead. >> so when i wrote the world wa flat, which was 2004, what i argued was that i didn't mean w were all people. we read the platform were more people could meet and connect and collaborate on zero cost. more places than ever before. and that was thanks to the merger of three things, the personal-computer. there aren't content in digital form. second, the internet, which a lot of people transmit their content digitally in newark, an the emergence of what i call software in my own window which a lot of people collaborate on each other's content. and all came together between basic in 1995 and 2004. i would argue what made in the moocs revolution possible was a second revolution that happened

since 2004 until today. it's a huge inflexion that happened to -- it was disguised by the sub prime crisis and pos september 11th. we are now living. so it's simple and that in 2004 -- in 2011i wrote a book that used to be my colleagues. when i sat down to do the new book with michael the first thing i did was get the first edition. facebook wasn't there. so when i was running around saying the world is flat torero connected. force he was a parking place, applications were were you sent to college, but it was a rough start and scared was a typo. so all of that -- [applause] >> all of that happened after i

was arguing the world was flat. so what happened actually is that the world has gone from connected to have been connecte in the last seven -- the last point i just make, the latest, what god has done, i believe, i that it has raised the whole global curve. the whole global curve just ros because every boss now has cheaper, easier, faster access to more above average software, automation, robotics, cheap labor, and cheap genius. since what are what are you are the single most important socio-economic factors is that average is officially over. and when averages over to my take the doctor's point, if you do not have high-school degree now there is nothing for you down there. so to the technology, it's related to the inequality, related to the opportunity.

>> and just to put this in very specific form, mounting and advanced calculus course. as it just happens; suddenly, t be given by a pen professor named reprise who is actually year. i see him right over there. and this course is one of the first to get accredited by the american council of education. and if any of you have not log on to see this, you must. it is visually stunning. i'll in a great scholar and teacher, but an artist. he knows dante. he draws this. this course is going to be available for everybody around the world, and we hope -- and dino robbed of said it will be something that inspires more people, more young people who don't have access to it in a

traditional education sense. you really care about access. they have said, and i quote, every capable hard-working and responsible students should be able to afford to sit a college -- daughter college. as of the democratic dream more republican dream. does the american dream. so here is a multiple choice. automatic grading would be easy what i am sure you will have a somewhat untraditional answer t a. >> you are on today. >> right. >> in 19 years you will deal with this : no question. >> will it increase access, decrease the quality of education available to young americans, both, or none of the

above? >> it will definitely do a and b . not none of the above command they will do a and b. they will increase quality and decrease quality, so i would amend be. they have already increased access. so they will continue to increase access. that is a no-brainer. you have all seen the numbers. >> and that is a headline. i mean, that really is the headline because there is no doubt. this is quite remarkable becaus we're living through this. there is no doubt that they hav a are ready increase in access. an artistic and person who took an american poetry course of line because that in person, because of his optimism, could not do it in person. that is amazing. >> i wrote about -- we have bee doing panels all year since the

together. doing duets. but i was so struck in your introduction because they came in may. at the time it was 230,000 students. now is to have come and each time you get panels together. and this is not even the same calendar year. >> and when we started we were for universities. i have seen my provost year, an we head -- he has really carry this forward. nobody should say that higher education cannot move quickly when we want to move quickly an there is something to be gained but just to piggyback on what was said, to my far less than a year ago there were four of us. i thought of being a lab scientist and having a petrie dish. first have to end an four and i eight and before you know what we had 62.

eyeleted daffy this morning and said, okay. do we have 124 no? redoubling? it is quite remarkable. it is good. let me get back. access and quality. how can we bring them together? >> i had a meeting this week with the head of higher education and one of our 50 states. he said he had just completed for courses an introduction to computer science and four different moocs. he said that he had for incredibly different experience in terms of what was taught, ho those courses were taught, and what he came away with. my first question was, did you finish? and he actually finished off four. so when i sat and answered that has the potential to increase quality and decrease quality it

is that variation that we in th federal government and many people across the country wants tax -- ask the moocs leaders which are dispersed all over th world now -- >> out, they're all here right now. >> ask the moocs leaders to giv us the best quality and continued giving is the best quality and demonstrate how you're giving us the best quality and what we're learning from what you're doing. so when i ask-the a couple of weeks ago who is taking moocs courses. i don't know if the numbers of this time. he said a percentage have baccalaureate degrees. my next question. there is a question. he doesn't have up baccalaureat degree. are they completing this course and what levels of those courses ? and a key i guess to close this little, do moocs have the

potential to teach basic math and elsewhere said that we can give more students completing advanced calculus and get more people ready for the jobs that are going to be here that tom talked about. >> is a great question. >> and that think it is a sense of step. if you are going to raise level of society within the united states and equally or perhaps even more so in the countries around the world, you need access to education even more s than we do here. you have to start from the basic . the basics are introductory algebra, physics dr. phyllis. they bring them up to the next level. so the point that they can complete a baccalaureate degree. and it's essential that we provide the pathway to success for students to common with so very little. >> i wanted to comment on the quality issue. at think that is so central to

this discussion. week, and higher education, cannot complete our obligation to society looking to the futur if we cannot meet the lower costs need of delivering high-quality higher education, overcoming what is called the cost. and so the thing that excites m about the moocs, but i still have questions. can they be used in traditional campuses to drive down the cost but maintain the quality of the delivery. we have to answer that question. we're running experiments, working with ithaca, the partnership. the university of cicero. we are running some side-by-sid comparison. glasses are being taught in traditional ways, but we are using the moocs in other class's

. and then we are going to compar not the cost but the outcome. we have to answer that question. >> let's be clear about this. teaching is not the same thing is learning, and what we really care about is not what is taught , but what is learned. so what is the potential for assessing it learned viejo moocs ? in other words, you know, the front page of the new york time today. it is very hard to wake up in the morning now and not see som article about online learning. this morning and it is not coincidental, front page of the new york times have a story about a new automated on-line grading system that uses artificial intelligence. this is your field. it uses artificial intelligence

technology to instantly grade students, assignments with no human input. is the future of moocs and higher education that students learned with no human inflexion except the creation of the mooc themselves? how do we best pushed moocs force that we know students -- high proportion of students are learning, not just that we are teaching them in technologicall innovative ways. >> of answer that no part of your question. we hope that most will learn without any human intervention. and that is strictly not a hope. for me, i think that the best model is the one with the description of the new content embedded in a study that has a live human instructed there to guide.

>> it is important because the relationship, that personal relationship between the students and instructor most of us can place that critical decision that we made in our lives and our careers to be a role model or inspiration. so assessments' aside, i think that it is critical to maintain at least where the students to have that opportunity to be mentored by allied human, i think that is an important part of the experience. you could do it based on high-quality content. you can do it based on high-quality exploits. >> it is really helpful to have a historical perspective and to understand that when the text

book came out people, many people were proclaiming the end of in-class education, and that could not have been further fro the truth. and the same thing is likely to be true. success that moocs had even a greater potential power for thi globalization of education. there is nothing physically tha you actually have to send aroun the world. it is right there in cyberspace. you recently wrote that nothing has more potential to enable us to be imagine higher education. so what is it that gives them that potential. that, is it true do you think i much with a classic liberal art and science courses?

does it is for computer science. >> i don't live in a university setting. i will speak in a little broade context. to me one of the most exciting things when i think about moocs. first of all, in terms of the time line, if i were to compare this to search, alta vista just got invented. we have not even seen the googol . when we do our 550th panel in five years, i am sure it is going to be totally different. when i hear people saying this is overrated. number one. in terms of foreign policy. we are struggling with the country like egypt, the arab awakening. how do we respond? one way to respond to it, so much a youth led a movement by young people feeling a world where they can see and touch

everyone else, appreciate it an realizing that they have come u and realize their full potential . and one of the ways that we can honor this movement in response to a commander for, imagine we rented 50 school rooms in egypt and stalled on 50 computers in each room. a satellite uplink. in the course they want. we hired an english arabic speaking instructed to be there 24 hours a day. the whole thing would cost us one plus 16. imagine the impact you could actually make that connects up with exactly what these and people want with these tools to realize their full potential. so i think this is enormous. i just say one thing again abou the importance of teaching.

and here is a journalist. the only jet was of course i have ever taken. >> and you have had a campus based college experience. >> and i believe that inspiration, my friend wrote a book, we were talking about thi last night. for the industrial revolution, we made a small aspect of the people and ask them to join the union, come to work every day. whether it is in the surface or the production sector. as a very gross generalize addition. we are not making -- harassment and critical thinking and problem solving, asking him to learn, relearn commandery engineer themselves every year. i think the small you could do through mug of -- motivating people through characteristics. a big one requires inspiration, and that is why, you know, if you look at one of the most

interesting educational writing we have three objectives. we need the base of knowledge. we can't do anything without that. second, we need critical thinking and problem solving. third, persistence and motivation because there is one thing about this world. it enables commit in spires, it empowers, but it demands much more self motivation, and that starts with, i think, and inspired teacher. >> so tom talked about what we could do in egypt. what do you think that we can do ? what is your ask of us? we ask of a government a lot. i remember, i was inspired, as were millions of others, by joh f. kennedy, asked what you can do for your country. what can we as educators to? what can we do with this new technology, whether it is a

large public system or many of us here who run private univers is, what can we do to make that access and quality come together . >> i just filled up a comment o the board, inspiration. i am reminded of their research that children need help in thir grade. too many children need help in third grade. one out of four children live i poverty in the u.s. 42 percent of people have not prepared for college, much less how many hundreds of thousands are dropping out of high-school. so one is to mccain of the equity attend the -- agenda big seller rated to a close to the achievement gap for three moocs education? and that is a very high.

if you just look at the whole spectrum of people who are in higher education and people who are not, you have to really loo at the pre k-20, look at the places where i think it's broken , and that is why i mentioned the comments of algebra and the like. some basic education with the inspiration will give kids at all levels and adults. 47 percent of americans the rei and a high-school level. >> so for every level there are people who could be brought the and not lost. the con academy does it as to have at a more basic level, but at every level we could bring more people and. and you see the full spectrum i your.

the fewer americans to the inability. if you lose them to the inability of actually sustain themselves in the job market. if they don't get -- >> that such a critical questio for our nation. i think the thing that gives me hope in picking upon something tom said, we are at the very early stage of moocs and other sorts of uses of technology and education. one of the powers that come fro the moocs and other quantity of innovation is using the interne and the technology, we are collecting data. and students know very quickly when they are not getting the material. so there is instant feedback. i used said teach a large lecture to oculus class job rumple about like this.

every six weeks i would know if there were having show was something. with these other forms, we know instantly. >> a continuous improvement. >> i could teach ethics in policy in one day. i saw hundreds. one day i said there was a notebook left open. the student is left to know put there. the needed to find that his student was. other tip the notebook and started reading her notes to my lecture and said, that's not what i said. and it it was a feedback loop that i did not have. ham is the possibility. it's not just crowds roared, bu fred six courses committing a feedback loop. >> and there is this adaptive

learning aspect of it in real time that, i think, is ultimately going to be one of the most powerful consequences of this technology. >> i actually like to think of it. there has been a lot of discussion of moocs as a way of decreasing cost. but i think the biggest contribution, social contribution here is access and quality. the instant feedback. the students also know that there not getting it. they get that hallmark. they have been an opportunity t try and try again until they get . there is the -- and this is something that has demonstrated educational benefits. the format that has you getting guidance and help from man

struck dead started to your specific needs, you can get a group together of the system, people are getting a specific concert. i'd think there is tremendous opporunity for quality improvement, and that will give rise to cost improvement becaus the biggest cost has seemed to fail. >> everyone is nodding, and we agree. we agree at least. we will find out from the audience. i have to put you -- it's my jo to put you on the hook. you said -- let's put cost aside . so your professor at stanford university, you are also a founder of co sarah, the last has a total tuition and fees north of $50,000 per year. on its website, it aspires, and i quote, to educate millions fo free.

what do you say to the stanford parents to ask, why did i send my sons and daughters through a rigorous admissions process and pay tens of thousands of dollar for something you're giving awa to everyone for free? >> football. [laughter] >> no. >> don't tweet that. it's a joke. >> and don't think you ever giv that answer. >> first of all, that is a question that i could post back to you is you're the president. >> says chair. >> centers. >> but you will get no other question is directed towards you . >> that would give my answer. you can give years later. a student kits at an institutio like us or pan, add qualitatively very different

than what the student gets in the open access movement becaus they do have the opportunity to come and engaged in a meaningful , interactive dialogue with some of the greatest minds. pierce your selected by a similar vigorous selection admissions process where their undergraduate or graduate level. i think you get the syrians by coming and it sending the viewers on a college campus lik stanford or pan, but that at th same time does not to value the a experience that you can get from people. it might not be the same. but it's pretty darn good. >> it is a fair enough question to redirect because it is certainly a question that i hav thought a lot about. and the first thing that i woul

say, because it is the first thing that is happening while w are going from alta vista tech kugel is that our faculty who are doing these moocs are also enriching their classroom experience by using them. so whether it's and greek and roman mythology by peter straus or advanced calculus, it's a backlash from, even if it is no fully flipped a new use of the word flips. there are flipping their classroom and putting much more interaction in the classroom. our students can learn more online as well. and you know something, student love it. it is a wind as well as we're creating more quality education

on-line students who either cannot be admitted or a ford to take the time of for a 4-year residential college experience. we are also making our experience right here better. and i think that is the way tha places like ours are going to increase access by also increasing the quality of the experience right here on campus. it is up the most thrilling thing to come into a classroom and just here your professor speak to you and not have interaction. it is thrilling when you can have maximized interaction. ..

>> read my book notes or whatever. i think it will really benefit people. >> can i just had one thing? people often ask me, it's back to the question that was already as, which institutions are going to be threatened by this revolution? is it the public or the private? top tier, middle tier, community colleges? that's not the right stratification. the ones that will be threatened are the ones where there's dissemination of content, the want to do not understand the need to provide their students

value proposition. >> because why is higher education so important for our time? it's not to get content. i mean you need content to be creative and innovative but it is to develop your capacity for creativity and innovation. so you're the former chair of the board of directors of the american council on education, and it recently provided credit recommendations for some of the moocs. what do you think the significance of credit bearing moocs love you for americans higher education? >> absolutely. absolutely critical. we can get to where we need to go and less we can figure this out, how we give credentials and credits for moocs. i think what we're trying to do within our university system is to bring the moocs into our traditional classroom setting,

in certain types of courses. but just across the country we've got to figure this out about course credit. hopefully we can use moocs with high school students who want to go to college and they come to college with credits already in place. look, we give credit by examination all the time. can't get credit to the. why not let them get credit by examination for moocs. sops will be we've got to figure this out and i think what the acd is doing is a very positive step. >> part of pushing this question a little bit, i had a meeting with research one university president recently and asked a question, i'm a senior in high school, i got accepted to your university and met all your selections, qualifications eric and in my senior year i took all

of your moocs courses with all of your moocs professors and want to come in as a sophomore. can i? basically he said no. you have taken a leading credit. we will give you credit for two semester courses, but when you to socialize you for the full four years and you need the experience. and after that i was visited by another president of a research one university. and ice what do you think your letters is going to look like in five or 10 years as a result of moocs. he said will probably be a three-year university, and take sophomores, because we want to pack on our advanced degrees to what would be the senior year in college. so i think moocs are making us question what are the business models in american higher education, who is going to get in and how will universities change. and we are already seeing the starting a three-year universities. and so --

>> so that sounds quite revolutionary, a quarter of the time reduced. so let me tell you a story of one person who applied to college way back in 1967. to an ivy league university that i think you all have heard of, and i got sophomore -- the university had, i could've graduated in three years. a.p. course is. that's university still gives sophomore standing. now, the moment i got there and i want to be a math make sure started as a sophomore as a math major, and then i got inspired by political philosophy and thought that math was, sorry rob, too easy. you could come, you've got key we des and wasn't as interesting, although i still am

fascinated by it as political science and i went on to take four years. but things that people feel are so scary and revolutionary, some of those have been read and they just have menus that much. we could use three or and for your experience if you can give students the options. a lot of students, i can tell you, who can come don't want to graduate in three years if they don't have to because you do learn creativity. you develop relationships. but i don't see this, i mean, i see this as a welcomed development. we have a really varied system of higher education. why not very the number of years that it takes for depending on what a student cam do? but i think people now think it's going to be a three-year experience.

where we that the possibility of friedrich mr. is not that many students in ivy league universities want to take it, but bless them if they do. so daphne, and a 2012 interview with the atlantic, you said about moocs that the tsunami is coming whether we like it or not. you -- this is a very california code i have to say because she goes ont on to say, you can be crushed or you can surf. [laughter] it's a better, better to surf. someone to ask anybody here, what do you think higher education needs to do in order to surf, to ride the wave rather than be crushed by it? >> let me first attribute the quote currently. this is don hennessey's quote, so i was adopting it. >> good. >> i think that order to serve

an institution when it's too thing, as i said, about what is the valley it provides to students, and that valley has to transcend, and even has to transcend just being a diploma mill and giving someone a diploma at the end. you need to be in position that you engage your students in meaningful ways that are more than just content, and that can be creative problem solving, projects work, internships and lab internships industry. i think there's a tremendous variety of ways that institutions can provide remarkable value to the students and institutions should do that. >> what do we need to do? >> i pick up on what daphne system which this is hybrid model, which is to get the best out of what the on line veterans can offer and that, student of processes and that same time leverage both for economic reasons and because of what he t can offer an online course, that the technology is making available. so i think we will move in that

direction. i'm very excited about it. >> so like a lot of the online ventures that began, there was not a clear cost model for them, a clear profit model. sustainability. in order for us, as universities condemned -- can bend the cost curve or even keep the cost curve constant, we need to find some way of getting revenues from moocs. >> pickup 1.0 -- >> so how are we going to do that? >> i don't know how we're going to do that but i've a daughter at stanford right now so i happen to know what the tuition is. [laughter] in graduate school. and i don't think this model is single. i'm struck at the number of my two daughters, one is 24, one is 27, the number of their friends

who have jobs but are not on career track. there's a difference between a job and a career. and i really am struck by the number of them i've spoken to lately who will confide in me. i have $100,000 in loans, i have a huge burden, these young people are carrying into the world after taxes, and they're not on career path. they are in jobs, teach english in istanbul or divide or any number of things. you know, i think again because of this inflection, we may be in for a long period like this one of the ability to generate the income to pay these loans back, and i don't think this is going to be a quick or easy thing. i think the model of higher education is going to blow up if they cannot find a cheaper way. >> you have just deepened the problem, because i was asking how we could sustain the online courses by getting rid and you

just deepened it by saying we can't sustain -- >> i think will happen -- >> this is, i'm glad, because we been on a high here of all the great things that moocs can do. so let's get real, what is it -- >> if you ask me, in five years, eurocom to your college age, son or daughter and say look, would you like to go to stanford and have that experience and a t-shirt and hat and the network and all that? >> it is more than that. [laughter] >> or would you basically like to have 20 coursera degrees. certain certification. do you want a penn degree or you want a certification? the whole thing will cost you, probably less than $5000, probably far less than the. and by the way, you can take any

gutman on ethics. you can take daphne koller on a pledge money. i think that's the choice a lot of. are going to be giving to the kids very quickly. and when you think about the point of telling me to the world doesn't care what you know him more but it only cares with what you know with what you know. >> if you learn, if you learn to do through online education or you learn to do more by actually having interactions with fellow human beings and -- >> daphne can tell you about the interactions they have with each other. other. >> some of your own courses have demonstrated that one can interact in different ways. so for example, the design course is an important -- at the wharton business school. amazing projects and they got 40 different pieces of feedback from different students throughout the course telling them what was wrong with the designs. and so i think it's naïve at this point in this generation to

say interaction can only be in a face-to-face setting. i have two daughters, they said adjacent rooms chatting to each other on the could and they seemed to enjoy that. so i think that there's a lot of meaningful interaction, but i still think it's a substitute for an on campus experience. the question is, do you really need four years of that? as earlier, can you do in three or two and reduce costs? >> is not just a question of what the need for years other. it's also the question that even the dissenting? we have a very distinctive i ricci case and sector in this country in which there is no other country that has a diverse effective institutions of higher education as we have. and the philosophy that goes along with that is one size doesn't fit all. so this allows, moocs allow a set of variants on a very

important theme of how you teach creativity and innovation. brit, what do you see happening? you oversee the whole range. >> i think the crisis in the country really around education has to do with public higher education. quite frankly penn and stanford and harvard and princeton, they will keep going on just like they can, if they so desire your but 70% of americans in higher education, or in public higher education. public higher education has been devastated by the economy. there's been a 28% reduction in state support for public higher education in the last two years. and so we can't be the america we have been and want to be in the future, and less refined lower cost means of delivering high quality education to larger numbers of people.

this tells me that higher education, public and private, has an obligation that they've never had before. we have got to find these new innovations that are going to enable us to educate larger and larger numbers of people. and that's why we're such a fan of the experiment of the moocs. >> so here's my worry. my worry is that the more, the better the moocs become calm them -- become, the more advantage they will take vantage of them. there's just no doubt that the students that we interact with, most of the time, just love to go, they go online, the interact online, they go in the classroom. they interact here. they go on the playing fields and to learn teamwork and they go on stage and they learn acting. and it just gets better and

better. and i do think we have a great higher education sector at the top, and i think many of our state universities are great but they're getting bled. so the worry is that online education will be a little bit like at the highest level what montessori school was. it was created for the slum children in italy, and it became the hottest thing for the most advantaged children to get a leg up in learning. is that, i mean, we think of this access, but are we kidding ourselves? are the rich going to get richard so to speak, and the poor cannot? >> i give you one warning. everything that happened to me is about to happen to education. we at "the new york times," we thought we are "the new york

times," we are the penn of the news business. [laughter] watch out. >> yeah, that's why we are in, that's where here on moocs. that's what we did say sorry, we're not going online. at "the new york times" is surviving because it went online. we have a great online presence and that's what we want as well. so you're right, if we're complacent that's what would happen. sure thing, but i wasn't like about us as institutions, tom. i was like about who's going to benefit, which students are going to, how are we going to develop this -- >> go back -- >> how are we going to develop this so we really are giving access to learning to the students who are not ready, you know, just getting it? part of it is the motivation. are we going, are the students going to be motivated?

go ahead. >> i was just going to say that to go back to something you said earlier, there i is something about disney world, okay, which incredibly enables, in credit and powers and incredibly requires self-starters. self-motivated people. and you are not going to change that. that is the new world, okay? the old days where you could join the union and count on a lifelong career and beyond that track, that's over. and so that's, that awareness has to be built into education now from preschool right up to college. >> and that's what i think the human factor, having blended learning courses, why brit said earlier, is going to be so important. because if we just put things online and think that that's going to truly increase access to living a productive educated life, we are getting ourselves. i think we have to also have the human beings who use those courses to motivate, to help

motivate students and get them when they hit a blockage in the road, give them over that block. >> i think we're estimate the power of technology to become something very different than it is right now. i love your analogy, because i remember when we put in a planetarium some years ago, i watched with a lot of elementary school kids this flight through the human heart, and i was watching the dna and is thinking to myself, if only i could get that projected out of the computers, out of the ipads. i could have kids taking apart a human heart, putting it back together again, and they might get that inspiration from doing with the faculty, with the guided instruction, with all the things that daphne is talking about. so i do kind of keep the temperature on how quickly the technology is moving because i kind of feel like we are talking about blended learning in a

sense of using what we have in coursera. certainly the forefront of the moocs but i think the technology movement so quickly that the face-to-face interaction and the quality of the pedagogy question, all of those will be changing over time while we're trying to do all of this. >> right. daffy? >> i would like to take this question of access and take a more global perspective on this. 40% of our students are in the developing world. a lot of the students are extremely motivated. they just don't have access because it just does not exist in the country with sufficient that the but i've talked to people in these little villages in africa. the under -- to him have schools. they see these kids are super motivated. the homework is always done and they can learn as much as i possibly can given the surroundings. this i think is another form of access that we shouldn't neglect when we think about the

opportunity here. >> so let's talk just a little bad about the global nature of this. tom, how does america compete globally with this amazing access now to moocs? >> well, i think, for one, from one point of you choose from an american brandy point of view let's go back to that egyptian school. and outside is a little american flag. this school brought to you by the united states of america. it's a totally different way for us as a committee and as a government i think and relate to the world. you know, what i find when i travel, i studied arabic as an undergrad but i wish i studied education because everywhere i go in the world i find that education is actually the biggest foreign policy issue. everywhere i go in the world,

that's the number one subject. here's what's interesting. everywhere you go, everyone thinks they are behind. you go to singapore and boy, it's very interesting -- >> they are all right. we are all behind. >> their kids are killing it on the math test and they think they can't invent a hoola hoop. and you come to america and johnny and susie can't read but billy has got a ring in his nose and a ponytail and says he has a tattoo on her cheek, just invented three new apple ipod apps. so we have weaknesses that we've got t to do with. they that wait is they have to do i think what you will see, more hyper connected world gets is a brand convergence and this provides a huge opportunity i think for our higher educational system to participate in the world in a really constructive way that meets up with the aspirations of 99% of the people. >> and i can't help but say given that we have a member of the administration with us that

we must reform our immigration laws to welcome people to this country who want to contribute to it, really. [applause] so and going, because i want to get to the audience for questions, i want to, before we opened the floor to questions with his very imminent group of participants in the audience, let me pose a big sky wrapup question to each of you. and i want each of you to put yourself on the line. it's april 2023, that sounds like a long time from now but it's only 10 years, last i checked. and we have gathered again to talk about educational innovation and technology and online education. and i ask you, so were these

moocs and incremental step in higher education, or has there been a revolution in higher education? >> for me, the answer is pretty clear. i think it's going to be a revolution. and i think it's very hard to say exactly where it's headed. and i think we're going to come to have seen the moocs as being a critical step along the path towards this revolution. but i have no doubt, and i think daphne would agree, and about 2023 we won't recognize the moocs of that day in terms of what we're seeing right now. >> so, i agree. i think this is a revolution and this is a revolution happening on three separate fronts. first i think it's a democratic position of education, the

conversion of education for something that is a privilege of the few for basic human right. i think it's the transformation of the quality of education that would offer joint on campus students in a sector that has not changed the way those businesses 350 years that i think continues we will look back at the days were shuttling students into some auditorium and lexington for our have twice what as a how -- [inaudible]. i think the third opportunity for tremendous growth is in understanding human learning as a data science whether as an anecdotal signs because the data that we can collect here can give us tremendous insights about how people learn and how they teach them better that would give rise to what brit just said, that we will not recognize the moocs of 10 years now relative to where we are today. >> i see it in two ways. the revolution could be very positive and adco what daphne and brit are saying.

i think if the digital divide widens any further than already has, we're going to have a different kind of revolution, and that worries me. that keeps me up at night because if we don't provide access to the underprepared folks to the poor people, to the people that really don't have hope across the world, and i don't think moocs will reach their full potential but and i think thethink you look like mo0 years. i think we'll have a whole new methodology of learning. will have read a pedagogy that it's a question of are we going to really lift this nation. >> so i'm really glad when he answered it you also address two of the winners and losers will be and to keep our eyes that we have a few losers as possible but there are always winners and losers in this. tom, you have -- >> i would agree with everything that was said. i would just point out, i picked up google news and i saw that anonymous had just taken down

north korea's websites basically, hacked their twitter account, and -- >> can't imagine who that might be. >> so that is the first, if i writing about, i may do a column on this for don't tell anybody, but that's the first crowdsourced war. we just saw a battle that was crowdsourced through anonymous. so icy moocs in a much larger context of crowd sourcing. crowd sourcing education, we are seeing crowd funny. we are seeing a crowd innovation now. we are seeing crowd warfare. and i think you're thing to with the recognizable about this place in 2025 or whatever is the architecture. >> and maybe not even that? >> not sure. >> it will be recognizable. but that is a great segue.

change is, we're in the mix of change and yet you're all here, irvine auditorium which is recognizable from its outset, and i want to open it up to the audience for questions. there are roving mics, so i've had to do is raise your hand and i will call on you when i see you out there. i see someone right here, this young man right there in the second row. please stand up, introduce yourself. >> thanks. >> and his computer a side, no doubt having been surfing the web -- >> i was taking notes, i swear. i'm a sophomore. i've got to take a lot of cool classes that involve community engagement, management 100 urban

studies where we sit down, we think about the problems we see in the community and we actually work to solve it. so my question is to parse. the first is should local commuting apartment be a goal of higher education? and how should moocs facilitate that? >> who would like to take a shot at answering? >> i can take a shot at the second part. i mean, i think certainly community empowerment should be a goal of higher education, and that's, the instructors and universities are really the ones that should decide how that gets done, but in terms of enabling that, the whole, i mean part of the reason why the moocs today are so different to come back to you very first question about what's different about this is it leverages community and crowd sourcing interaction in a way that earlier efforts online education could not. ..

>> i am going to call on the young woman over there in the corner. yes, you. >> please introduce yourself. >> hello, i am marianne and i am what university pennsylvania. and i have a rustin specifically for mr. friedman. in your book you talk about the world has become a more even playing field with the increases in technology across the world. however come you mention that outside the united states, some people are behind. you believe it back to apple last for a substantial amount of time? that the world will become more competitive in a. >> yes, i really do. and i think that institutions in this phenomenon has enabled

that. giving us the best world-class education to more people and more places. but i think that i am always a little bit leery when people say that it is going to become more competitive. do we have it, and i don't actually think that that is how it works all the time. i think that what all of this will allow, first of all, what is really exciting for me is we are going to leverage a billion more brains to solve the biggest problems in the world. men and women. that is the most exciting thing about this. ten years from now, there will be a billion more people on the planet with the tools and capabilities to solve some of the biggest problems. at the same time, you know, what they will invent, heaven only knows. one example i gave in the book was when your son or daughter goes off to college. ten years ago. they come back after their first

semester. they say, mom and akamai decided what i want to do when i grow up. they say that i want to be a search engine optimizer. and i said kumble will be talking about? you can't be an ophthalmologist or lawyer and if you're going to be a search engine optimizer? well, what is search engine optimization? well, it came out of nowhere, the whole industry. so this became a huge economic event, producing a multibillion dollar industry overnight. so god only knows when a billion more people start buying their brains to the world. what new jobs will emerge? there is only one thing i can tell you. that is that in this hyper connected world, every job, every middle-class job, it is either going to go up, out, or down faster than ever. it will either require more

education, whatever it is, and it's going to be a decent job, more people in the world will be able to compete for it and do it in different ways and it will be outsourced to history more fast than ever. that is what it is doing. every job today's going up and down and down faster than ever. >> wow, okay, here in the aisle in the red. >> hello, i am from the working class of 1979. and i have been taking a lot of horses and having a lot of fun with that. i resonate with the issue of people -- how people come in and how people finish classes and the whole idea of motivation. having learned from a lot of different systems here, one of the strongest models that i have learned about was about

regiments. thirty-five years of research have told us that there are 3.5 significant factors for success there in terms of motivation, after resources, social support. so people come in with mentions of motivation. the act is totally there. the social support to me is the one that is the weakest. a bunch of the courses are trying to get groups together. one was recently postponed because it was unable to do that. to me, that is the key, it is like the discussion forums are beautiful and wonderful. how do you really do social support? >> so what is the social support for? >> to get them to come and be here. >> okay, so i think that one emphasis of that is this is one of them most rapidly evolving

things over the coming years. how do you leverage ideas from social networking is other to supplant in order to increase student engagement and social interaction. i'm sure we will develop better techniques three years from now than we have today. at the same time, it comes back to this recurring theme of learning. that is having an actual mentor, specifically for those populations that you mentioned. ones that don't have as much and turns it motivation. they are the ones that i think really benefit, perhaps the most from having that learning experience with an instructor. they are with them, in the classroom, helping to retain them, engage them, and overcome hurdles. >> the point here is this traditional, residential issue that they are facing. is it issues are desperate to have a social sport. you have the social services.

it makes it very good for a campus. >> and also is the social outcomes. are the socialization treatments really benefiting different kinds of students. students like me, students like you who are really going through, you know, what do they need. so i think that the point is that we are really in the beginning. but i think that those are great comments. >> it is also the case, i know a lot of people have bemoaned the fact that younger generations, millennial, they are just connected electronically. not face-to-face. but that actually isn't true. they are connected electronically, they are also connected face-to-face. and they also do the same things simultaneously. i had have a jewish mother that would've felt very comfortable

going from venice out to the islands where i am sitting. all of the italian women are talking and listening to one another, staying in touch. with our young people, we just have to get used to it. they really learned a kind of interaction that is different. but the social support is obviously necessary. but it is not who's of of the technology. it has to be married with the technology. okay. where yes, right there. you have a question? >> just. >> you do? okay i thought you did. back there on the aisle. okay. >> hello, i graduated from wharton in 2010. the question is about this

revolution. what kind of services and products would you like to be entrepreneurs create to have this revolution? >> boy, the list is endless thread i think there is a tremendous opportunity to develop learning tools. these can go all the way from chemical experiments and simulations, all the way through creation of social groups and interaction and everything in between. i think it is really unbounded and up to your imagination. >> the one thing that i would have is in india. one is an indian start a company that is doing this. that is basically certification.

more and more people are going to develop a body of new classes and expertise outside traditional universities. whether it is a electrician or business teacher, i think it will be another one of these new industries. so this will be very important. >> something that i think is very important is the sophistication of the learning platforms and their ability to support adaptive learning and learning analytics. i think that needs to be built in ever greater sophistication

into the mooc's and other online learning. >> i think that this young man wants to get to know what to get to work on. for the next innovation. all the more power to you. >> hello, i'm a very big fan of moocs. i have the potential that moocs has for these lifelong learners. i have a question about the classroom issue. if moocs are used to split the classroom, and therefore provide a much better quality interaction at the university of the college, which means include the opportunity if that happens,

how do we make sure that we don't create a more elite education where the people that graduate from the university, the top-level universities, would be even more competitive. and would have on the rest and would be better educated. >> that will be the last question. it is a worthy question for panelists to answer. this is so good for everyone. it is important to recognize that you can't solve all problems all at once. even if we can get everyone to a level of absolute polity, if we

can give creative, self-motivated, individuals who do not currently have access to the top universities, give them access in a way that their creativity can manifest, because if such a debtor foundation to build on, that we might not have achieved all day. that we are a lot better than where we are today where we have very little action. >> i would like to add one thing to that. one of the fundamental truths about globalization, it is that the bottom rises faster and the top rises higher. you can't control that. but i think that what is though exciting -- >> i just interrupt for a moment? is a moral philosopher, i would say as long as the bottom rises above standards of decency, adequacy, ability to live a good life and choose, we shouldn't try to keep this down.

we should be focusing on getting everybody up. so that is the challenge. >> to add to this and tied in to the young man's question and the young lady's question, if it were a stock, i would buy right now. this is coinciding with something that is going on. something that has been disguised. we are talking about the wisdom of of a thriving middle class. so the price has fallen so low, and the price of education has fallen so low. now come to, your handheld computer is falling so low. there is a whole new billion people walking around the planet with middle-class aspirations, middle-class identity in their own minds, just not a middle-class wallet. what happens in india and

mexico, i have been to both recently. there are a million indian engineers who could solve our problems. they could remediate computers for y2k. what is happening now with the falling prices of all of this is that they are solving their problem. that floats my vote. okay? and what you are seeing now is the emergence of a vast and virtual middle-class. think of young 22-year-old woman who's tragically raped in india. her father was a baggage handler, making $50 a month. he put her through three years of physiotherapy school. he called her doctor. she went to the mall to see the life of pi with her boyfriend and she did not have a good

method to get home. so she tragically took a gypsy bus and she is the epitome of the virtual middle-class. this is going to revolutionize politics and not part of the world and she will meet right up with that. so put your tray table up into a fixed upright position. >> on that note, i'm going to ask us to all thank our guests. amy gutmann, mr. friedman, daphne koller, and britt kirwan. thank you so much. [applause] >> we thank you all for being here. we thank you for being fabulously attentive and very inquisitive as an audience. we thank you so much. [applause] ♪

♪ [inaudible conversations] ♪ >> some live coverage this afternoon about u.s. and russia relations. we will hear from joe dority and the president of eastern europe about his 20 year career. hosted by the alpha fellowship alumni association, live coverage begins at six eastern on c-span. with congress off this week for their memorial day recess, we are featuring booktv in prime time as we showcase three books on american foreign policy. beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern, the book beyond war, at 855, the

author of foreign policy begins at home. the case for putting america's health in order. and we finished with the book, indispensable nation. american foreign policy and retreat. opb is all this week in prime time here on c-span2. on c-span3 tonight, it is american history in prime time as we take a look back at the 150th anniversary of the civil war. at 8:00 p.m. eastern, we visit an exhibit at baltimore railroad museum. at 830, we learned about the confederate general stonewall jackson who died in may of 1863 after being wounded by his own troops in a friendly fire incident during the battle chancellor bill. and the relationship between elizabeth van loo and a former

slave inside the confederate white house. it all begins tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> i begin with this because it is so essential. what you ultimately will become. many of you have a career path in mind, many of you have no idea where he will end up. a few of you may be surprised by where life takes you. i certainly was. in the end, it is not only what we do, but how we do it. >> you know i have to start by tweeting mess. when i woke up this morning and started writing my speech, i was thinking about my first month on campus in september when i was a

freshman and the football team went into that season, they were number one ranked the season. i remember that september when i got there, there was all this excitement on campus in our first game was at wisconsin and we went up there and we lost our first game, 21 to 14. there was a crushing disappointment afterwards. i would like you to think of that followed by crushing disappointment, a metaphor for the next 20 minutes with me. >> next weekend, stories and advice for graduates at eight eastern with administration and state and local officials, including robert mueller and florida governor rick scott. saturday at 8:30 p.m., business leaders, including dick costello and steve wozniak. i'm more commencements the speeches at c-span.org >> the university of florida

race relations examined the shooting of 17-year-old trayvon martin. "new york times" wrote a piece last year called the curious case of trayvon martin. he is the keynote speaker at this conference in which he spoke about the media coverage of racial issues and the trayvon martin case. this is an hour and 15 minutes. [applause] >> wait a minute, i don't think anyone has ever found that i have from congress. thank you very much for having me here. thank you for the fantastic introduction. today i'm going to talk to you about what i call journalism injustice and how those things have coincided in the case of trayvon martin.

were overlapped with the case of trayvon martin. if you have been here all day, you do not need a refresher on this course. if you haven't been here all day, maybe you do. i'm going to give you a little bit of a run through of what we know about the case. on february 26, trayvon martin from a 17-year-old boy from miami gardens is in florida with his father. they are there to visit the father's girlfriend who lived in a gated community. this is a gated community not like what people think. it does not have 80 dates within armed body. so you can walk right around the gate. trayvon martin has gotten in trouble at school again. so he had been suspended from

school for the third time. his father, tracy, has had enough. he took trayvon martin so he wouldn't have to be on the streets. and he also says that there is nothing like a good road trip for the heart. on the night of the 26th, he is at the father's girlfriend's house with her son and they are watching television. the way the story goes that the father and the girlfriend were there and trayvon says that he wants to get ice cream down the way. he asks chad if you want something from the store. chad says yes, i want some skittles. so he leaves the house, there is a light rain outside.

he has a hooded sweatshirt on. he puts the hooded sweatshirt up and trayvon goes into the store and he pays for the items. on the video he is seeing motion. because we don't have the audio, we don't know if that is the case or not. at that point, he leaves the store. so on the way back when he is taking his time. according to his families lawyers, he is on the phone with his girlfriend, with which would make sense. 19-year-olds walk slow, they talk about being on the phone with a girl. so he catches the attention of

george zimmerman. a member of the neighborhood watch program. there have been burglaries in this community. george zimmerman himself arranged a neighborhood watch program to combat the crimes of the neighborhood that have been happening. the neighbors designate them as a captain of this walk-through. when the police come to explain the guidelines, they include the neighborhood watch volunteer. they say that they should not be armed but should not be with weapons. trayvon martin is wearing a holster on his waistband and it is a 9-millimeter hand gun.

he called the police and he described him as a very suspicious guy and he said that the guy seems to be up to no good like he is on drugs or something. he even identifies them as being probably in his late teenagers. when asked to describe this further on a racial basis, george zimmerman submits that he looks like he is armed. his father, just for the record, his father is white and his mother is in panic. he asked the person how long it will take for the police to arrive because these guys always get away. according to his family attorneys, trayvon tells his girlfriend on the phone and someone is watching them. the girlfriend tells him to run, he says no, but he will walk

fast and he tells the dispatcher that the suspicious guy was running and then zimmerman comes back to follow the boy. this is beyond the bounds of what the neighborhood watch volunteer has been instructed to do by the police and he is the captain of that group. he leads the vehicle with a gun strapped to his body which is something he has been told that you should not do this. the dispatcher is following the boy. zimmerman said that he is. and he said, okay, we don't need you to do that. the call soon ends. what happens over the next few minutes is the all-important part of this chase. somehow trayvon martin and george zimmerman encounter each other and engage in a physical

altercation. it ends with him shooting trayvon martin in the chest. witness accounts to the extent that they even exist are sketchy and in some cases contradictory. when the police arrive, they take george zimmerman into custody. trayvon's body is tagged as a john doe and taken to the medical examiner's office. at the police precinct, the lead investigator does not buy the version of george zimmerman. his version of the story. he is overruled by his supervisors and zimmerman is released with no charge. as far as the police are concerned, that is the end of the case. when tracy martin and his girlfriend returned home, trayvon martin is in there. they called his cell phone

repeatedly. but there is no answer. now, with what is this case resonate so much? for so much of this country? is juan williams wrote, nearly half of all murder victims are black and the overwhelming majority of those black people are killed by other black people. where is the march for them? in particular, taking lives is a tragedy. any life taken is a tragedy. this case, for many people, it was not about an extraordinary death.

what about the pursuit of justice and the application of the presumption of guilt. this was about a man who was found standing over a dead body and was able to talk his way out of it these arrest. who was deserving of this profession of guilt or innocence in this case? the dead boy with the candy, or the man standing over his body with the gun? furthermore on a pure storytelling level, as have all the elements of a great story, guns, murder and an unarmed man, racial profiling, it raised tough questions in particular. why did george zimmerman find trayvon martin suspicious, which

were his words when he first called 911. what about trayvon martin provoking what appeared to be a threat response in george zimmerman, even though he was inside the vehicle. why did he pursue the boy with the 911 operator? why did he get out of the car and why did he take his gun when he did? houses self-defense when you are the one in pursuit? who initiated the altercation? who cry for help? what moved george zimmerman to use lethal voice? another thing in a visual type of view, i think it is kind of

uncomfortable truth that makes this resonate. the images of george zimmerman and the image of trayvon martin of a very handsome and very young looking boy area one way to understand this to understand this in the context of what media critics have called missing white woman syndrome. in the cases of people that are missing or dead, the extraordinary amount of coverage goes to people who are female,

caucasian, young, attractive, and disproportionately high income. think about for a second the last time that you saw jonbenet ramsey coverage for any woman who was a young? think about the last time that you saw that kind of coverage for any man, regardless of race whatsoever. there are many others who fit that category. see if you can match the coverage that you get when the victim did check all of those boxes. so that is what media critics call that phenomenon.

now, obviously trayvon martin is not wealthy, he is not white, he is not a woman. but what i think that phenomenon gets to is the issue of traditional ideas of beauty in society. the overlap of how beauty and value and what we need to protect and defend that as a source of innocence. what trayvon martin did represent was young, handsome, and presumably innocent. in the context of that phenomenon, there was another

panelist to talk to about the one thing that people don't often talk about. when people saw the face of emmett till before the income he is a strikingly handsome young man in what that does is it amplifies outrage. it amplifies it within the larger media contacts and the logical political process and social context. so if you have a base in which you already think there is something wrong, if there is something that you can lay on top of it, it ends with eyes public response in those particular cases. one of the bigger things is the destruction of beauty. a gorgeous young man is reduced

to this image. that plays into the george zimmerman and trayvon martin case. that image of him as a young innocent person who is in addition, the innocent becomes something that we want to protect in society. but i think that we have to consider that as an amplifier. the other issue that is raised is the closest comparison to this case and the closest one maybe the o.j. simpson case. in that case it is kind of like this. during that case, there was no social media.

there was no facebook or twitter. there were no real blogs to speak up. the environment was completely different. the way i turn heard about this was people started to tweet me. what do you feel about this case in florida and i had no idea who trayvon martin was, i didn't know what the case was, but people continued to put that into my twitter feed. one week on a fluke, i just googled his name seems to me a very interesting case i am not sure what i help to bring to that. i'm not going to florida, not from florida. you know, what can i write from

my perch in manhattan? but there are some strange things about this case. including this idea that there is absolutely no charge. i do know that i would actually write about and played on an interview with his mother. and i'd either to just write about it on a personal level because i have kids about that age. there's another issue raised, which is the role of diversity. aside from the local florida coverage, the only people that are seemingly getting coverage on a national level were black men like me.

people like me, and some of those seem to burn with a personal passion in this case. my first column, i was unapologetically honest. it was march 16. as a father of two black teenage boys, the case gets close to home. this is a fear that seizes me whenever my boys are out in the world, that a man and a gun with an itchy finger will line them suspicious, they might end up with a hole in their chest in a hole in my heart. this is the burden of black boys in america and the people that love them. someone who is caught in the crosshairs of someone who crosses the line. many other writers follow with

relevant columns. one said reading about trayvon martin reminds me of the list of don'ts that i received from a sheltered existence in new jersey. when i was replaced, when my mother remarried in 1980, there was a list that said, don't run them public. don't run while carrying anything in your hand, or that someone thought that you stole something. don't talk back and let me give you a reason and one individual told "the new york times", and i quote, on the story there is a certain degree of owners ending that comes to minorities, particularly african african-americans because we have lived it. all of us are black men in our 30s and 40s. all of us were born after the

civil rights movement and all of us have seen incarceration of blacks up close and all of us were part of the crack epidemic in the war on drugs. all of us are of that age and what would happen to this particular case if we did not have the platforms that we have? another issue with partisan influence has public perception. on march 23, president president obama called it a tragedy and said that when he thought about the case, he thought about his own kids. then he said that if i had a son, he would look like trayvon martin. why did he do that? well, if the case wasn't already infused with enough race and politics, and ensure that it would be.

this was no longer a simple case of the point man in florida. this was not about liberal and conservative worldviews. many liberals argue justice for trayvon. many rush to judgment in a lift from mentality. there was no fox news, there was no msnbc. people got their news from newspapers. network news stations and cnn headline news in all of those places where they try as best as they could to be objective down the line. that has changed and the lawyers for both sides took advantage of that change and sought out sympathetic media coverage. the lawyers for trayvon martin's

family hired a pr agent. when i got to interview his mother, we went through a pr agent to get that interview. his lawyers and commentators discuss the case. zimmerman directly went on hannity and gave his first interview that way, which was a complete disaster. that was his venue of choice. and to a degree that there was different parts of me that covered this case, it was covered in different ways. that meant that on april 3, twice as many democrats were following the case closely as republicans. and more than twice as many republicans saw the case is getting too much coverage as

democrats did. then there were the cases where the media does cross the line completely. nbc fired a producer for editing the 911 tapes to suggest that zimmerman had volunteered the description of trayvon martin as black rather than a response to a question. geraldo said that i think the hoodie was as responsible for trayvon martin's death as george zimmerman wants. which is ridiculous. this is classic. but the victim was wearing incited the violence. there is nothing you can wear that is an invitation for someone to rape or kill you.

a post said that the crazies of the new black panther party was in the spotlight in the trayvon pardon controversy. they are an arm of the senate party. i had never met a member of this party. i have not ever met anyone like this and i had not ever met anyone who defended anyone in the new black panther party. somehow he was labeled as white, although it is unclear if that is how we self identify. other people got around the description by describing his parents and their background and leaving out the racial designations. in my column i said that trayvon martin is black and george zimmerman is not. i had no idea how george

zimmerman identified himself this way. you can, it is up to you, no one knows. so everyone who identifies him as a white guy was playing into racial constructs that are flimsy at best. business insider published this correction. after posting an image from a neo-nazi site, storm front, that was supposed to be trayvon martin, but it was not. someone showed me this earlier. there are images circulating online that have to do with other views. a racist message board -- we should stop right there. [laughter] it was embedded with pictures

reportedly to have been trayvon martin. but "the new york times" pointed out it was not trayvon martin. the entire image included two photos. now there is a question as to whether other is trayvon martin. kudos to those who neo-nazi website to get their information? [applause] >> the other picture is what appeared to be trayvon martin with grills in his mouth. you know, this was supposed to -- you know, some cosmetic thing and this was supposed to suggest that he was a thug. basically you have to reduce the beauty portions of the route

used to be for it this person. so you have to create -- you have to make the person into a monster visually, so you reduce sympathy. every attempt at that seems to fall short to me. i have a skateboarder in my neighborhood and that does not they lacked me. that just says keyboard. this past summer we had a gold medal skater. no one said doug wants. crass, maybe. but no one said that. every time they tried to suggest the way that he behaved, the things that he wore, it just said that he was not worthy of life passed every 26 -- it falls

short. there is nothing that you can wear. nothing gives you license to shoot someone in the chest. lastly, i would like to discuss the question of advocacy and activism in journalism. now, i am an opinion writer. i argue for the positions, developing arguments and i get paid to have an opinion. even at the time, views on this can differ. my colleagues say that i'm

worried about being an activist or a crusader. i'm an advocate as a journalist, but there is a faint, almost wandering line between advocacy and activism the. one of the perils of activism is you become so much part of this posit you lose your object committee. that can be a tendency to start speaking for cause rather than for yourself. i try to navigate this terrain. frankly, there is a lot of blurry lines, especially when i am writing about this. i sometimes worry about where i am in relation to the line. that is a tricky thing for us. how much are we speaking for ourselves, and how much do we contribute to the cause? i think that is what causes a lot of consternation in the case because the people saw that the

opportunity to become a front person for a cause and that can be dangerous from a journalistic perspective. we are very wary of that idea. there is a stark difference between opinion writers and news reporters. i think that that is relatively well understood in newspaper. number of people who are reading newspapers, according to the pew research center, the number people who say they got their news yesterday from newspapers 20 years ago versus now is drastic rate increasingly, people say they get the news online, although not nearly all of them do. it is derived between news and getting journalism, they get

those lines blurred. they follow link that someone sent to them on twitter and they just land they are, paying very little attention to where they are, whether it is news or opinion are they just know they are on the website. in a heavy social media environment, news articles and opinions often live side-by-side. opinion journalists, advocates, activists are equalized in social media and to many readers and viewers, they began to blend together. many of these people often have open exchanges. i do this. so i'm talking back and forth on social media for straight news reporters. including people that are considered as journalists and back and forth, not understanding that in social

media, that news reporter has real constraints on what they can say and i have none. they might read to eat something that i said. not because they endorse it, but it's interesting and they want people to know it. but it seems to a lot of people, all of this gets very blurry in the public mind. after the fact, those people said on the same panel in television news. on any given day, and everyone talks about this channel format, on any given day there is a news reporter sitting next to an advocate. someone who worked on the romney campaign, the obama campaign, someone who is an has an opinion journalists. they are all discussing things. and the public, we are supposed to understand that these people are not coming from the same

place. but that is not the way that people understand it when they are watching it on television. one thing that emerged from the trayvon martin case is whether he should be leading rallies for trayvon martin and in regards to the policy of msnbc and their politics. i am not -- i don't know where that line is. you know? he says he will always be an activist. i don't think that people understand that those are different roles that these people have. they don't see that and that muddies the water when it comes to the public. i try to be as transparent with my readers about that struggle as possible. in the first column i described

that in a way that i described to you earlier. there was a blog about how the media is changing overall, the growth of journalism in journalism school, how the impact works for the very meaning of objectivity. he said the amount of programs today is much greater than in the past. media format multiplies. one problem is whether the ideal of journalism or objectivity should be emphasized in these changing curriculums. the new journalism tends to be more personal. it prefers transparency to objectivity or self-effacing neutrality. across journalism programs, there is a trend towards teaching prospective journalism that draws conclusions and

argues for interpretations. this challenges the previous dominance of objective objectivity as an ideal. that is a huge shift in how we get our news. there was just a pew research poll out that looked at how much of each cable news station -- how much of their coverage is actually opinion and how much is news. 80% of nbc news coverage is opinion driven material, according to a pew research report. the only place that still has the same balance in straight news is that cnn and that is a real shift in how we are getting our news. people are drifting away from wanting the appetite for

neutrality. it is changing. we want to live in a cocoon where we just hear our own thoughts reinforced over and over again. we have to say what does that say about us as a nation, in particular, how that reflects on this particular case where people tune in to particular cases so that they can have confirmed whether george zimmerman was innocent or guilty. i love what i do. but it can depend heavily on other people's reporting to form my opinion. there is often an original reporting that is interwoven. but there there is almost always reference to what others have ordered. let people respond heavily to opinion journalism, often disproportionately. i can write a column about

buying a new puppy. it will be at the top of the "new york post." that is just the way it works. somebody can work three months on an investigative piece with what iran is doing in their country. and i find that a bigger problem. i find that the rise of personality journalism. the marquee names, the opinion writers, reporters do what i do. they consider more important work, or coverage and stuff like that. that is what wins me. but they will never get the same kind of coverage and response i'm getting.

we have a dangerous point in america where people want more ammunition than information. this includes people who are challenged on their beliefs. i believe that that is what we have seen in the trayvon martin case. people know what they want to believe and only listen to sources that confirm it. so to wrap this up, whatever comes of this case will certainly serve as administration and an incredibly visual one. an opinionated, personally driven force is for better or for worse in america is responding to it.

this case will always and forever more be seen through that. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> we have time for questions. so if you have a question, please come on down to the microphone. we encourage the students and faculty and staff and community members for the questions. >> hello, my name is jim and you gave me great comfort. i know if i am ever kidnapped, it is because i'm incredibly good-looking. [laughter] i practiced criminal law in that area and you just gave the finest