authorized because almost by definition they are classified operations. but if it would help in terms of where your line of questioning is seeking to go to, i will expect to spend several hours in each week considering warrants and reading the supporting paperwork, questioning officials about the material that i've received, meeting with heads of agencies or other people in the agencies to discuss either specific issues or issues of broader policy that have arisen from warrant applications that i've received. >> thank you. finally on transparency, robin, foreign secretary, have you been understandably cautious this afternoon about what you've been prepared to say in public. now, the outgoing director of gchq told this committee that he is, and i quote, not e van gelically are opposed to publishing information about

gchq's internet collection abilities, but he went on to say he would need to get ministerial backing for this. now, the attitude is a conversion on the road to damascus. he didn't start in that position. >> and he's about to leave. [laughter] >> and he may be -- [inaudible] i mean, subject to the advice of the technical experts like the director of gchq, are you in favor of increasing the transparency of the activities of the intelligence agency? >> generally, i am confident from what i've seen that the public would be reassured by knowledge of the way the system works. against that we have to balance the indisputable fact that knowledge of how the system works allowed those who have something to hide to adjust their behavior. we've seen it.

we've seen it since the snowden revelations, al-qaeda senior operatives changing the way they communicate, criminals operating over different communication routes. so we have to balance the desire, the self-interested desire to be able to be as transparent as possible in order to secure a public reassurance against the reality that if we expose tradecraft, it will cause behavior change by those who are seeking to do us harm. >> very briefly mark and then julian, finally. >> sure. your early weeks as foreign secretary you had an issue with the whole account of neither confirm nor deny, when we've touched on the disparity of the reaction of the u.s. and perhaps european governments compared to our own and some criticism that

we've been less willing in this country to level, as it were, with the public, do you really think that that doctrine of neither confirm, nor deny is going to be tenable in the longer term? >> before i answer that, can i just supplement my previous answer? i've been remind that there is a new annual transparency report, of course, that under the dripa legislation that will be available. neither confirm nor deny is a vital part of our armory, and it's, it is a self-denying ordnance. sometimes it is very tempting to reassure by denying. but we want to succumb to the temptation by reassuring by denying, the next time we neither confirm nor deny, we've imlicitly confirmed. and i think -- implicitly confirmed. and i think we've considered

this on a number of occasions very carefully, but maintaining neither confirm nor deny is an essential part of protecting what the agencies do. and maintaining their ability to continue doing it. >> finally, julian. >> you've repeatedly stressed the robustness of the legislation as a protection for the public and a reawe shiewrns to the public -- reassurance to the public. can i just read you this extract -- >> quickly. >> very quickly from ripa has follows: intercepted materials also falls within subsection 2 notwithstanding mentioned in paragraph a and b of that subsection if, a, the person whom the warrant is addressed believes on reasonable grounds that the circumstances are such the material would fall within that subsection or, b, the condition set out in subsection five below is satisfied in relation to the selection of the material. now, that may be very robust legislation, foreign secretary, but don't you agree that to the ordinary member of the public it

sounds like gobbledygook? can we not get some legislation enacted that ordinary people can understand so that they can be reassured? >> i think extraordinary people could understand -- >> i think the, i think that -- yeah. i think that question could be applied much more widely than the intelligence service ises legislation. i suspect that most legislation is impenetrable to members of the public and, of course, as all members of the committee will know from their work as members of parliament, because legislation is amended repeatedly over time, even reading the original legislation seldom gives a very good guide to the way it is operating currently. but although you read that out, the key point in there and the point i've already made once is that while the legislation provides a robust framework, it is reference to the person authorizing the warrant or that is the ultimate safeguard. a person who is democratically

accountable through parliamentary processes, exercising political judgment. and what i can say to you is that in practice that political judgment will invariably be exercised some considerable way inside the parameters of what the law will allow to insure that the agencies are narrowly focused in what they seek to do on any particular operation. i think perhaps it's a feature of the times that we live in, but i'm sure i can speak for all of my colleagues who sign warrants that we all have in the back of our minds that at some point in the future we will -- not might be, but will -- be appearing before some inquiry or tribunal or court accounting for the decisions that we've made. and essentially, accounting for the way we have applied the proportionality and necessity texts. there is a very strong political

incentive to apply these texts narrowly and in a way that minimizes the scope of agencies to interpret warrants that are issued. >> thank you. you mite even be appearing -- you might even be appearing before this committee. [laughter] thank you very much for all answers. we are going to adjourn and is meet again in closed session later this afternoon. thank you very much. order, order. >> and so as you heard, this meeting will adjourn for now, but they'll continue in closed session a little bit later. a quick reminder that we have british house of commons coverage here on c-span2 live wednesdays at seven a.m. eastern. it reairs sunday night at nine as prime minister david cameron faces questions from members of the house of commons. well, coming up later today live at one eastern, a former israeli intelligence officer will talk about national security, instability in iraq and syria and policy towards isis. it's hosted by the woodrow wilson center. we'll have it for you here on c-span2 starting at one p.m.

eastern. this weekend on the c-span networks, friday night starting at eight eastern on c-span our campaign 2014 debate coverage continues in prime time. on saturday night at ten, the women of color empowerment conference. and sunday evening at eight on "q&a," film maker and daughter of robert f. kennedy rory kennedy on her film, last days in vietnam. and friday night at eight on c-span2, author michio kaku in the latest advances in brain science. sunday morning on booktv, live coverage of the texas book festival, and sunday it continues live starting at noon. friday night at eight on american history tv on c-span3, the union army and abraham lincoln's 1864 re-election. and saturday night at eight on lectures in history, the modernization of businesses and households in the 20th century and its impact on society. and sunday afternoon at four on real america, ronald reagan's

1964 a time for choosing speech. find our television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us at 202-626-3400, e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet at c-span hashtag comments. join the conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. recently, harris-stowe university in st. louis hosted a town hall about how the media covered events if ferguson -- in ferguson, missouri, after the august shooting of michael brown, whether the media fueled the ensuing protests, the effects of the national media on a local story. panelists include reporters, a local township official who was blogging from the protest scene and the president of the national association of black journalists. >> good evening. >> good evening. >> unfortunately in hornet

nation, we use feedback. we need feedback, so good evening. >> good evening. >> thank you. my name is dr -- [inaudible] warmack, and i currently serve as the president of harris-stowe university. and on behalf of our faculty, staff and our students, we would like to welcome you here today. we're excited to partner with this program tonight. this is our fifth town hall meeting that we've sponsored here at harris-stowe regarding the aftermath of ferguson. i will be attending a meeting in the morning with the regional chamber and emerson to talk about some systemic community/socioeconomic things that need to happen to restore this community. so we're excited to partner tonight k and we're looking forward to the fruitful dialogue that will go on that will continue to have systemic impact in our community. thank you again for being here, and we look forward to a great program. [applause] >> good evening, everyone. my name aja williams, and i'm

the president of the greater st. louis association for black journalists. i'm here to, actually, be very brief and introduce you tow our moderator -- to our moderator, mr. bob butler, president of the national association of black journalists. he flew all the way here for this event from california. he's been in the industry for more than 20 years where he currently works as a reporter for kcbs in san francisco. bob was truly instrumental during the ferguson coverage as far as being able to help journalists on the ground when journalists were arrested such as wes lowery who is not only an nabj member, but he was the award winner for emerging journalist of the year at our recent convention. he immediately released a statement on behalf of our organization and helped in any way he could in making sure journalists on the ground were having their rights protected, essentially. so i am pleased and very happy

to welcome him, and i hope you all will welcome him as our moderator for this evening, mr. bob butler. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> thank you, aja. we're back there kicking it, that's why i didn't hear my name. good evening and welcome to this town hall meeting, it's on how the media covered ferguson following the shooting death of michael brown. the it's being brought to you by the greater st. louis association of black journalists and president aja williams and the national association of black journeyses. my -- journalists. my name is bob butler, and i'm president of nabj. a coupleover housekeeping notes, we do have a twitter, a hashtag,

it's @fergusonmedia, submit your questions that way, they'll collect your questions up on the screen. we also have cards if you have a question. at the end, i'm going to have a couple of questions for the panel, and then we'll go to your cards. we wanted to have a mic for people to get up and ask questions, but they don't -- we don't have that, so i want to introduce our panel. to your far left is mariah stewart, she covered the st. louis metro area for and is the ferguson fellow for huffington post. he graduated from linwood university in may and started covering ferguson, like, right after her graduation. she started covering the michael brown shooting. that's mariah stewart. [applause] >> next to mariah is christopher ave, he's the national and political editor for the "st. louis post-dispatch" and stltoday.com. he's been instrumental in directing coverage of the government and political

ramifications of the shooting and the resulting protests in ferguson. christopher ave. [applause] next to chris is bill fry vogel, the director of the school of journal kim at southern university carbon dale, are those are -- >> got that right. he has had an award-winning career covering national politics and the supreme court. he is the publisher of the gateway journalism review. [applause] next to bill is patricia bynes, democratic committee woman of the ferguson township. she watched some of the looting that took place that night, those nights. she has appeared on national be media outlets to discuss, among other things, the clashes between police and the community patricia bynes. [applause] bradley rayford is a freelance photographer and student at st. louis community college, a graduate of the association of

black journalists' workshop for students, photos shown on national television. mr. bradley rayford. [applause] >> and finally, some of you may all know brittany noble-jones was one of the first reporters in ferguson on august 9th. here social media reports really drove the media coverage not just locally, but nationally. in fact, how many followers did you have on twitter at that time? >> yeah. at first i started with 1500 and -- >> now how many do you have? >> and ,000. >> 13,000. twitter does work. aye known brittany since she was a student reporter at our convention in 2010 in san diego, and i must point out she covered ferguson while planning her wedding which took place how many weeks ago? >> like two or three? [laughter] >> two or three weeks ago. the wedding, by the way, i was not invited to. >> you could have come. >> i didn't get an invitation. [laughter]

anyways, this is your panel. we want to talk about the media coverage. we've had a lot of town hall meetings here talking about the police, talking about the city leaders, talking about voting, not voting. but what about the media? how did the media cover this? so let me is ask you each from your perspective, did the media get it right? mariah, we'll start with you. >> i feel like the media did do, they did the best that we could in the situation, or i know i did. and a lot of people up here did. >> you were out there. i mean, you probably have seen some of the coverage of ferguson when you -- did you see any of the coverage? because you were out there for a long time, weren't you? >> yes, i did see the coverage. the only thing i would have to say negative about media coverage is the actual attitudes toward public officials when it came to press conferences, press

meetings. some of reporters, cameramen were nasty. but as far as overall coverage, i think we did a decent job. >> okay. now, chris, you actually directed some of the coverage. not so much the coverage of ferguson during the protests, but the results and the ramifications of that. what are you seeing? >> well, i think in many ways the jury is still out on how the media, how we covered ferguson because when we say "ferguson, of course, really shorthand for a wide and ever-growing range of issues. this wasn't just about an incident between an officer and an 18-year-old. this was, certainly, it was a fatal shooting, it was an incident -- it may have been a crime. it was something, then, of course, it was a reaction to that. but then what happened, in my view, opened up all kinds of deeper issues of the sort of

divisions in our society. and it's just fascinating, the ways the reactions vary depending upon one's background. i think it's really revealed some real problems that we have and in everything from the use of, the proper use of force among police to the proper way to handle when there is a protest which is a constitutionally-protected right, by the way, to assemble and to petition and to protest all the way to the disparity in sentencing, all the way to fines, criminal fines for small legal matter. this crazy system, there's something like 80 different court systems in st. louis county. it's crazy. we have the most crazy, unfocused, balkanized system of government that i've ever seen, and i've worked in five or six

states. so a wide variety of issues. we're doing our best to get to all of them. it's not easy, but it's certainly important. >> okay, bill, you actually rate the media. you do a journalism review. what have you written about ferguson? the coverage of ferguson? >> well, i'll get to that in a second, but i just wanted to sort of start with whatever we think about how well the media has done, it's clear that most people in st. louis think the media has done badly. you know, there was a survey the other day that showed about 70% of the people thought the media had made things worse rather than better. now, i wouldn't, i wouldn't necessarily agree with the majority sentiment there. i think that some of the things that christopher just finished pointing to were ways in which the media has really helped -- and this is both the local and the national media -- has really helped focus on important

issues, you know, the value cannized -- courts, police use of, you know, police profiling of african-american citizens, the need for cameras on officers, video cameras on officers for accountability. so -- and the broader, really what i think is the most important issue which is the conversation about race which this town never has quite actually had, i think. so those are ways in which i think the media has done well. to answer your question about what have we written about in the journalism review, some of the things -- i've said in some of our stories what a great job the post-dispatch photographers have done. i think they have just been amazing images and, you know, they have been very brave in the way they have covered, have covered the story. i've been pretty critical of

some of the parachute journalism. there was a new republic reporter the first week went to a barbecue place and interviewed about five white folks who had very negative feelings about african-americans x that was, -- and that was her story about what was going on in st. louis. at "the new york times," they had a second story -- had a story the second sunday of coverage, i think it was called "circle of rage," that st. louis was encircled by these segregated suburbs, can and it didn't, just didn't quite get things, they didn't really quite get things right. for example, they portrayed ferguson as having, as aing is regated community. as a segregated community. a person i know be out at stanford actually pulled out the census statistics that showed, actually, ferguson is one of the most integrated communities, you know, if you look at the entire boundaries of the city.

i thought some of the -- so the citizen journalists did a really good job. i don't even know this that's quite -- if that's quite the right word. patricia would be one of them. antonio french had some very, you know, very excellent posts, i thought. of course, they all had a point of view, but they were reporting from the scene. i quoted, in the journalism review, i quoted a young journalist named ryan shoesler who i think was working for al-jazeera america, and he was very put off by the way journalists tended to make the story about themselves. cameramen making jokes about where michael brown had died, cameramen who were yelling at people in the community to get out of the way. chris hayes being out of way of their shot, chris hayes, the msnbc guy out there with the

people, but he's actually behind a wrought iron fence. so i thought that he had quite a number of good points there. >> i'm going to go to bradley and brittany before -- because these are the journalists, i want to hear from the journalists, and you're going to tell us what really happened out there. bradley. >> great. so i'm the least experienced guy out there -- >> don't say that. >> okay. it was a good -- not funny to see, but interesting to see a national/international story unfold before me. i have never seen so many journalists in one spot at one time, so what kind of bothered me a little bit was because we were becoming the story. and the actual story was being overshadowed by how the police were arresting journalists, how the journalists were being in the way of sometimes. and so i think that it's important from now on that we learn from this situation and learn to report the story and not become the story.

i think -- like bill said, there is a mixed review from -- [inaudible] about how the media overage was locally. -- coverage was locally. i do believe the best was cone cone -- was done with the resources they had. in any situation, things can be done differently. but this story was unfolding at such a high pace, it was kind of hard to please everybody with the story. however, like i say, things can be done differently. so i hope this will be a learning situation not only for the police, but also from the folks in the journalism, the journal journalist industry to learn there this and do things differently next time. >> so, brittany, you were out there early on, early and often. >> uh-huh. >> talk about it. talk about when you first got out and how, i mean, you were one of the first reporters on scene, right? >> well, i think it's really interesting to note and and really funny that bradley and i

sit here next to each other because he was my photographer that was taking my engagement pictures, and literally in the middle of the session we're like, wait a minute, what is and

>> we're holding people accountable, you know, we're digging for answers. we're an emotional brand. and when you put that brand into an extremely emotional, what became a national case, now it's almost like i'm the emotional reporter. so you just have to take a look, i had to take a look at myself and how i was covering it and how i needed to step back as far as our brand and just, you know, i absolutely was reporting the facts, but i know how some people say reporters are trying to become the story. and don't forget, there were a lot of reporters out there that were trying to -- this was their name to fame, you know, if you l. it's a huge national story. not just reporters, like, i've seen vendors out on the street selling t-shirts. they're trying to make a profit off of this too. so it's just, how did the media cover this, did we get it right, i think that's such a very broad question. there's so many media outlets. i've never seen anything like it

as well, bradley, so both of us, this is the biggest story we've ever cover inside our career. i can't speak to how everybody else covered it. i can only look at myself, how i covered it, what i think i did good and what i think i could improve on and go from there. >> so, pat, patricia, you're out there in the middle of it kind of doing double duty not just as a public official, but also you were blocking about the violence and all that -- blogging about the violence and all that. so when you look at the national coverage, and there'ses always a difference between national coverage and local coverage. >> right. >> for anybody that's a reporter, you know you'll be in town and the national media comes in, and things change. so from your interspective, how did -- perspective, how did things go? >> i've always been, i guess, a news connoisseur. i'm always reading, always keeping up on what's going on. and i tweet, and i initially found out about the shooting.

i think because i get such a diverse can view of the -- diverse view of the news, i read the local, i read the national, i look at international things, to me it's cute to see you guys be so hard on yourselves. there are so many types of ferguson stories that were covered, and some of them were done well, and some of them were not. i definitely want to give kudos to the local coverage that was here because i know just like for myself, i had to school a lot of the national media on how st. louis worked. they did not know that. and i know that this was a crisis situation, and people just jumped in, but i would like -- i would certainly hope that in the future in a caustic situation before national media jumps in, they have to do some homework so that way they can start getting the story right. initially, i saw posts. i was like, oh, no, no, no, you don't understand.

we had to explain government municipalities. they got ferguson police and st. louis county police mixed up, and if they -- and it's a huge difference in what was going on. and it changed the entire tone of the story. and as ferguson, and it's continuing to unfold. the coverage is not over. and as it continues to go on, you can tell which news organizations and which reporters were trying to get it right, who was actually doing the homework, who was asking the hard questions and doing the deep digging. and as far as the reporters becoming the story, i think that i don't -- i mean, there may have been some people trying to become the story, but i think an important part of the ferguson story is the violation of first amendment rights that if they don't care about how they treat the media, imagine what they're doing to the people that actually live here. so what is considered being in the way to the police versus to the media versus to the people.

and i think that that was important. yeah, please lock up some national reporters and have them talk about that experience just so they can get a taste of what dealing with zillion county and ferguson police is really like. so i don't -- i mean, there havy have been some people who injected themselves, but there's this eye-opening experience of, whoa, what is going on down there? if they're doing this to us, what's it like to live there? and once they started to really try to dig to see what is all this anger all about and it became not just the shooting of a young man and leaving his body out in the mid -- middle of the street for four and a half hours, it became the understanding of police harassment, the ticketing. where's the ticketing come from? the courts. everything just came rolling out. all of st. louis' dirty laundry just came out for everyone to see because none of this was new to anybody who lived here.

>> so from what i hear you say is that we should not have been surprised that reporters were arrested, is that what i'm hearing you saying? >> that's exactly what i'm saying. >> is that common? are the police that -- i don't want to say bad, but, i mean, it's -- i've covered protests for years. i've never been arrested, never even been threatened with arrest. one time a police officer came at me, but he saw my microphone with the mic bug on, and i think that's what saved me. but when i heard about reporters being arrested, i'm like, what? you know, what for? so you're saying it's not a surprise. ..

. you have response of police toward the citizens that pays their salary. now you have the response towards police, towards media members that cover the stories. now you had, now you uncovered the racial wound there st. louis has for this story has uncovered so many more stories beyond what happened to mike brown but now we have other stuff to deal with because of mike brown. >> do you think, i've done this before, i mentioned this before but the media sometimes drives the protests of the they might not be doing anything but a tv camera shows up or microphone

shows up and they start going crazy. do you think the media contributed to that in ferguson, anybody? >> i think the night that thomas the tank engen showed up in the middle of selling something. a local well-known homeless advocate and minister showed up to raise money, and, i'm not sure the t-shirts were being sold. yeah, absolutely. there were a lot of people trying to manipulate the media, we in the media, we all agree on this, we hate being part the story. it is not why we're there, it is not part of the goal. even the thought we would be part of the story makes us extremely uncomfortable but the phenomenon that you described is undoubtedly accurate and will continue to be accurate. people see the camera, the notebook, or the microphone and will act in a way they would not otherwise have acted and that is

unfortunate. >> i agree with christopher, that in general, reporters don't like to be the center of the story but, but i have to admit, i had the same reaction i think bradley was describing earlier, that sometimes the reporters were, were really happy to make themselves part of the story. i was a little bit, i mean the day that those two guys were arrested in mcdonald's i had really divided feelings because on one hand i felt as though the police in general that at that point the way they were handling the protests and the way they were handling reporters were violating the first amendment. on the other hand i felt as those, when i looked at the "huffington post" and world war iii headlines about these two guys getting arrested after they basically refused to vacate the mcdonald's on police records, i mean, suddenly the story was about those guys and i was not, i found that sort of offensive to be honest with you.

and i found, i was, you know, seems like it was at that point the story took off. the story should have taken off for what it said about race in st. louis, not what it said about a couple of reporters got themselves arrested at mcdonald's. >> any questions from the audience? you can tweet to, at ferguson media, we'll pick up the questions on the screen. i believe there are some cards. do we have the cards for questions? say it again? >> pound. >> pound, yeah. showed my age, didn't i. we have a question? so, we talked about national versus local media. how much do you think this would have been, how much less of violence do you think it would have been had it just been local media? do you think the national media drives this? when the big boys show up as

they say now you have got the big truck, the cameras, all the fixers and everything. pat? >> it was local at first. everything was local and what drove, what got the national media's attention was social media. that's where your stories are, that's where it came from. so to see the tweets and the pictures and videos that were out there, you can't help but be like, oh, my gosh, what is going on? i'll tell you the local media was out there. they came out there, they were live streaming streaming what in at night. reporters and photo journalists, we were all out there running together and it was amazing but the local was there first and then, it was the, the response from social media. that is what got it big. >> let's not forget, you know, what tipped me off the story because i wasn't at work when i

found out -- yeah, the death of mike brown, it was social media. it was not reporters. it was people that had seen, these images all over instagram or all over twitter and they're asking what the story was. so it really was not just the local media was that started this whole thing. really how social media really took a part in the story. people were instantly sharing this. the word got out so quickly, the news hadn't even come on yet. >> i believe that picture of mike brown laying on the ground with the bloodstreaming down the street. >> then the dad. >> then the dad with the sign my son was executed by the ferguson police department, those two pictures was shared thousands of times within time span of a couple of hours. so you have, you can not miss that. no matter who you are. you coin miss. that you knew somebody that knew somebody that shared this picture. it will be on the news feed, instagram, facebook, twitter.

you can not avoid seeing those pictures. so the fact that those pictures were out there, kind of made the story bigger than what it is now. >> then even, just the video, even while reporters supposedly were sleeping if we did sleep, there were other people that lived in the neighborhood that were out still on instagram, still on facebook and they're still capturing moments we missed while sleeping. i don't know that it is all just, local media did the best to try to cover the story but i think people in that area in st. louis quickly picked up on it and shared it with the world. >> chris, have we seen a shift, because remember used to be a time when there was a big story it would be on page one -- >> next day. >> the next day. >> yeah. >> that's why i working in radio, i cover the same story you cover but i can go on the air immediately with my telephone. >> yeah. >> have we seen a shift?

you don't have to wait until the next day? how much pressure to get it on the web as soon as possible? >> intense pressure no matter all of us, what a platform a journalist works, the deadline, i'm old enough to start in this business, in my grandpa voice, when i started in this business you had a deadline, probably around 5:00 or 6:00 and take your time, get everything right, double-check everything, have it edited, rewrite and go home. the story still doesn't get out until zick the next morning. those days are long gone. deadlines all the time some here's a point i want to make about this. patricia is exactly right and she was one of those people by the way that was getting the word out on social media. it ex-exploded around the world literal lift that is not a metaphor. that is actual truth. antonio french, patricia, others were there tweeting, taking

photographs and sending them out. that is a huge element. so it is much different than it was. however if you just got your news, and i use the term loosely, about ferguson from social media, you would have quickly seen things that were just not right. in fact, not only were they not right, they were dead wrong. there was a rumor that was spread, like wildfire, again around the world, literally, that the police officer in question had suffered a fractured eye socket. you probably saw that right? >> the picture. >> someone mocked up a fake picture and put it on twitter. well it is on twitter. my gosh, i better share it. okay. we never ran a word of that until we could track it down and we found out it was false. and then, we were very happy that we hadn't done that. what is the difference there? the difference there is that, you know, journalists, i know there are nabj members here, god

bless you, young, smart, aspiring journalists, you have to save us here, our society from this trend of just spreading rumor and, and spreading opinion about things and not getting to the fact because traditional journalism as wisenned and wrinkled as it seems to be, traditional journalism still holds the most important thing is the truth, the truth. and so you don't report things you see on twitter. you go check it out and figure it out and you do it fast because you're still competing against all those folks. so it is very fascinating out this is developed and it will continue to do so. >> okay. got a question. do you believe that the citizen response to the media presence was exceptional? if so, what might that say about the desperation of the citizens to, quote, have eyes on a dire situation? who wants to take that one?

>> i guess, citizen journalists, are they journalists? i don't think that a citizen journalists will look at a story or, something happening the same way that i would because i'm in search of the truth. i'm impartial. i'm taking my feelings and emotions out of this. i'm trying to find out what happened and how to get those answers and i don't think that, i think citizen journalist they can insert their own emotions in it. that makes my job and their job very, very different from me. >> that is my next question. what makes somebody a journalist? we hear the term, citizen journalist, all the time. those of us who went to school

for journalism, some of the purists if you didn't go to school for it you're not a journalist. i don't believe in that but bradley? >> i think what makes you journalist you want to tell the real story, either from your perspective or perspective from others makes you kind of a journalist. that's good question. that is a very good question, what makes you a journalist? i believe the fact you want to tell a story from the perspective other than own gets you to be one. >> bill to you. >> i agree. we don't want to be so exclusive who gets to qualify for the club of being journalists that we turn up our nose at citizen journalists who, i mean, maybe they're, maybe they're, maybe they are recording events from a particular point of view you about still, i still, if you were trying to figure out what

was going on the streets of ferguson the nights of all the protests and the riots and the looting, you, the tweets of antonio french and of patricia were really crucial to figuring that out. i mean, we had st. louis public radio, we had kelsey proud and she is backed up by erica smith who were butting -- putting all the most responsible tweets they found from patricia, from antonio french, from post dispatch photographers and reporters who were on the scene from st. louis public radio, reporters on the scene and really to get the whole picture, it required the, the eyewitness accounts of all of those folks. so you know, i'm, i know patricia, i asked patricia

before we came out here, are you a citizen journalist, are you a politician? she sort of said both. i sort of go with her on that. >> i would add, i think before the days of twitter and facebook, people who we would be considered citizen journalists who were reporters would be coming to, the journalists would be coming to for the story and i think citizen journalism kind of evolved from the need of another voice, a different perspective. i think maybe what is not told sometimes is reporters, in order to do their job, they have to develop some level of relationship with the persons or entities in that they're reporting on and through having to develop that relationship, sometimes everything isn't told. so there are other people with, hey, i don't have anything to lose, i will put it out there and what are you going to do? it is a different kind of

reporting because sometimes everything can't be told at the time that it happened with journalists because of those relationships. so, it is kind of a balance that needs to be strike, but sometimes here a different perspective or see a different perspective, i think that is important giving people a full picture of the story. it is a voice they wouldn't have before. >> another question. after the night of unrest i would open the post-dispatch the next day and read the accounts. often the chronology on the story was based on the statement, quote, police said. many times the series of events were just not factual. for instance, statements about when police moved in and when they fired tear gas was used. having been there, the repetition of these falsehoods was disconcerting. didn't the police department have somebody on the scenes, those late nights? why were the police statements taken at face value? >> well, since that was the

post-dispatch i can try to address that. that is a good question. why do we just put what the police say in the paper and i heard that question over the years many times and it is an excellent question. i would answer it this way. the police, you need to ask the police what they did and what they encountered but you don't need to take it at face value. you don't just believe it. that is like asking a politician, no offense, patricia, asking a politician and then getting the answer and just being a ten nothing grapher, putting it down and walking away. stenographer. reporter must check with police because the reporter is not doing his or her job because the police weren't there. that doesn't mean the police will tell the truth. we know over the years police lie in certain crucial

situations. we also know that police sometimes don't lie but they don't exactly get the truth. this goes back to what patricia was talking about and i totally agree. you know, you have to go beyond just the official statement. you, if you're a journalist, you go and find the person that actually was standing out there. you look on twitter and you see with photos are actually taking and putting up. that is a piece of evidence. that is a testimony. that is an eyewitness account. and then, i think the ethical journalists weighs all of these factors, as best they can in the time allotted. and that is a key phrase, in the time allotted. you know we may not have had time to check out every detail of the police account of what happened over an eight-hour period or 10-hour period or 12-hour period, we do the best we can. there is old saying, i'm dating myself here, there is an old saying that journalism is the first rough draft of history and that is exactly right. because it is not what's in the

paper tomorrow or what is on our website right now or stl public radio or st. louis american or any number of websites or news organizations is not necessarily the total story. in fact it probably isn't the total story but it is the best we can do for now. >> another question. there are a have right of examples how the media portrays white suspects and killers better than black victims moving forward, if any, what steps or solution is the media taking to stop these types of portrayals? how are we combating stereotypes in the media? >> well, that's, that's a question i think all of us battle. for myself, for myself, trying to come into the industry, being a student, i think you notice that. i do believe it is an oversight most of the time.

you often, i think they often relies on the words that are used to describe certain people in certain situations but i do believe that it is up to the people that are watching and viewing those particular avenues of media, be it online, broadcast or, even on social media. it is important for those, views to be spoken up because often times media only cover stories or produce media think people want to say. if imeditor of a newspaper or news director after tv station, i want to feel the vibe of my community and if vibe of my community says, you know what? there is things, like black people are, they're giving attitudes or words to describe black people that are way worse than white suspects. maybe we need to redo that

approach. that will happen because people are speaking up. the people speaking up are the ones viewing the material so. >> i think that viewership, remember that you too have a voice. during the ferguson coverage we were literally like non-stop, 24 hours a day, ferguson, ferguson, ferguson. until many of our viewers pointed it out like, what else is going on in st. louis? i know there is other news. we said, okay, look at the newscast and see how we can make this a little bit more neutral. so that was because viewers called in or emailed in and they shared their opinion with us. and we don't know it until you -- unless you saying. >> this is question along the same lines. why other black men are unjustly murdered, trayvon martin, grant, why has the death of michael brown been a flashpoint of concern from the media on other

level. given i'm local and national and i can tell you when you have the pictures and when you have the community out there taking photos, putting them on social media, it become as story, the first word that we got as a young guy trying to give himself up, hands up, don't shoot, should and killed, like six times. that becomes kind of a story you say wait a minute. it wasn't like, everybody, he was unarmed. he wasn't even running away. or, that is one of the things that makes it a national story. in my view. >> i was going to say i think it is partly the fact that it is, latest in a sear es of all these -- series of other events. it was also four 1/2 hours he was avowed to lie out on that street. you know, which wasn't required by any kind of police, police procedures.

so i think that i think those were two factors that made it, you know, blossom into this big story. >> i think what makes this a big national and international story the fact that unarmed black teen was shot by a white cop. that was one perspective. another perspective he was allowed to lay on the ground for four 1/2 hours. responsible community seeing body on the ground for four 1/2 hours. you have the media's response to the people's response to seeing the body on the ground for four 1/2 hours. all those things made this a national story in order. >> you and brandon are young june r journalists getting into the business. what are your thoughts on this. >> well, st. louis has always been a hostile environment between police and citizens. everyone has a story. you go to these town hall meetings. everyone has a story to tell or

they know somebody that has been directly affected by the police relationship here. so everyone was emotionally attached when it finally happened here. and it has happened here before. it was just, i guess people were bottled up and this broke lights like bradley said, the reaction that this community had, that is what put this story over the top because it has been said before by some of the protesters i talked to. they said if trayvon martin was to happen here, we know something was going to happen and that is what happened. >> another question. why has the media not identified this excessive police brutality as a product of our sew seat which has been progressively declining internally due to failing systems? we know there is trouble with police, all across the country. you know, we've seen it. i don't, i'm not sure it is because of declining systems or

failing systems. >> may i speak on something? >> please. >> especially with the national association of black journalists. i think when we have questions are asked about how black people are portrayed in the media we have talk about the diversity or lack of diversity in media in covering these stories and i do believe that people nope the power of the words that they use. i am not going to let anyone in journalism get away with, they don't understand how blacks are portrayed in this country in the media. i'm just, we know the power of words. i remember even maybe about a year or so ago, there was a station, or maybe the post-dispatch they would stop using the terms on the north side or the south side when a murder or something happened because people say, hey, this isn't fair. we want to get away, assuming, south side, north side murder. was that the post that stopped doing that? there is a, i don't know if it is a, the news or the

post-dispatch, when we report about a murder we'll say on the north side or south side. we'll give the street address now and people can figure it out on their own. so, if, i think that if there was a louder voice in the media, in the mainstream media, because i think, black media, there have been several stories about excessive force and police brutality, but, without those voices at, in the mainstream media, being in the editorial rooms, you know, writing a lot of the op-eds you're not necessarily going to hear about excessive force and police brutality. but in our neighborhoods and our experiences you will. >> brittany. >> so i was a reporter that would always beginning leave race out. i would say, police are looking for a man, something along those lines. so making friend with my police contacts and you know, sitting

down and talking to them and being real, one of the officers says, brittany, if i tell you we're looking for this black guy, and he is, i'm giving awe description of the person i'm looking for, i want you to put that out. i don't want you to sugarcoat it. this was an african-american officer that was talking to me. i don't want you to sugarcoat it. this is what i'm looking for and need you to put out. so we'll be on the same team. we need to work together. i understand where you're coming from but i think there is another side to that story. >> i think it is also important to note that often people criticize things with just, idea to criticize it with no hope to do anything about it. i'm personally, if i want, if i want to talk about something, i want to make sure that i have a plan to change what i'm talking about. so a lot of times there are often not enough african-americans applying for police jobs.

they're not enough african-americans applying for elected positions. there are definitely not enough african-americans applying for media jobs. so if we want to, if the voice of the african-american community has to be heard, has to be african-americans are willing to stand up to be that voice. >> so, nabj is very big on diversity in the media, not just on the air, especially behind the scenes because your media coverage is not determined by the reporters out on the field. the news agenda is set by the news managers and i can tell you that in st. louis the last time you get a report on media diversity in the tv newsrooms, it was almost none. in fact i think of one person who was an executive producer who was at 2 and now i think at 4. >> she's gone. >> she's gone. so maybe there's nobody. but reality is, you said more people have to apply for jobs.

that is one of nabj's major missions is to be a clearinghouse for jobs and promotions for our members, for african-americans, for black journalists. if you look at tv stations we looked at, look like it. v, the last report we did, we looked at almost 300 tv stations and 12% of the newsroom managers were people of color. african-american, latino, hispanic, native-american, 12%. as i said very many times i got no problem if you have no diversity in your newsroom in a place where there is no diversity in town. if you have 92% white hop pages i will not say if you have nobody of color on your management staff. i have a big program if you have 40% diversity in your market and nobody of color own your management staff. that is an issue we're addressing forever. one of my major jobs, talk to news managers hiring more people of color. i have a lot of questions

coming. thank you very much. i think this is one story, two stories have emerged after the shooting in its aftermath. one the officer who we now know to be darren wilson, had his skull crushed, this came from fox. now, we've been told by reliable students that, six young black men were killed in the 18 hours after michael brown was killed and these stories were not reported. where did these stories come from? is the story concerning six killings an urban myth? did michael brown actually suffer a crushed orbital eye socket? i heard that too and i don't know the answer to that. >> so, i think that is referring to the officer. >> i'm sorry. darren wilson. >> that was the false, the false yet often repeated rumor that the officer had suffered a broken eye socket or orbital

socket in some kind of confrontation with michael brown. that was flying around social media and it was not true. and somebody, even went to the extent, i don't know who, somebody went to the extent of getting an x-ray of somebody else, somebody else's eye socket and putting it out there saying this was the officer's. so that was completely wrong. six black men killed in the 18 hours, i haven't heard that. i have don't belief that is true. i we write about every homicide that occurs in the st. louis area. sometimes we don't write a lot about everyone but we write about everyone. we keep a count. it is definitely part of the news report. i'm sure that kmov and others do the same kind of thing but -- >> you remember right after the shooting, like the day after, there was a lot of things floating around social media that somebody else, you know, had been shot and killed? so i remember that, you

remember? every time we got a tweet, go to the location, okay, nothing. sorry, false alarm, guys. get another tweet and we go there. so it might have been just rumors circulating again on social media. >> said six black men. didn't say where. if it was around the nation, that could well be true. this brings up another issue. the officer, somebody put his address and his house on the air. right or wrong? >> right. >> wrong. ksbk did and they apologized. i think it put the officer potentially in danger. that is my opinion. >> had they, had they shown the house and not shown, not put the address out would that have been appropriate? >> no. i don't think any kind of visual of darren wilson's house or car,

any kind of things. because that's, that's making, i love to, i would love to get justice for things and what justice means to me, you do what is just. and so that's not doing what is just by showing his personal house or belongs before the process is done. so i believe that's wrong. >> i'm not putting down the fact we know his name but i covered lots of officer-involved shootings and i don't know any of the officers that, you know, took part in the shooting or fired the shots. because that information is usually never released. i remember when the name, we knew that the name was coming out, i remember there was discussion in our newsroom, are we even going to report this? and so, you know, going as far as to find his house and stuff, even his name coming out was, you know, something for us to take in. >> i think his name almost had to come out.

everybody knew who he was. i knew who he was. people were telling me, who the police officer was, when i got there. and, i even had media, wanted media to confirm. i would not confirm the officer's name but everybody in the community already knew the officer's name. >> i think it is really important that the name come out. as much as i think it is wrong to take a picture of his house, i think it is absolutely important the name come out and should have come out sooner. cincinnati, that had a lot of problems about 12 years ago after a, there was a similar kind of shooting of a white officer shooting an african-american young man, and, one of the things that they have changed is they immediately release the name of the officer who is, who is involved in a shooting of a citizen. i think that is the way it should be. >> i know in oakland and san francisco they will release the name.

i know that, i was reading something, in one of the national media, or maybe on facebook, i don't know, but it was about, i think the post dispatch, trying to find out with whether or not michael brown had a juvenile record. they did a pra for that. is that correct? >> yeah, absolutely is correct. one of the things we did and continue to do is find out everything we can find out about the incident, the tragedy, what happened and also all the ramifications that wee been talking about. so in the course of that we have launched an incredibly robust effort, i mean almost everyone in our newsroom and we're still i think the largest newsroom in the st. louis region and almost everyone in our newsroom in some way has been involved in reporting what happened to michael brown, what were the consequences, what happened

afterwards, all the various trails of the story we've been talking about. one of those, one of those pursuits actually was sparked by another one of those false rumors. talking about false rumors, one of the false rumors going around and spread around on social media, michael brown at the time of his death faced some kind of charge, i think it was second-degree murder and very specific and false, i might add rumor. we never reported that, but in the course of figuring out michael brown was 18 years old when he was killed. when you're younger than 18, if you are charged with a crime it is in the juvenile system. the juvenile system is not open. it is not typically open, that is if the person's alive. once a person is no longer alive their records tend to be released. so we quite routinely, as part of our journalistic effort to figure out everything we could figure out, went and said, hey, we don't want to see -- we want

to see any records that exist on michael brown, knowing there was this rumor going around. we were told no, you can't do that. so as we often do and we do it every week, at least every month, certainly, we filed a lawsuit saying actually the law says you need to release it. this is public information. the name of that officer, it is public information and should be released. i will tell you a story about the name of the officer in a minute. that explains that. we weren't trying in any way to besmirch or distort the story or to assistant it one way or the other. that is not our business. that is not what we do. what we do is try to find the truth as i said earlier. and so that was part of it. now i will tell you the story about the officer. we were talking about how it took them a couple of days to release the officer, maybe several days. do you know what we found after they released name of the officer incredibly and mysteriously his name had disappeared from the internet. somehow, very curiously, in any

reporter worked on this, brittany probably knows this, you couldn't find anything, like he never existed. hmmm. now that's interesting. how did that happen? well, i don't know this for a fact but i suspect, somebody went in there and swept out the information from various websites. you can employ a company to go do that and we strongly suspect that's what happened. so, that's, i don't think that's right. if that is what happened. if it is what happened and we find out about it we'll definitely report it. that's wrong. >> what i suspect you doing a pra for all pendtures for month of august for the police department and city? >> i'm sorry? >> i suspect a pra, public records access request for all the spending done by ferguson the month of august? >> oh absolutely. >> that might take it to 16 but that is the possibility. so watching keith jackson on sunday, and watching him on the

following days afterwards, i do believe, watching the whole ferguson, i do believe that as with any situation, from a pr perspective, we're having some kind of knowledge about pr, you do want to to cover yourself. so to say ferguson did not do a cover-up to a certain extent, to deny that, any kind of situation you do you have to make yourself look better, to cover yourself in that situation. so ferguson definitely, without a, it is fact. they can not deny that, any kind of person that does their job right in pr would try to make ferguson look better or try to recover ferguson from the situation. so i do believe there is deferral a cover-up that is going to be exposed. >> so on the lawsuit recording the -- regarding jewel of nile record, have you filed anything? is there any juvenile record?

>> at this point they have not released, we're not sure there was a juvenile record, let's be clear. he may not have a single thing on a record. the judge has said, we're not going to release the record but we will tell you he did not face a major felony, he didn't face as adult or even juvenile, the two or three most serious felonies he has never been charged with. there are some lesser crimes maybe he was charged with. they are continuing to keep that secret. that is where it stand. >> have you done the same thing for the officer? i haven't seen much about his background if he had any charges against him, any other allegations against him, whether this department or the last department? >> the one thing on his record that they have made public is that he won an award. that is what's out there. believe me, we are, we have a team of investigative reporters among their chief tasks is to

figure out the story on this officer and they have been working it and working it and working it and will continue to work it. i don't know if you saw our paper last sunday, centerpiece, 1-a, 8 -inch story was how it was that michael brown's lay there for four hours and 15 minutes according to the official records, quote, unquote that was a product of this investigative team. the previous sunday we had a story, lengthy story, again on sun on the front page and it was talking about witnesses who saw the actual shooting, how they described it. we worked on getting those witnesses for days and weeks, trying to convince them to talk to us. these efforts are going on. we're not stopping. we are continuing. >> just saw a question came up on twitter. let me ask this question before i forget it. this has to do with talking about michael brown being accused of strong-arm robbery in a theft of some cigarettes. why was i it labeled strong-arm

robbery in the media. >> it may have been labeled strong-arm robbery because it looked from the video as though he was pushing the store owner. >> that is the term that the police use. the police put it out there that it was strong-arm robbery. >> i believe it means weapon wasn't used. when it is strong-armed versus armed, strong-armed means with your physical presence. that there wasn't a gun or a knife. >> okay. you were going to say something before? >> yes. i wanted, i, i wanted to say that, chris, i was mad with you guys for going after the juvenile record of a dead guy. it came off as if you were just, it came, i'm not going to say you, it came off as if they're trying to dig up dirt. we all know they cleaned the officer's record so there is nothing to find. mike brown and his family hadn't had that opportunity. but to go and try to get a

record that is closed because he is dead now to try to make him look like, it just, it did not sit well and it came off really bad. so i don't know if the future moving forward if that is something legislatively that can be, because i think, what you did as a kid. that is what you did as a juvenile. that should be closed. so the idea whether or not you're dead, we'll open up all your record, if there are any, we need to take a look at that because it really comes off you're trying to smear the victim. [applause] and, i'm on strong-arm robbery, using that term, strong-armed robbery, that is, might be the legal definition. a lot of us from, like aggressive shoplifting. he went overboard. seems like there was this really this taint to try to make, tried to make what happened in that

story one, more than what it was and two, it actually had nothing to do with why he was shot. so, really comes off as anotherrer. >> job. why that even got released that outraged the community and at tremendous level. that was extremely irresponsible and that is really when people called for chief jackson's job. that is what did that. >> well, the fact that the term strong-armed robbery was used, it was used by the police first. so i it would be unethical for folks on journalism, who are journalists to change up the terms used by the police department. that means that, they're trying to persuade, if the police department puts out a report saying it was strong-armed robbery, well, your job is to report facts and if there is a police report, potentially police report it was strong-armed robbery, that happened, that, you have to report that.

and it is up to the people that is watching that, you see the video. just because you see the words used strong-armed robbery does not mean that you have to see it as strong-armed robbery. you have a option to have your own opinion about it but as far as people in the media, they have to do what the trip says, the training says be non-partial. the train -- >> i will borderline, play devil ace advocate. because reporters, we are, we've saying this over and over, we are in search of truth. people are asking us what is happening, what is going on, what don't we know? this is not adding up. how many times i have done stories, we don't know what led up to this but we know right now all police can confirm and us reporters kept going to police, what happened? what led up to this? what led up to the altercation in the car? we kept asking that. finally will never forget the interview, we were outside in the park. we realized why are you just now

telling us this? and chief says, well, you guys asked for it. you guys kept asking. so we had to release it. we were going to hold it but y'all kept asking for it. i'm not saying that was the right decision. it is up to him. my job was to try to find the answers. to try to find out what happened. what led up to the death. what he was doing earlier. what police knew that we didn't know. and so, you know, was everybody happy with what they found out? no. but, i mean that is playing devil's advocate. >> i thought the way in which the police handled the release of that video was very poor. they were obviously trying to play defense for, for officer wilson. and trying to drag you know, brown, make him look booed. -- bad. on the other hand i think it i potentially relevant to what

happened. it sort of depend whether or not, i don't think we know yet, at least i don't know, whether officer wilson knew about the robbery at the time that he and brown had their, had their altercation. i mean i have heard it said one way and heard it said the other as well. if he did know about that, then it goes, it goes to sort of the state of mind. it goes potentially to wilson's state of mind and also goes potentially to brown's possible state of mind. so it could actually be relevant and even could end mop in a court trial. >> the chief says that he didn't know about the robbery before. because i remember asking him that. >> my recollection is that the chief said that at the time that he, that wilson first told brown to get out of the street, that he didn't know about it. >> right. >> i saw it indicated however, by the time he, the actual, that he had heard about it by the

time the altercation occurred. this was the reason that, wilson had backed up and further engaged him. i don't know this to be, i'm just saying. there are different accounts. and if, if the account about him knowing about it is true, then it is potentially relevant information. >> well i think it is important for citizens to be involved in government or any kind of civil job because, the individual yee was released and initial story was -- video. the initial story was that police officer encountered michael brown because of video. then the retraction made that he didn't know by. shows you can not be too trusting of certain things. you have to, take things at face value but then do your research beyond what it told to you. you have to be your own researcher and research what really happened. and, be ready to dissect whatever is told to you. don't take things at face value. i think it is important a lot of

times, people rely on the media to be voice. i mean that is true but at the same time, you have your own voice, you have your own mind, you have your own ability to find out about things. so it is important, if i tell you what happened on north st. louis, well, if you want to know what happened in north saint lies you -- st. louis, you do your own research to find out what really happened. >> have re they released police audio, police radio calls? that's what i heard. they released video but he didn't know about the robbery he stopped them. but later he did know about it. have they released police radio calls or 911 calls? >> there is no indication that the police radio was recorded. so we don't know that that even exists. they certainly haven't released it. what was released, what was released, was a guy was making a recording for his lady friend. and, and, in the course of making this, you know, what he intended to be romantic

recording, it happened to be at the moment of the shooting. and so you heard a burst of gun fire, pause, another burst of gunfire. and that is reputed to be that shooting. and, i couldn't tell you for sure that is what that is. although i saw a report that someone authenticated it. i'm not sure. -- reliable but that is, what do you call it probative, if you're a lawyer? that has got value to it what it shows that something we really dent know, there were two different bursts of gunfire. there was a burst and a pause and then another burst. the bullets came fast. it was boom, boom, boom. that doesn't mean that the officer's guilty. doesn't mean that the officer is innocent. it is interesting. it is information. i want, may i get back to patricia because she was expressing her anger and frustration at our decision to, and i heard some other people

agreeing with that, the anger. i just want to tell you, i hear you. i mean, i would never try to talk you out of your feeling about something that we did that you feel is wrong. that is your feeling and that is valid. i'm not arguing okay? but i will say this. that if we start deciding what kind of information the public shouldn't ever really see, be careful, just be careful. because, who decide in the end what information the public doesn't get to see? well guess what? it is the government. so, if you start to say, well now, that, don't let them see that. what you're actually saying is, don't let us see. that then all of sudden they can say, well, we're not going to release the name of the police officer. then all of sudden they can say, no, you can't see emails. they were government emails. messages from a police chief and you can't see it. this is what government wants to do. this is the natural inclination

of government, is to keep stuff secret because it makes them look bad, or they are afraid it will make them look bad. what we try to do is get information out. again i'm not negating your feelings about that. i'm just trying to explain where we come from on that issue. >> chris, i get you, i also think there is a time and place to release information, sometimes it is out in the public and other times it should be done through the court of law through the proper process. what wind up happening, you dirty potential jury pool. people are watching the news and when they are get called to jury duty, they can not erase what already has been shown, whether it is relevant or not. so i think there is a time and a place for information and, we need to go through the proper channels for some of those things so that way we don't mess up the justice process. >> i agree but let's take your example, all right? say officer wilson had four

complaints in the last six months, and i'm making this up. this is not true. i'm making this up. okay? >> don't tweet. >> we're into fantasy land right now. don't put this on twitter they said officer -- let's pretend that officer wilson faced four different complaints of using excessive force in the last, whatever, six months and let's just say that the police department decided you know what? that information could poison that grand jury, thatter ising that case. we better keep that secret. after all we want to be fair. oh, my gosh, that would be a complete injustice to keep that secret because that might be relevant. you see what i'm saying? >> we're talking apples and oranges. >> no. >> juvenile record, juvenile record that is closed while somebody is living, i do not think should be open just because they're dead and shown to the, the public. >> the fair enough. that is fair point. >> i'm sympathetic -- >> another question coming. i have a whole ton of questions up here.

there is a lack of trust between the public and the police but also between the public and the media. how does this coverage change that relationship, or does it? how does this discussion, will this discussion, will anything change this dynamic between the public and media? >> excuse me, this discussion here? >> our discussion today. >> i don't know if our discussion today. obviously the coverage hasn't, hasn't changed the public's mind very much since i think the media, according to this recommending ton poll that they think that the media hurt more than helped -- rep ming ton. we have a long way to go to make people think we're doing a good job. >> i said before i will say it again, you have the power to control what you see. i mean so if you're not liking what is going on, you can do something about it. >> i saw a question on twitter i

wanted to ask and it had to do, let me come back up. i don't want to get it wrong. it had to do with the emotions. where does your integrity come into play. i got to find the question i got to ask. a panelist mentioned the role of social media in making ferguson a national story. a twitter, i guess, a twitter hashtag of ferguson showed a spike when the "washington post" and couple reporters were arrested. at what point in the narrative of mike brown's death and the did the treatment become national? did treatment of reporters become national? if not what moved the story to national media focus? i think we covered that. they let mike brownlee there four 1/2 hours. he was unarmed. he was shot six times. >> police response. >> how do we keep the coverage

going about something that is so important? i understand the coverage is still continuing here in ferguson. i haven't seen much more national coverage on it though? >> i did i still get press calls. i want people to know that the world and, when i say the world seriously the world is still interested how we're doing. while everyone has left, i still get calls, maybe about every other day where there is, from national reporters or either from international reporters wanting to know what's going on. so i guess it, it is not blaired across the tv screen and twitter all the time now but people are checking in. i don't want people get the sense, oh, the media once they get the clicks and pictures now they're taking off. i have relationships with reporters, what are the next steps? what are you guys doing?

how did the council meeting go? when is the next protest planned. the interest is still very much here. it still doesn't feel like much after what we've been through, people want to see st. louis and this region start moving forward from this. >> absolutely. go ahead. >> my whole role with "huffington post" is to continue coverage on ferguson because as you know, ferguson is the case study of america. yeah, national media has dwindled off, the big news people are gone but, there still needs to be coverage on it. i will vow to continue it. i still know locals are going to be here. we'll see what happens. we need to know how ferguson changes of at verdict, after everything. so that every city in america that is going through this can know what to do, when it happens. or how to heal. >> i don't think that this is a story that is going to dedown anytime soon. -- die down. look in my life as a reporter,

i'm a general assignment reporter. every morning we're taking a look what's happening in the city and it is bigger story is, today i was doing a double shooting outside of a church in riverview. for that community, that was the big story of the day. now, that does not mean that i'm losing sight of what is going on in ferguson. i'm keeping very close tabs of what's happening. my followers keep me updated. i'm still following everything. if tomorrow i need to be in ferguson, then i will be in ferguson. but if the, you know, the other bigger story in the st. louis region is something else, i get it. and i'm willing to do that. >> i don't think, i agree, i don't think this media, i don't think this story is going to die down. just last week there were all sorts of segments on national public radio about the actions to try to change the way fines are mete the out in ferguson. there were several stories in the "washington post" about the handling of the grand jury in

st. louis county. so i think the national folks are keeping their eye on it. think of all the stories out there still to do. there will be all the developments in the criminal case, whether or not there is an indictment. whether there is indictment, there's a trial. if there is acquittal or no indictment, or there is federal investigation. meanwhile holder has announced the, attorney general announced this pattern and practice investigation is going to go on for months about police practices. this story, and that doesn't even, that is just on the police end of things. what about the whole, big issue of raves and, and, i mean don't we want to look at the schools in that area? it's, not just a coincidence that normandy school district was unaccredited, unaccredited school district which michael brown graduated. are we doing everything we need to be doing in those schools to educate our students?

there are a million related stories. i don't think this story is going to die. >> i realized this, in my story today even though i was in riverview and talking about this double shooting, all the people i interviewed were people that had come from ferguson and moved to get away from the protests. now they're living in riverview and there is this double shooting. so the beginning of my package i'm talking about ferguson even though i'm in riverview. i remember listening in my ear, i may not have been in ferguson but there are reads back-to-back and ferguson still coming up through the newscast. so it is not going to die down anytime soon. . .

>> traditional journalism challeng. i mean, mainly for economic reasons. the business model of journalism, i'm sorry to use coarse language, but it's in the crapper. we're not making -- people don't want to pay for news. they think news should just be free. there's also an increasing, especially among young people as you say, there's an increasing tendency to say, you know what? if it's big news, it's going to find me. my friends will link to it, you know, it'll come to me. okay. so how do we react to that? one, i would say the most important thing we can do is reaffirm our principles of ethical, traditional journalism, reaffirm the search for truth.

because if all that's left are those blowhards on fox news who just want to give their opinion and then the only other people are the blowhards at msnbc that want to give their opposing opinion, then where are the facts? how do you find out what's actually real? there has got to be, for our society, a place to go for actual information; a radio station, a television station, a news web site, etc. so organizations like stl public radio, like the post-dispatch, etc., etc., you know, exist to provide that a unbiased and rell information. one of the things we're trying to do is get much better on facebook and twitter. that's where people want to find their news. that's where they expect to find it. they don't want to go searching for it, it needs to be there for them when they want it, instantly, and that's one of the many things we try to do. we report fast, we get things up on our web site, but more importantly, we push it out there, we push it out out there

on facebook and twitter. visit @stl today on any of those outlets, please -- [laughter] and learn what we're doing. you don't have to agree with it, you can be angry about it. that's actually good because you care, you're living this life. i would say that's what we've got to do. >> okay. this is for bradley. the entire point of you as -- i think the entire point you made is the media supposed to fact check and not leave it up to the public to fact check later, this mindset is exactly why citizens are blaming the -- i don't quite get that. >> well, whoever said that, do you mean the fact that is -- are you saying that it's not up to you to fact check the media? well, if i'm wrong, if you didn't say that -- >> i think it's an entire point

of view the media to fact check and not leave it up to the viewers to fact check. >> i disagree with that. that means you want to be a perp that's easily controlled -- person that's easily controlled. it's not always up to the media to fact check. if i the tell you the bathroom's on fire, i mean, i'm part of the media, are you going to believe that? or are you going to go and find out if watt room's -- bathroom's on fire? it's up to you not only to share things, but also to get a different perspective to find out if it's true or not. >> and then it's a relationship. you grow a relationship with, possibly, a reporter or the news station. it's a trusted relationship. like, i know i can call kmlv and they're going to give me the facts. if you really feel passionately about that, then you're fine. if you see something randomly on twitter and you don't know who this person is, you don't know

if this picture is accurate, maybe you do need to give a little digging -- do a little digging. >> the fourth night of tear gas it was initially said this is not tear gas. i hi it was people like me -- i think it was people like me and other people who were out there saying, uh, no. we know what tear gas is, we've experienced this. this is the fourth night. these aren't just smoke bombs, this is tear gas. and once just a -- i mean, all of us, this is tear gas. this is a lie. this is not right. we're out here. this is tear gas. all of a sudden, the story changed. so there is a time for, i guess, citizen journalism and people using social media to say, uh, no, guys, you did not get that right. and that's how that works. >> i was out there that night, and so you have the police telling us, hey, it's not tear gas, it's smoke bombs. [laughter] i mean, you're going to report what you think is true. but that's why it's also important for you guys to fact check. well, if we're saying -- if the police are saying it's tear gas

and the media are saying it's tear gas but you're actually out there and you're saying, hey, this isn't actually tear gas, it's up to you to call the station and say this is actually what's going on. >> you only have to smell that sweet smell of tear gas once to notary gas. >> yeah. >> okay. how are media outlets who allow readers to comment on stories, there's a history of racist-driven comments on any story involving african-american victims. do these comments encourage negative editorials as a follow up? >> well, i completely agree with the premise of that story, that some of our commentators clearly have opinions that they just need to keep to themselves, and i wish that they would. now, having said that, we allow comments on stories. and that includes some comments that, frankly, piss me off. but i don't get to pick and

choose just the comments i like. and i don't have the time to do that. i mean, some stories have a thousand comments on them. we don't have the personnel literally to go through. however, you know, abusive behavior and profanity and such we try to flag and get rid of those. but it's a tough question, these comments. do they affect our editorial decisions about what we cover and how we cover them? absolutely not. >> this is one thing i would totally disagree with you on, christopher. i think -- >> good. >> i think the newspaper has the responsibility to take the racist comments off and has every ability to do that. and, you know, if they don't have enough people to do it -- [applause] then hire some more people or don't run any comments. >> yeah. i think i would agree with that. if somebody is being blatantly racist, i'd love to just lift that off. and we do. we have people even here tonight, there's one right there, whos has killed -- how has killed, how many, 10,000

nasty, awful comments? countless. so, yeah, we don't want to see that crap on our web site, believe me. we think it's hideous. at the same time, though, you know, there's going to be some comments i disagree with, but that's not reason to kill them off because i disagree. but, yeah, when you get to profanity, racism, antisocial behavior like some of these comments, i agree. >> you know, i'm not sure what -- i guess after donald sterling had his rant and i was interviewed by i forget who it was, and they asked me if i think this is a problem. it absolutely is a problem. there was once upon a time when it was not politically correct to throw the n-word out there, to berate people for their race or their gender or their sexual preference. social media has changed that because people now can hide behind a false name, a false account -- user name they create or an avatar, and i think people's true feelings come out.

so when people tell me we're in a post-racial society, i just say read the comments. [laughter] >> right. >> that's or very good. one of the things we have done, i will say this, is that we do force people to use their real names. we don't let people just have a fake name or a no name to comments. so i guess those people are proud of their racist comments, but -- [laughter] nonetheless. >> couple of -- we kind of covered this, but what exactly do the images of the convenience store show? do journalists believe a rob erie took place or something else? >> i would say, and i think this might speak to some of that, when you look at the videotape some people are saying that may or may not be mike brown, there are some different shoes, there was a date stamp time change on there, it wasn't him, so i think that's where that comment may have been coming from. some people say, no, he was wearing different socks. how did he have time to leave the store at that point -- or different shoes and socks.

how all of a sudden from the time he walked in ferguson market he has on a different pair of shoes. so i think that might be where that question is coming from, because i heard that a lot. they're like, is this even him? the guy looks heavier than what they thought in the video. i've heard that being asked. >> national media have been more aggressive covering and uncovering underlying issues local media failed to cover. why? i'm not sure if that's true. >> i disagree with that. i think what happens is, you know, i took a, just a quick look at the stories that we've run concerning ferguson, michael brown and the associated events since august 9th, and what is today, september -- what is today? what is it? the 17th. so since august 9th we've written, like, something like 250 full-length stories, and we've published more than 200 photographs in the newspaper. we've had more than a thousand, maybe in the thousands of photographs, videos, etc.

, online, and we're just getting started. like i said, the last two sundays -- sunday is, by the way, sunday is like the big, showpiece day. we try to put our best work, our work that we think is most important. we give it a lot of space, a lot of attention. and the michael brown story continues to be our focus on sundays since then, and it will continue to be into the foreseeable future. >> so this is, this is regarding michael brown -- not michael brown, darren wilson's police friends and family network. it says they are convinced that wilson was nearly beaten to death. why can't the media dig up this information? i remember seeing a couple of weeks ago there was somebody who had talked to him and gave an account of what had actually happened, and the media played this up. i mean, this was on national, cable channels. michael brown's -- i forget who this person was, like a friend,

and she had talked to him. it was a, it was a secondhand account of what happened that day. so are you responsible by putting that on the air when you don't know who this person is? they could have been make it up. >> yeah. i think you're talking about darren will soften, right? >> -- will soften. >> yeah, so it was a woman who had talked to a female friend of darren wilson's, so you're already like -- >> thirdhand. >> thirdhand. and i think she called the conservative commentator. so, you know, i don't -- i guess i don't really think that it's responsible to use that. i mean, i was reading it because i, i mean, at that point we really didn't have any kind of good idea at all of what the police account was, so i sort of read it for background information. but, no, i don't think, i don't think writing a story about that

was, would have been responsible. or if you're going to write that story, you certainly have to say this is a thirdhand account and no firsthand knowledge. and i think it's a pretty good rule for journalists to just stick with what they can figure out firsthand. >> this question, is it okay to report unofficial tweet or retweet as a journalist? what is official, what is unofficial? i mean, every tweet is official. whether it's true or not is a different story. who wants to -- anybody? >> well, i think it's okay to report a tweet that has been proven to be true. that's -- >> how do you prove it's true? >> i mean, okay, so darren wilson was -- >> suffered a broken eye socket. >> let's say mike brown was wearing a red shirt that he was shot, that's the tweet. well, if you look at videos and pictures, you see mike brown was not wearing a red shirt, so that's how you guys do a good job as a journalist to find out

things are true before you report on it. >> okay. >> a tweet may print me off or an instagram may tip me off, and i'll take it and try to investigate it some. there are sometimes where i was, i knew bradley, and i knew his work and how he'd been out there, so a few times where i'd be in bed, bradley's out there, whoa. retweet because i trusted him. i didn't do that for everybody because i didn't know everybody, and i didn't know their work. >> tweets can be completely wrong, like christopher's example of the eye socket. they can be the first place that news is reported. i mean, i think almost all the news about what was going on in ferguson would have been first reported in a tweet. i got the idea of how powerful tweeting and retweeting could be in that i wrote a fairly pedestrian story about why it was nixon couldn't order wilson

to be arrested, and through the tweeting and the regetting and where it was -- retweeting and where it was posted, it ended up with 100,000 hits, which was a new experience for me as a reporter. so the tweets are also really valuable to magnifying the power of journalism. >> so this is a question i have myself. what coverage or action will take place the there is no indictment? and will the media and the politicians pursue this? how can you -- what can happen? i mean, the question i have is, you know, will you notice when the indictment's coming down to be able to gear up? because, obviously, you know -- >> nobody knows. >> yeah. >> they've already pushed it til january. after the election, right? [laughter] [inaudible conversations] >> there are so many unknowns right now that it's not even

responsible to give a full picture to even speculate what can happen. because, one, i don't want to think that he's not going to get -- just from what we've seen, there should be enough to question to move for a trial. and i certainly don't want to assume that any rioting is going to start again because there are people on both sides who are going to be upset regardless of if he gets an indictment or does not get an indictment. so it's kind of like -- we don't know what will happen. we don't know where people will come from and how they'll be feeling to come out of the bag. and it's been very hard to try to think of a contingency plan for what if, because you can't plan for everything. so what i will certainly say is that this is on the minds of just about everybody who cares about the public safety, and we're just going through different scenario analysis of what to do, but we're trying to be prepared for anything. >> i just wrote a story yesterday saying that

mccullough says he's going to -- if there is no indictment, that he is going to release the transcripts and the audio of the grand jury with approval of the judge involved, carolyn whitington, and he will do that immediately. now, that's very un-- that's highly unusual, but i don't know that it's going to, that it would, you know, convince anyone. i'm sorry? >> [inaudible] >> the question was how are people supposed to trust the transcripts? >> well, i mean, there's going to be both transcripts and audio. i mean, if you -- at some point you've got to something, and -- to trust something. and generally court reporters do provide accurate accounts of what is said in trials, and they can in grand jury proceedings where they are, where they're recorded. so that's what would happen.

if there's an indictment, then, of course, an interesting question is, well, maybe the judge would open that to tv. mike wolf, who's the dean at university law school suggests that would be a good idea. if there's not an do you indict, the very first thing you're going to hear out of the justice department is our investigation is, for possible federal charges is going ahead full steam. so there will be that potential backup. again, i don't know that the combination of the transcripts of the grand jury and the audio of the grand jury and the promise of the federal government to pursue the case would keep people from wanting to be out in the streets. but that's sort of -- and, you know, i don't think we know even though the grand jury was extended to january, i've heard people say that it could well end up sooner.

post-dispatch had a story today saying that wilson testified for four hours to the grand jury yesterday. so, i mean, i think that one might think it could wrap up before january. >> who else has testified? >> i don't -- well, what mccullough's people have said is that they are putting -- and this is actually controversial in itself -- that they are putting all of the potential witnesses and, you know, the video and everything in front of the grand jury, and they're letting the grand jury make their decision. and that they're not providing them with, like, a narrative here's what happened that you would normally expect a prosecutor to do with a grand jury. and they're, you know, there are some people who say like dana milbank, the washington post columnist, says, okay, this is proof that the fix is in, grand jury is a farce, to clear wilson because any prosecutor who really wanted to get an indictment would be providing a narrative and be honing the facts in a way to get the

indictment. but tn again, i talked yesterday to -- on the other side of that, i talked to a guy who used to, his name's david rosen, used to prosecute police cases in st. louis, and he thinks it's a good idea to let the grand jurors hear all the evidence. and apparently, mccullough is going to provide more legal guidance at the end of the grand jury once all that material is before them. so that's the back and forth of it. >> another question, when the curfew was in effect, most reporters went into what i call the press playpen, a roped-off area for them far from the action. why did the journalists comply with this? can we -- those of you who were there, can you talk about this? because i heard about this too. >> we didn't all comply wit. >> that's right. >> i was out will in the neighborhood getting stories, posting instagram cans. there were a lot of times where i did go to the safe media area, that's where -- and i'm a daysider, so nightside there was

more tear gas and stuff like that, and i know a lot of our nightsiders were in that safe area. but, i mean, there are some reporters that wanted to be in the safe area that it's not just a safe area, that's where our equipment is, that's where we can put our videos together, that's where we can log our interviews, that's where our equipment is, but that didn't stop us from going down into the neighborhoods and getting the stories and bringing it back. >> well, a reference to after midnight, reason why i stayed in the area is because i don't have a lawyer that can bail me out of jail when you have police that have guns and tear gas. [laughter] threaten you. hey, media, stay in the area. media, stay in the media area or you will be arrested. hearing that as a student still, i mean, you're kind of fearful. you don't want to get arrested. [laughter] >> absolutely. bradley -- i went through a similar experience. that was the first night of cur due. i wasn't connected to a -- curfew. i wasn't connected to a major organization yet, and i didn't even have a press pass to get into the media staging area.

all i remember is a policeman saying i can't help you if you're out of those ropes, and so i was scared, and i didn't know what was going to happen to me. so i begged to get up in the media area, and i got in it. >> i mean, if it's after midnight and there's a curfew and you're outside of the media area, first amendment's not going to keep you from get arrested, and it's not going to be any defense be you get arrested. >> yep. >> but i will say there were, i did not adhere to the curfew, and i could have been in the media area. many other elected officials were there and other journalists were in the media area, but, no, because the juicy stories were when they whisked you guys up in the pen and they were able -- >> i do believe there was a police -- that was a police tactic. >> yeah. >> i mean, it's obvious because, well, they saw the media as the ones reporting the stories that were exposing some of the police action.

so, hey, let's -- why not put them all in an area far away from the action so they can't report what's really going on. that's why i do feel the tactic was used by police. >> they switched up where the line was. ferguson avenue is where, by the mcdonald's and the ferguson liquor mart was usually where the police line had been. the night that they started the police pen, they kind of left that open and kind of moved the line somewhere else, and there was a push of the crowd away from the media area. >> toward the canfield apartments. >> yes, toward canfield apartments. so i do know several journalists that did not adhere to this because they knew where the juicy stories were going to be coming from, and they were hiding in bushes. i mean,this is the work you guys want to do, i was just crazy. be prepared to hide in a bush if you want the good story. i wound up getting a bulletproof vest and a gas mask, and the first potential -- first person

i saw putting on that equipment were the journalists, especially the photo journalists. i was by surprised by how much they put themselves in the line of danger just to get that shot. like, i have a whole new respect for the pictures that come out for the post-dispatch. [laughter] i got mad with you, chris, over the media requests, but i did buy the paper because of david carlson and andy cohen? yeah, they made -- those two photographers. >> robert cohen. >> robert cohen. they made me buy the paper. if you want to be or if you wind up having to stay in a media pen, please know that the real good stories are going to come from you hiding in bushes, putting on the gas mask, running from the lis yourself and possibly -- from the police yourself and possibly being arrested, and it was awesome. >> absolutely. [applause] >> another important point to make is the national media coming to talk about are used to reporting in baghdad and beirut.

it's kind of bad they're having to put gas masks on in america because this is not those countries that are going through war. this is america. >> photographers have to be able to get the photo k and you've got to get close. whether you're carrying a still or video camera, although i would say the video guys can usually stand back and get the video because they can zoom in. same thing for the print reporter. but i'm a radio guy. in order to get the sound, i've got to get close. what are you doing? for the police to say this is your area, you have to stay here? i mean, this budget a crime scene. -- this wasn't a crime scene, so how can they get away with that? >> well, you've got to remember, now, the governor of missouri declared the curfew and made it law and gave the law enforcement the right to arrest anyone who violated the curfew. so on the ground, the commanders on the ground said, okay, it's midnight is the curfew. you journalists can stay here, period. you cannot be on the street, you have to stay in this area,

right? so i think what bradley was saying is very, i mean, it hits home. i mean, your choices are you obey the guy with the gun, or -- [laughter] >> pointing the gun at you. >> -- you get arrested or worse. and let me tell you something, those of you out there who are thinking about being journalists or who are starting to be journalists, this is real. this is things journalists do can. we had a couple who got decapitated because they were reporting. they were just reporting, you know, in a war area in the middle east. i mean, think about that. we had -- you mentioned our photographers. we had one photographer who was taking a picture of looting and totally focused on his job, and one of looters kind of stopped and looked at him and said, what are you doing? i think there were some other words in there besides that, but what are you doing? and he started approaching, and the photographer said something to the effect of it's okay, your face is covered, because the guy

was wearing a handkerchief. and so the guy backed off. but later that same photographer got knocked down and kicked and hit, you know? it's real. >> it is real. >> journalism is not easy. >> i've had covering the oscar grant protests after the verdict in -- this is the one in oakland where a guy was shot lying down on a train platform handcuffed, snot the back. one of my friends was punched by a guy. being a journalist nowadays, you are taking your life in your hands. your career in your hands by doing this. we've only got about -- i've got a ten minute warning, but my watch says it's fife til -- five til, so we've only got a couple minutes left. why hasn't as much been done digging into the background of darren wilson? his family history is an interesting story along with his arrest record as an arresting officer. you've been trying to get this

information, as i understand. >> that effort is ongoing. it didn't help that they gave him time to scrub the record if that's what he did or someone did but, believe me, that's continuing on. [inaudible conversations] >> yeah. has the media told enough of officer wilson's story to be considered fair and balanced coverage? >> well, we've done everything that we can do as major investigative journalism operation. the biggest one in the region, we've done everything we can do. all i can say is it ain't over yet. i mean, this story's not going away, and we are continuing on that path until we get to him and we understand his record. his full record, not the cleaned-up record. >> bill, i've got to ask you this, why is it okay to tell children wikipedia cannot be used as a source, but the media uses twitter, facebook and instagram as a source? [laughter] >> i mean, i think we covered that, right? >> well, wikipedia, you don't know who is saying what.

so there may be lines after lines after lines that you don't know who put it out there, that that person that wrote whatever they did on wikipedia. if it's twitter and it's only, what, 130 characters, i can research who put this out. i can do some more investigative -- and i don't just take tweets and just run with it. >> that's the key right there. >> i'm tweeting it anyway. but on wikipedia you really don't know who put it out there at all. >> what will it take for the media in st. louis to cover other important issues like, you know, the guy in new york city and the guy shot in california who was deaf? i mean -- >> i think that my focus right now locally, i mean, there's so much going on in st. louis right here that my focus right now just as a general assignment reporter is what's going on here locally. and the national media outlets can handle the national media

stories. >> and eric garner was choked before the michael brown shooting. so local coverage really is local. and there is national coverage at all of the local media have national coverage, but, you know, if it's me, i'm going to spend my money covering local because there's plenty of national people. [inaudible conversations] >> why was the post-dispatch to cover the date -- the only one to cover the date officer wilson testified, we covered that. how useful is utilizing ferguson as a moniker, has there been any discussion about giving recent events a different designation? i mean -- >> that's where all the stories are kept, is at a hashtag. so we want to keep all the information to that one hashtag. >> it also gives you a way to catch up. >> hashtag -- [inaudible] and you see all the tweets and stuff. >> i'm trying to find questions