haze in the civil rights that unintentionally increase diplomas by reducing the ability to use alternative ways of certified worker competence t. thereby allowing colleges to raise fees aggressively as did financial programs under the higher education act of 1965. the hated fast the form to disperse financial aid has disproportionately turned off minority group numbers bewildered by the forms complexity. i worry we are unburdening african-americans and hispanics by overselling to gain an understanding of risk associated with going to college. colleges should have skin in the game sharing any adverse financial consequences associated with college dropouts following two large amount of college that.

noble intentions were behind the civil rights act of 1960s and arguably real games have occurred. with respect to gender equity, it is men not women who are significantly underrepresented. putting aside past accomplishments and honest appraisal suggests demand unrealistic promotion may now give minorities more harm than good. thank you very much. >> thank you members of the commission for inviting me to be part of the discussion. i'm an associate director of postsecondary education policy center for american progress. center for american progress are cap is a nonpartisan policy institute and we are dedicated to creating new policies but

aggressive ideas. quality affordable education beyond high school is a critical part of enabling citizens to have economic mobility and make sure the economy grows were shared prosperity. today i'll describe her policy ideas for improving the higher education assignment howitzers people of color. the three policy areas i will discuss our increasing federal investment in public colleges, guaranteeing students receive financial aid to pay for college up front and making sure students are prepared to do college work when they enter college and receive support from institution to meet academic goals. first i'd like to set the stage a little bit. this might not be news to you as this is the last panel of the day. since the 1970s we've made significant investments in

telegram and student loans to make more americans able to pay for college. her grandson paid. the growing rate has increased by a third since 1970 and particularly low in him middle income and students of color. at the same time the system is more diverse. in 1976 people of color were 16%. today they are happily 40%. part of this is because the citizenry becomes more diverse with the increased participation rate among people of color. there are troubling signs people of color are not able to access some of the most well resourced universities. research universities is categorized by the carnegie classification system are some of our most well resourced and academic research programs.

during the fall of 2012 undergraduate students of color at public colleges were 37% of the degree enrollments but at the research universities they were 29% and students of color were 41% at two-year colleges. you see a disparity and overall the 150 public research universities only nine of them are institutions with a specific mission of hispanic serving institutions, minority serving institutions and historically black colleges. the first step for addressing inequities is to look at the cuts that have happened of public education after the recession in 2008 and many state governments had to cut back funding for colleges. research has shown 29 states

decreased their total investment in education in 44 states decreased investment on a per student basis. the institutions to serve the higher proportion of students of color were particularly hard hit with these cuts. one of the things cap has proposed to address the situation is a program called the equality compact are really jumpstart the invest. without this reinvestment we will not see the games we need. under our proposal face to be eligible for matching funds that invest as much as the maximum pell grants for students and we would give extra bonus fund for serving students and g.i. bills defense.

the provision would be explicitly aimed at increasing the investment in his editions that serve students of color. the second piece i want to talk about is the college for all proposal. we want to make the funding guarantee much was certain. we think education beyond high school needs to be universally available and that is to cover tuition fees, living expenses and making sure students know going into high school that the award aid will be available to them very similar to the powell promised. we think it is important because students will know in high school or college is available to them and we want to see more high school students taking a college preparatory curriculum. finally i'd like to talk about what happens when a student gets to school. it's important that students

receive support from institution will make it less risk be for them to attend. that includes ridge programs that have shown to boost student progress in student success and the other piece that is important our learning communities which are interventions for students have shared use shared work and they know other people are participating in the program within. there's students interact with and professors tracking progress. in conclusion i thank you for having me. happy to answer questions than happy to provide follow-up in permission. [inaudible] mr. vedder, and i read and listen to you with great interest on what you conclude what your position is very similar to what mr. clegg said yesterday as did stephen aaron's

drum. i agree there is individuals that may not want to go to college and may not be right for college do you not tend to make blanket statements in your concluding remarks when minority shouldn't try for this because they'll be disappointed in you point to the fact the wealth gap has not been narrowed for blacks and whites the 1960s. and then you say become the higher education not prepared because the system k-12 didn't prepare them well. you blame a community for a playing field sat by discrimination in the past and present as fabian sasser eloquently put it yesterday to mr. clegg on this point, the fact that wealth is a huge divide particularly with african-american communities up

until the 1950s they were prohibited from purchasing asset of a home which by and large is the main asset for minorities because of discrimination. when you look at school system the communities find themselves in they are based on communities that have a tax base virtually nonexistent compared to the wealthier whiter communities. they have schools that don't have access to advanced placement in college preparatory courses. it is because of a system rigged that way in my estimation. to say they come from here to 25 why even bother seems to me to be an appropriate way to address the issue. if those are the concerns we shouldn't be saying you guys are never going ahead 100 mark.

you are only a 25. you shouldn't even try. that is close enough an opportunity for people based on their status. minority shouldn't even try. you must value your northwestern degree. god knows i value my law degree from michigan because i know it opened doors for me i would not have had had i gone to a less prestigious school. to say minority shouldn't try because it might be hard, maybe i got more beef in michigan and then had i gone to a local school that didn't have prestige and come out of their a+ at baker mckenzie would've never hired hired me as from a prestigious goal. >> you are misrepresenting. >> we set up minority communities for failure based on past failures. >> again, you are misrepresenting. >> that is how i interpreted.

>> i would agree with commissioner heriot should let me say this is my testimony came off as saying i don't think blacks or hispanics or whatever group should try because they are some mean of that nature certainly was not the intention nor do i think it was expressed in my testimony. i think the failure for minorities is a failure of public policy. public policy is hurting minorities and unintended ways. without using black hispanic things that might be inflammatory, let's talk about income. what percentage of college graduates come from the bottom quartile of the income distribution. the bottom quartile disproportionally includes

minorities. let's put it in terms of income could the bottom in the last few years about 10% of the graduate come from that group of people. as 25% of the population. what was said in 1976 the first year the pell grant was made. 12% was higher than dan today. one of my colleagues at the pell grants have been cap.. we've gone from 2% to 38% in terms of finding. 72 to 36. in the real world to say outside higher ed the price of bread triple. the price of housing tripled.

the price of food tripled. in real terms the national bureau of labor statistics than a mile away from here has gone up 30% or 40%. colleges raise tuition. why aren't you lucky not? why are you looking at the producers of the services. they are exploiting people and taking financial aid programs. it hurts minorities more. i'm not saying they shouldn't go to college. i am saying they are being ripped off more relatively speaking. that is the thrust of what i wanted to say. >> we will look at that because we did have testimony yesterday. that is not what i interpreted your remarks both written and

oral to be. commissioner achtenberg. >> i wanted to talk with ms. mcclean about your obligations of the campus-based it program. so college work-study and there is a third program. perkins loan. could you talk about each of those interned and whether or not the other two as well are ready for reform and in the case of college work-study not just the allocation but whether or not increases in college work-study might be a smart investment if our goal was to empower students in general who

are already in college to achieve the baccalaureate and any observations you might have about whether or not there's anything pertinent to particular to persistence and degree attainment on the part of racial minorities. >> absolutely. something i didn't mention in my testimony of many of you may know programs are chopping block as we approach the reauthorization. i want to see we find them very of the eye will go through them and to visualize u.s.'s supplemental educational opportunity grant designed to supplement the pell grant program is what it does and that is a ground-based program administrator does have flexibility to look at their pool as a guide -- to the extent

is supplemented is doing a good thing right now. the federal perkins program we can always look at it and in the program. right now is a relatively small program. a $1 billion program for example is very small. what we might look at is expanding the program to get more institutions into it so more can participate. the federal work study program has a tremendous amount of goodwill both on capitol hill that financial aid administrators in the community and i was there with was there with that we were glad to see more funding in the program and certainly that help students as they get paychecks throughout

the semester. you asked specifically about other benefit and there has been researched to show it does connect students to the institution if they have a job to go to and get intertwined and have a supervisor they work with. certainly for students that is their first real job experience and they rely heavily when they graduated trent to get their first job. >> we heard testimony that in particular college work-study was a very important part of not only making the student connect it to the university but also enabling the student to have an opportunity to do an internship inside the university or become a lab assistant or something with college work-study fun and that makes the person more likely to persist to achieve to

graduate. he was also not a cat of targeted work-study. so that is pretty consistent with his testimony. i am wondering ms. baylor some of the recommendations ms. mcclean is making ring true for your organization and if you could comment on that. >> absolutely. i agree the work study program should connect students to universities and it gives them a work experience taken to after school. we also in particular would like to see an expansion of any thing -- jobs that connect the student to academic work to make sure students who have economic need also have the time and

opportunity if they can afford to do an unpaid internship make sure there is an opportunity to do work that connects them to their academic work related to -- our general recommend nation is we need to have more aid that is not paid back especially for students at the low end of the income scale. we want them to understand it is something they can obtain because the jobs in the economy require the skills. >> we heard testimony from king alexander regarding the funding formula and his observation that this can assume that yours said one of the components where you gave them their base that they

had the year before so the older institutions that have made when the program was created and have an outpaced enormously by newer faster growing institution that the formula is outdated and tends to reward older institutions and give them more money. we heard a statistic of the ivy leagues combined received $10 million for 60000 students were at the california state university which educates 400,000 students receives $11 million of the 400000 students have a bad archery and 11 eligible for the ivy leagues may be under 15% r. train 11 eligible. a large amount of money is invested in a small number of needy student on one hand and

over here you have a huge number of students getting essentially nothing. perhaps that might be combined with some kind of outcome measurement good we heard earlier and i am sympathetic with commissioner kirsanow's concerned that the measurement of inputs is not exactly where we want to be particularly if our goal is to increase the attainment of the baccalaureate degree in the aggregate as well as with regard to minority underachievement. it seems to me -- i hope it's not on the chopping block but it made me on the free distribution block if equity is

going to be more readily achieved. is that a conclusion you would agree with or do you take -- is there something there i am missing? >> that is correct. >> mr. vedder, did you have an observation? >> i have no specific observation except for one thing. the base guarantee. everyone i know in higher ed is an opposable thing. i am in complete agreement with the statementstatement s with respect to god. >> i think one of the things that we see systematically from state funding to this grant program is institution that are

well resourced and end up having more students succeed. then you see these institutions that have procedures money and the institutions serving the needy astute and seem to be facing the confrères. >> your federal matching program encouraging states to me and asked. one of the primary factors for the increase intuition at least for state-funded institutions. i'm not saying it's the only factor that a primary factor has been the progressive disinvestment on the part of states on behalf of their state university system. at least that is the phenomenon

in california that has been true in others dates as well. holiday federal matching program work in terms of your proposal and how does that yield increased investment on the part of the state? >> the way we envision it as we create a pot of money at the federal level that states would be eligible to access if they spend as much per student on a pell grant. if the overall investment is equal to as much as a pell grant student is so $5700. good luck data that is to and another 10 states are in a couple hundred dollars at the bar. we thought it was states a little bit but was announced that the ground is seemed

reasonable. what wouldn't say if if you participate to be eligible for the extra funding for any money put back into the system federal government would not do and wanted to make sure the matching supported students from backgrounds who wanted to the 60s. we thought it roman is pell eligible students could be good measures to redistribute the equity. >> may have to make a statement, you asked me a question. the federal government gets $50,000 per pupil student for more gb of the private universities. when you take account coming down the subsidies privileges for people make donations. these are schools with low pell

participation. these are schools that have legacy admissions tendered but often discriminate against minorities. i don't know why you people -- you people is probably a wrong term to use. the commission does not look into this issue and take this up as a topic. it is something that people on the conservative and liberal end of the spectrum might find some agreement on. commissioner narasaki followed by commissioner heriot. >> thank you. i have a couple questions. mr. vedder said a college degree is not a guarantee of employment. what i want to understand from all of you seems to me that increasingly it is becoming a prerequisite for many jobs.

>> and made the u.s. commission held a symposium on access to higher education for minority -- >> sufficient employment are getting into the middle class. if you have a college degree versus if you don't. >> you should mention my name first. i would agree with that statement. college degrees, other things equal, and that is an important qualification are you better take it success than i have. of course we want people to get college degrees. by the way i'm the only one here except for some commissioners that teaches students. i'm in my 51st year of teaching. i've been teaching for 51 years. i'm a great believer in pushing college education. there is a payoff.

but there is also a huge amount of risk associated with getting that degree. that was my point. my wife is a high school guidance counselor and were the worst offenders. we tell everyone go to college, go to college, go to college. >> i think that is what the commission is exploring though we are concerned there are institutions who seem to be gaining students at the expense of student and not concerned with the graduating and being able to use education. i'm glad you clarified it. that's very helpful. really the last two days has been focus on the private good and private good and what is in it for the student to get college education which most of us agree is important to either get college or summit against

agree, whether it is vocational or something else, that these days and this global economy a high school degree isn't going to cut it for much people. that is my personal observation. i say that as someone who had a brother who became an actor and a fidelity asian-american culture and said he wasn't going to college. he is one of the smartest people i know. obviously you can succeed without a college degree, but it makes it easier if you have one. so what i would like is some observations. aside from the hope you will become someone making enough money to pay into the tax system and help drive the economy, what are the other goods associated with college degree?

>> one of the first things i think of is her dissertation in our society. ..

is a huge part of it the national competitiveness. these might be more generalized as the softer skills but just the general tendency of college graduate to be more open-minded and to leave having on what it's like to work in groups. i think it really does a great thing for society as a whole. >> actually in our hearing in new york on use of force i asked one of the panel, the question of what's the biggest link, what can we do to help law enforcement be able to make better judgments with use of force. and one of the responses was the thing that correlated most with appropriate use of force was a college education, which i thought was really fascinating. the other thing i want -- >> i think he were to answer your first question as well. >> can i finish? i let him answer. >> i thought you're asking a second question. >> i just wanted to finish.

the other observation is there's a lot of testimony here that the most likely predictor for kids to be able to successfully go to college and graduate is having parents who went to college. and i get concerned about the lack of value of having educated parents. partly because when i was going to college, i went to yale and my uncle said to my dad why are you bothering to spend all this money to go to yale? because usually going to get married and you're wasting the investment. saw feel like there is an investment to having educated moms and dads who can better help the kids not just because have a good income but because they have a bigger vocabulary than they are able to be more supportive of the kids corner. i just want to say that. mr. vedder. >> you're asking about the public good.

there's a couple of studies to i don't know i proposed a fire in don't look at the more often by the national bureau of economic research that show that we have more presence of college graduates in a work environment you to greater productivity out of your noncollege in private. that would be a pure public good kind of thing. there is some evidence that there may be as the late milton friedman wrote in an enough judicial before he died that there also some negative externalities perhaps associate with college in some cases. it's difficult to measure the cost, that's an economic -- economic term externalities. another one those used is looking to college graduates smoke less. so that causes less secondhand smoke problems and health issues. they claim -- although people who smoke die earlier and that lowers america caused. you know, you can -- i'm sorry.

true. [laughter] >> somewhat greenview. and russia want to explore that when any further. i think i will shoot to the trio program. >> a little segue. >> yes. >> good morning. good morning, everyone. i hope you all had a good fourth of july weekend. and it's a pleasure for me to welcome my friend, my colleague maymy admired colleague, the minister of defense jean-yves le drian come here to the pentagon. france, as you may know, is america's oldest ally.

[speaking french] [laughter] too short. >> i had a french girlfriend once. [laughter] can you just hold it like this? highly motivated. [speaking french] [laughter] >> let me start again and thank my good friend, my colleague, my admired colleague, the minister of defense of france jean-yves le drian, here to the pentagon. france is america's oldest ally and today our security partnership is the strongest it's ever been. i first want to thank the minister for spending our

independence day new procedure he was aboard a sailing ship replicate of the frigate made famous in 1780 by its voyage across the atlantic when it carried the marquis de lafayette, the legendary general, and friend of the american revolution. in a sermon at a board of the ship on saturday, minister le drian commemorated the 70th anniversary of our shared victory in world war ii another example of u.s.-french security cooperation. by a board in france's highest recognition, the legion of honor, american world war ii veterans minister, thank you for celebrating america's birthday with us. into for honoring our veterans. and thank you for reaffirming our centuries long alliance. we just finished a productive discussion on shared concerns,

ongoing operations, and opportunities to strengthen yet further our security cooperation. one area we discussed was the isil. i committed minister le drian and france's commitment to the fight to deliver a lasting defeat to isil. a campaign that we agreed requires a sustained and long-term effort. earlier this year france deployed its aircraft carrier charles de gaulle to the gulf to support counter isil strikes, integrating seamlessly with u.s. forces. the french air force, being the first to join us in striking isil targets in iraq, continues to play a critical role there. these are some of the reasons why france continues to be one of our strongest allies when it comes to the challenges in the middle east. we also discussed the france's

persistent leadership in africa, particularly -- french operations there are preventing spillover of terrorism trafficking and extremism, disrupting al-qaeda affiliates, boko haram another extremists in north and west african nations like mali, nate year and check it is military will continue to support france in these efforts with our lift and aerial refueling -- refueling capabilities. also gave a new security challenges to europe's south and to the east, we agreed that u.s.-french cooperation is and must remain an anchor for european security. following russia's initial acts of aggression in ukraine, france helped me to reassure our allies along europe's eastern borders. and we will continue to work together during my trip to europe i committed the united

states providing important capabilities to nato's very high readiness and joint task force the bjp have. which france volunteered to lead in the future. -- vjtf. i've been working minister le minister le drian executed for longtime both in and outside of government and i think minister le drian would agree this is the best our defense relationship has been in a very long time. probably ever. and we are committed to strengthening it still because we reminded by celebrating america's independence like a mirror married in our shared victory what you, the partnership between france and the united states has long been instrumental to building peace and prosperity for people here and around the world. we must ensure it will always be. i when i welcome minister le

drian's comments before we get questions. thank you. [speaking french] >> translator: thank you, my dear friend. particularly happy to stand today in washington, d.c. after the celebration of july 4, for which as you recall i was in new york which is assigned of the premise of our common history old -- sundeck editors should be shoveled legion of honor to 23 veterans who participated in the landing in france in 1944. this common history which is of course old but now has the quality and the actuality center mentioned it yourself, our

relationship has never been that tight for a long line tiger i can come from the. i thank you again, secretary carter, for your warm welcome and the quality of the exchanges we've had. we've always met in the past but it is the first time that we meet face-to-face center of arrived in the pentagon as secretary of defense. we have mentioned bilateral cooperation which is excellent. friends in the united states are i think together on many theaters. in the sahel where we are on the front lines where france participates in the coalition led by the united states. the deployment of the french aircraft carrier in the spring to the coalition as you mentioned yourself was testimony of his french commitment.

we are also fully committed in reassurance measures for our allies in central and eastern europe, both with the air force navy and land forces. the tensions will impose on us to get closer and closer. we mentioned libya and our support. we have mentioned our support to the tunisian government. we've also mentioned the cooperation of the training for drones, for instance, or the perspective of a strengthening of our spatial cooperation. i consider that our partnership our mutual trust is essential if you want to face the security challenges of our time according to the tradition of the

alliance our two countries are very close and very frank at the same time. thank you again. >> we would like to call first on to "the associated press." >> mr. secretary, considering the recent uptick in spikes iraq and syria i was wondering if you could tell us a little bit about whether or not the united states is looking to increase in anyway either the funding of activity against the islamic state? and whether you think whether or not you asked the minister during our meetings if france would indeed start helping with airstrikes or other support in syria? and for the minister mr. minister, i was wondering if you could address the latest news with rejecting -- greece rejecting the bailout of one that you think i will have any

impact on national security in europe and on nato and whether this may require any additional support from the united states for france and any of its counterterrorism? >> well, thank you. well, we are doing more industry from the air. i think he think you saw some of that in recent days. and the opportunity to do that effectively is provided in the case of the last few days by the effective action on the ground of kurdish forces come which gives us the opportunity to support them tactically. that's what we were doing over the weekend north of raqqa, conducting airstrikes that limit isil's freedom of movement and ability to counter those capable kurdish forces. and it's very important that's the manner in which the

effective and lasting defeat the isil will occur when they are effective, local forces on the ground that we can support and enable so that they can take territory, hold territory, and make sure that good governance comes in behind it. so we are looking for those opportunities and trying to trick those opportunities in syria. but it's a success on the ground that occurred that explains the uptick over the last few days. [inaudible] [speaking french] >> translator: france deciding with the tradition since the very beginning. -- is fighting -- we have declared a will in this coalition. this has been recalled earlier

that we participate fully within the coalition, the strikes against isil. our mission is in iraq and we are pursuing our actions permanently, regularly in iraq. i must say that what needs to be noted is that the size of the strikes, the repetition allow others to block basis. we have not won yet. this action will be very long because also we need to train the troops that will need later on to ensure the premise of what we are doing. the united states and us. both in iraq and in kurdistan but also in syria so that the

articulation between the action on the ground of the territorial force and the permanence of our strikes will give us the result which will not be immediate but will happen eventually. i believe in the determination. so isil can never act without being punished. as to greece, your question is about greece the talks ongoing in europe. it will be a very bad announced to think the votes in greece are against me to put it was never mentioned on either side. the greek authorities are at the

seat of the atlantic alliance, and we met our greek colleague a few days ago in south hall, so it is not a vote against the alliance or the west. they have refused financial proposals have been given to them discussions as to restore. it is not a vote to get out of europe nor to get out of europe, political affirmation, then there will be new discussions. [speaking french] >> translator: i had a question for both ministers. the murders last week --

[inaudible] against boko haram or nigeria itself. thank you. [speaking french] >> translator: the situation in nigeria is sometimes tragic when we learn what's going on and the events, massacres slaughter of children and women. sometimes nigeria, sometimes elsewhere, and chad. this situation is one of the first security problems that we have. we talked about it. what is the situation? remember me 24 the summit in paris which he gathered had estates -- had estates of the country, nigeria chad, cameroon and the president of the republic went to cameroon.

what i've noticed is that countries in the region decided to implement their own security with a mix of multinational force, to which we are bringing support both through intelligence. we have created a center for that. since the beginning of the year. i went there on january 1, and opened up come if you want, the intelligence unit which is a unit for coordination and liaison in the sector of intelligence where we are present with our british friends. and then there's the interpretation of unit of staff for the multinational force, which is going to be deployed with a strategic part a

tactical part, the president, well, he's decided to go much further than before. so we have this mixed multinational force and our support them both in intelligence and logistics. i think that africans now are taking charge of their own security with our support. this should allow us to attack, to respond boko haram and to reach progressively at the situation where we can eliminate boko haram. this is what we are tending to all of this actually. >> i think it's a sign of our closest but it will have a lot to add to that. to what the minister said. the governments of the region are responding to boko haram and we are supporting them. we do that together. the french have been leaders in

that part of africa in a very admirable way. we support them as well as supporting governments in the region directly. and, finally the minister mentioned intelligence and the sharing of other information and that's something yet again we discussed this morning. you even as i said our cooperation overall with friends in this entity sector has never been stronger that's true of theassuring of military information and intelligence information. and we took some actions this morning to increase that get further. the minister mentioned remotely-piloted aircraft as one example of that in his statement, and so that was one of the things we discussed

today, and it's applicable to africa. but i just want to commend the french on what they've been doing there. we have in place to support them and admiring their leadership. >> mr. secondly, i wanted to take you back to raqqa. the strikes you spoke about, what specific impact the uss now that they've had on the isis leadership in and around raqqa? did you get any high-value targets? the kurds are still of course some 30 climbers outside this idiot you are able to strike targets in populated areas. so what has changed about your intelligence picture? what specific impact you have? and on al-baghdadi since you can't put troops come at the french as at the french is welcome to put troops on the ground in syria and especially in raqqa, as you edge closer to

raqqa for what is the message for baghdad he? is it he? is a disciplinary commission because you can't have any realistic hope of capturing him? >> well, the opportunities we are pursuing in the last few days the specific tactical opportunities were not individuals per se. it with a freedom of movement of isil and disability to counter the offenses of the white bg. and we're doing that in a way and -- white bg. namely with local forces, nominating targets. we validate those targets including validating there will not be damage to innocent civilians associate with strike and then we take the strike. with respect to leadership. they were not the subject of these particular tactical opportunities that arose over the weekend north of raqqa but we continue to take action

against, and will continue take action against isolators whenever we have the opportunity to do so and also taking into account our continuing restraint when it comes to anything that could involve damage to civilians spent on baghdad, what is your assessment now accenture to put groups on the credit industry, is baghdad a now a killed rather than a captured nation's because we are able to target individuals currently. we have we do if we had an opportunity to go after.com is that opportunity presented itself and we look for the opportunity, we would certainly take it. [inaudible] >> but we target isil from the air every single day. in syria.

tactical targets, including leadership targets. we been doing that for months and months now. [speaking french] >> translator: more details on what your counterpart said. tell us the reasons why france might not be committed over syria. is the difference between you and your american counterpart? i wonder if you could make any comment about the strikes that the u.s. air force made, mr. carter just explained to you come and i'm not going to make any comments on that. is our choice it has been explained many times the

sharing, it's the will of france to intervene in the coalition and we do it on a very large way, a regular way. but to block what i called myself a terrorist army that isil has become. it is no longer a terrorist group. it has become a terrorist army. which both has the capacity to act as a classical army, demonstrated but also to have operations in urban areas which they also demonstrated counterterrorist operations. we can do all three at the same time. and the repetition of interventions, the strikes in iraq allows us to stabilize, not to win but to stabilize the situation. remember that the coalition has intervened at a time when we thought that isil was about --

is not the case but it will would not be the case. it's a long-term job. mr. carter repeat it. they should be sufficiently trained forces on the ground with the support from, the support of the coalition in order to retake the territories that have been lost to isil. we are in this logic. >> thank you, everybody. >> thank you. look forward to seeing you this afternoon, many of you. >> [inaudible conversations]

>> if you missed any of this briefing it is available shortly on the c-span your library. go to c-span.org. >> the center for strategic and international studies will be hosting a discussion on the u.s. patent system. speakers look at ways to better protect innovators while allowing the u.s. economy to compete globally and remain competitive. live starting at 1 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> tonight on the committee caters we visited attacks are on capitol hill to hear what policy issues technology innovators want to discuss with members of congress.

>> that's basically when a business owner doesn't like our review of their business and says i'm going to see you are going to threaten the city. and actually go forward with it but you the user to you the user to the person who wrote that review or shared that experience you know that it's% and its actual and true but you are the little guy and you may not have the money to really go to court over which he wrote about a chinese food restaurant or that car mechanic said that you just take off your dispute. while yelp is protected of the decency act, what we are really worried about is the chilling effect that those types of lawsuits to threats of lawsuits on the people that would otherwise share the firsthand experience. >> we were intending to deploy and is about 600 satellites. there are a lot of regulatory items. clodius one of the reason why want to be here on the hill as

well but to express the nation. the mission is to bring the affordable internet access, and also the people to provide services of public safety military and other uses non-government uses that will benefit the population in general. >> wireless is different than wireline. i hope it is being that wireless could be treated differently in terms of net neutrality, recognizing it's a scarce resource and so it's not exactly the same as data flowing over a fiber network, for example. we think the wireless piece of it does need to be given very careful consideration. >> tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> the future of radio is the main topic on several panels at the annual "talkers" magazine conference in new york. 2050 marks the 25th anniversary of the magazine.

speakers export industry trends digital technology and the changing landscape of political talk shows. this is about 90 minutes. >> thank you very much. and i always take it very personally when people come to this event because it's really hard to get people to go anywhere nowadays. so when you think about the level of quality in terms of the quantitative nature of this crowd, like i say i just can't believe it. 25 years ago we started "talkers" magazine. we made up the word. it sounded novel. we had a newspaper called talkers. what an interesting word. now i see talker being used as a generic name of a whole genre of performance. it's very satisfying and they can't even begin to tell you how honored i am that you're all here. i have to admit talkers even

though it's 25 years old and this conference is 18 years old it's a minute to minute deal. people laugh at me. i say this is the last time we will do this conference. we can't do it again or it will have to stop doing this thing, talkers, because what do we represent? i don't want other publication about the digital world even though the digital world was the thing that we first foretold. we called it this conference the new media seminar 18 years ago. people said why are you going to -- because coming up in the next 20 years, radios integration into the digital era is going to be the most important thing that we deal with. and it turned out to be true as evidenced by look at the obsession we have. but back to us. there has to be the central hub called radio or there's no need

for talkers. the digital world is so widespread, so i'm always living on the edge that this could be the last day, not to mention we all are getting older. so i savor every one of these moments and i particularly saver his fireside session even though the fireplace is covered with something that is way too warm to have a fire so it's the idea of a fireside chat is an intimate, informal discussion between friends. i would be presumptuous to say that my guess is my friend but i would like to someday he will be. i will say this but would not be a conference today if it wasn't for john dickey. because i was in a conversation with him and it was the first time ever met in person and i said to him, i don't know if we can continue to do this conference. he looked at me and he said, with the most serious look on his face and, he looked me in the eyes and said, you have to do this conference.

i get chills. i will never forget it. and that is the only reason we're doing this conference this year because after last year we were so exhausted, so blown outcome and this is so hard to put together at i said, i said to my wife, irna debt when it was all over and i went back to the room i said this is the last time i am everybody myself through this. and then shortly thereafter i have discovered session with john dickey and he said you have to do this conference. that was so inspirational to me that this enterprise hangs as all of our enterprises to come as you get older you realize that on a thread from everyday have to reinvent yourself every day. i welcome this gentleman was a tremendous amount of gratitude in my heart for all that he's done for me and all that he does as a lover of radio who is

in one of the toughest jobs anybody could possibly imagine. let's see you do it. let's see you do what this guy does and what his brother does and what the people who are running these gigantic, complicated businesses that is the sum result of the river of time and events that led to radio in the year 2015. let's see anybody do it. is executive vice president of cumulus media. he's in charge of the content and programming synergy and operations. he has a long a degree in radio. he comes to my broadcasting as does my son. is a graduate of stanford university. he's brilliant and beloved radio come at a love the fact that i'm going to get to chat with them for the next half hour or so intimately in front of the fire of her mind. mr. john dickey. [applause] >> we were standing in the back. it was standing room only.

>> i remember these days. >> you also said to me, i asked you a question that i said to you during that meeting that we had almost a year ago, how do you deal with the stress of running so many operations? i go crazy just running a small business. we are a small business a handful of employees. you've got vice president, market managers different formats. basically comes down to the human element. doesn't? people think who knows what goes on in the tower? you said it is stressful. so good you just tap into that for a moment, human to human? how do you run an operation of this big? >> i appreciate, first of all let me say the remarks were very kind. i do know if i'm responsible for the conference or not at the way

michael recalls that i think is pretty accurate. i'm a big believer in conferencing. i think all industries that are healthy have a healthy conference aspect to them. the thought of this conference going away or sunsetting just didn't sit well with me. if i had anything to do with it which made i had a small part i appreciate the kind remarks. we are all gifted have someone who is as passionate and has devoted so much of the like to the format and the progress is what has made in the last 20 25 years come and begin to turn this into a retirement party because we want michael to be a round for years to come let's give him one more round of applause plot but. >> now to the record of stress, i was a this off the record, the way i deal with stress

personally i hired mike and ike tiki probably four times a day. the uk? he sitting down. it is a stressful job but i do but has heard this saying before. find something you love to do angel network another day. i feel fortunate that was to be doing what i'm doing. i tried to do best job i can. is a difficult and sometimes thankless job. i try to approach it with a little bit of levity and utility, maybe a lot more humility than most would. it's a tough job. stressed like anything else, no matter if you are programming a rated station in topeka kansas rome have a great cluster of stations or you're in new york like craig is with a 77 it's the same. it eats you up if you don't get with it and have to applets. it comes down to this will tie into sort of the genius of the

question, it ties into balance and balance in life. i've got a very great family. i'm very fortunate about that as well, great wife, three kids and one on the way. i started late. that is a whole nother thing but it's nice to have a pallet sized able to come home and kids, they don't know what you do and who you are. ages know your dad and to jump your dad and he gently allowed to make sure they keep the dry cleaners in business. and it's all good. i feel very fortunate that way but balance is important a part of what we'll talk about in just 30 minutes of together is balance in content. the way forward in the format but i'd like to take the thunder. michael is hosting so we let him lead. >> before getting to that, one cannot ignore what a lot of people were saying to me is the best teleconference the ever seen at a convention the one that sean just ran. i approach a radio ratings from the standpoint what i see is as

one of the. what i see is are i will ask it as a question. is it possible to ever accurately rate radio? >> i am a recovering statistician. i stay static runtime statistics in school. it was an area i was good at the i was a history major. i love history. i just couldn't figure out a way to make a living to doing it. and still to this day and passions about history but i was a good at math and statistics and that led me into a career that some of you know me from days before on the research side. my brother and i had a research company at a consulting company for 13, 14 years. richard was a great competitor in the field and i knew mike mcveigh from the states and lots of other people in the room. but to the question, can you accurately measure consumption in radio?

i think the thing that i would see, two points. one, sean and i happen to agree on the most everything on on the panel. some people would find that to be interesting and funny and ironic because i think there's a perception that we don't agree on a lot of things but that's not true. we see eye to eye on that issue but i'm going to come at a from a different perspective. the other thing i would introduce to this debate conversation is this. the ratings are an estimate. accuracy is, the answer is yes the ratings are accurate that they are accurate to a point. and what we don't talk about and what arbitron doesn't advance and nielsen out as the keeper of arbitron doesn't advance is to what extent are they accurate. in other words, as we are on the eve of another crazy political roller coaster here, the first

vote what companies in eight months away or something we will be inundated with pollsters and polls and wanting to get from all of that other than headaches is a margin of error on each poll published. what we don't get out of nielsen and arbitron our margins of error. i would submit that are not going to be too many hands popping up if i ask a question does anybody not figure what you margin of error is on a person 25, 54 average quarter hour sure or rating in the month of may? does anybody not figure that out? there's some smart that out? distance for people to go in, i know john can figure it out there's more people that would figure out how to get the edge and then go do the math. but what we are all buying is a product that we are unfortunately representing as chapter and verse. the ad agencies, to their advantage, take it as chapter and verse and we unfortunately and probably unwittingly accept

that. so the first thing i was that everybody is it accurate but it is accurate to avoid it if you don't know what that point is in your paying for something are misusing. i have been a staunch advocate of this for 14 years but back to the days when i fired arbitron and nielsen into radio for the first time. i do remember a six, seven years ago. margin of error is important. we have two issues in this format. we have audience that is not accounted for, regardless of what we think and how flawed methodology is come and we have margin of error which is a going concern and has been pre-tpm. in my opinion this gets back to the famous quote in a few good men. we can't handle the truth. and the truth of the matter is the margin of error is a lot greater than what we want to acknowledge. for the more the truth of the

matter is solving for the margin of error cost a lot more money than we're willing to pay. so i would almost take nielsen's point of view if they would be honest about this and this is what it's it's a fine, we'll give you what you want. are you going to keep your checkbook out? doesn't make sense? if the answer is no it doesn't make sense we can't justify that in what we are to do is work backwards from what does make sense. that product i promise you is going to look different and the product we have today. that may not make sense for nielsen at the end of the day from a business perspective but as we been informed, they make far more money with procter & gamble than they ever thought about making with us. you ask yourself, why do they care about is? we are the missing piece of the puzzle to allow them to monetize and represent that if listeners from home to cash register. without us they don't have that story. i think the a was more than what they're giving us but that could

lead us into pitchforks and torches and we would have to give john a head start. but i'm not here to bash and nielsen. i'm just here to present the truth, and the truth is we are outselling numbers right now that have a ban on them that we don't come or a bracket of plus or minus that we don't represent the i was a proponent of putting a hover on estimate and i've been saying that repeatedly or a dozen years. it's easy to do. put your mouse and cursor over a number. doesn't bother me? it bothers me. what bothers me is when people are misrepresenting the truth. that is a blatant misrepresentation of the truth. we are paying a lot of money for this. once made it even more difficult is 10 years ago, it's a rounding error for a lot of the bigger countries can even seven from ages ago it's a rounding error. now it is our most meaningful

expense behind payroll. arbitron neil audience were not supposed be a tactic they're supposed to be additive, give us a told to go out and make money. it's becoming increasingly apparent that it is a tax and that's a problem. >> in toronto i had the opportunity to have a similar fireside chat with your brother and asked him about -- >> sergey about that. >> it will be interesting to your answer to this question a year and half later. he was extremely eloquent and detailed about the need for metrics analyst any kind of advertising sales -- >> i prepped him for that speech. >> he talked about basically what we talked about today the different platforms that we are so fun and that agencies what metrics. they want numbers. yet throughout this room and throughout the industry the

people that are selling outside the numbers to take on nontraditional revenue to they call a qualitative slick trick i think michael is here. he sells in santa cruz all kinds of interesting ways to he even as advertised is not important anymore. selling products on the air. qualitative selling. does this fit into the cumulus philosophy at this point? >> it does. i would say again, and this is the honest truth, i would say from us to iheart to cbs all the way down, none of us and i mean none of us did as good a job as we should in selling the quality of the audience as we have. that's the reality of it. it's far easier to go celebrate sobering and rating that is to take an audience and go out and talk about as john said, what% of my audience has got a disposable income that can do something

with your product or service? if that were the case we would be having a conversation about the relevancy of 35-64. wouldn't you like to be bonus and measured and report against persons 35-64? can i get an amen? the reality is the next across the table and look at a stooge like me and i say can't do it. because our guys can't sell 35- 35-64 bit even though it's the right thing to do. i would never take it is about persons 25-54 is where the vast majority of the available business is. it cascades down to either women 18-40 25-54 and he goes down. do i think that's right? no. increasingly as whitmore millennials living on couches and not getting out and starting in a position to start her life into the get to the late '20s

and '30s don't you what you think madison avenue would wake up and you think people would wake up and say with school debt and wage stagnation and increased amount of pressure on incomes vis-à-vis taxes, i feel like i'm running for office and all these other things to you think someone would say you are right if you are probably not in a position to go buy a second car, buy a jet ski can do it to a dinner and buy a nice $50 bottle of wine into you probably unless you're in the absolute five standard deviations outside the norm you are a whiz kids in silicon valley or your hedge fund person with no moral compass, that didn't sound right, david? either any hedge fund people in your? can you got to be in your late '40s or 50s before he started you like you have something jingling around. that ties into again the conundrum we are all in which is the average age of the format is late '50s, 60 years of age.

there's an old saying go fight city hall. we can't fight that fight. the good news is the demographics of the country are working to our favorite. there are more people coming of age in waking up and finding hey, i need readers. i can't see like i used to. hey, i just discovered the am band. i'm 40. what was about? i didn't know that was out there. more people falling into the classification which is great for us. the question is how do we get them and what of the going to do about? >> i always find the argument your audience is dying off, he had to go for a younger audience is illogical. "seventeen magazine" becomes a teen magazine in the 19 magazine. did they close high schools what your audience is going to college. aegis great programming for new old people. there is a cyclical nature to life but he answered the

question and basically the answer is, this is the way it is. it's not a matter of what's there. it's the weight is on a deeper moralistic social level we can do with it but right now this is the way it is. the way it is. there are thousands of people whose livelihoods hang on this question. they would like to know because of the number of people that work in cumulus and a tremendous influence you have and the talk radio sphere. what is the position of talk radio at this point within the bigger cumulus plan? >> that's a great question. i went into that first by saying you are correct we have a very special responsibility in the format. by virtue of the stations and the markets go stations are in, that we are custodians of the that's how i view that responsibility. we are stakeholders in our company owns them come we own the license but let's face it, we are custodians of these great

brands. as a custodian of a great brand and in the larger context of the format, we had huge responsibility. i go to bed without that every night among others and a wakeup with it. back to just know if it contribute to stress but certainly, it keeps me grounded and contribute to the ground and the urgency that i approach this format and how we find a way forward in the format. so part of the answer is about. the other part is, and it relates to the outcome we are heavily invested in the format. we are not running from the format. we are not looking to get out of the format. we are deep in the format and are going deeper into the format. the real question is what constitutes the format today? what does that format look and feel like? you know back to branding my brother and i made a pretty successful market research company for a long time.

lew, i don't get in enough accolades come he's a very smart guy. not as smart as me but he is really smart. [laughter] he wrote the official book that was one of the best social longtime called the franchise. it was all about branding and taking the whole concept of branding which fortune 500 copies have been doing for 100 years and appointed to review. when we were kids and getting into the business bill moyers was speaking of research and everybody in this room probably had marketing warfare on the bookshelf and it was a badge of honor to have a samurai sword from him. there was a lot of great parenting coming from bill and continue to radio what franco was or might still be to television. when we got out of school and and we were into space and we're looking at a strategic framework

and a people of puerto rico, what didn't sit right if formats were beginning to fragment come wasn't the individual attributes of the park were going to define the branding of the packaging of the product being i'm going to be a 10 in a row greatest dish at us on going to hang my hat on and i will win by verge of the. that only works until somebody does what, like the old baseball bat game. they become an 11 in a row greatest nation. when we went back to school, he did his study among other things around branding and applying the art of branding to rage and therefore, the book came out about. today which is very interesting, we talk about brands as if we always talked about brands. that wasn't the case. the warfare metaphor was the strategic paradigm that we all lived off of into we changed that. we changed it for the better so getting back to the concept of branding and talk and as we

approach it we've got to figure what the brand of the format is going forward. we all understand that the objective on reaching a younger audience for a broader audience makes sense. when i say broader, i mean an audience more inclusive psycho graphically and demographically. they are itself and its format which is where we find ourselves to be. don't take my word for it. take it was said about margin of error aside, take a look at ratings in most markets and the stations that are really winning on the am side of am with a thin to put on the all news stations and our sports stations. i will come back to that in a little bit but talk purely talk and where the format since then it's been into clint we've got to figure what the way forward is. to michael pashtun to michael's question to ask him we are not afraid to admit we don't know what that exactly looks like i don't know what that exactly

looks like but i know the conversation is to be broader than what it is. i know from being fortunate enough to be around a lot of interesting smart different people at cocktail parties and dinner parties, i know what they could table feels like and i know what a bad cable feels like. i know what people got a 35-40 years of age 55 six years of age, i know what to talk about anybody's having a good time. they talk about a lot of things. they talk about a lot of things and i can promise you, sports is part of that. mike would agree with it. they talk about business, morality philosophy religion and other things. they talk about kids. they talk about politics. they talk about all kinds of stuff, right? that tends to only be further facilitated as wine bottles are order to. if they're going to be a reflection of those conversations, then as a format we need to start thinking about

that. that doesn't mean, i'm not taking an ideological position to i'm just saying if you want to have a successful format moving forward given the reality of where we find ourselves today and it's incumbent upon all of us to try different things, to broaden our horizons and to see what's out there and to look come in our talent made any differently than we than we have in the past. >> maybe we should just hire drunks. [laughter] i remember when i was first breaking into radio -- >> i'm going to get lots of e-mails. >> when i first was breaking the rate of either look for jobs and broadcast magazine and would always say drunks and drifters need not apply. [laughter] and i figured why are they saying that? drunks and drifters need not apply. that would be a good name for a book. it's interesting you mentioned sports because we are all obsessed with sports and

mr. sports is a microcosm of life. to a certain degree it is. we pulsate from journalism especially and jeff especially and then it gets broader again and you pulsate back to journalism. mcdonald's is starbucks and jim chicken places are selling beef and beef places are selling chicken. it's this constant pulsation going on between being a specialist and being a generalist. is a petulant talk radio losing the great sports talking with rss or and gave up his to become its own specialty that is in part of qualitative lucrative selling? >> well, hindsight is a wonderful thing. i can answer that. i can answer that with a categorical yes we blew it. but that's the benefit of looking back and saying the

mighty voice of the great lakes with the tigers and jp mccarthy and all of this great talent and and this one of a place where people would meet on the radio and discuss all things important in the greater detroit and the world, you know what have you. ..

with the same sort of switch. glowing icon i don't know if that's the right verb or characterization. that's what i was saying about the conversation, to me the figuring out of the puzzle in trying to pick the lock on how we get back into a healthy position has to start but the reality that people talk about a lot of things and not just politics. politics is important and offers a clue to what the way forward is. what is the old saying about politics? politics are local. that is the other key to working their way out of this conundrum we are ready. radio stations have to get back to a balance. push on us is great, what rush does is great what alan mrs. gray. for some wonderful syndicated

programs that belong programs that the long and is there to be a nice radio stations and will be paid it is a question of how much and how we view our responsibility as programmeprogramme rs versus how leads to view it. when things were working in this easy to think that. i am fond of saying before google was invented we have the first-order self driven cars as a format. we would plug in the talent packed into less and watch the magic happen. it was great. no problem. it worked. that like anything else runs its course. it had a great run. and not run has come to an end through self-inflicted wounds and the nature of brains and life cycles. it is incumbent on us thinking about finding our way forward to ask ourselves how much of the solution is premised on being

more local and how much of the solution is premised on finding out how to showcase the great syndicated talents like sean environment that allow them to shine more successfully than they are. how much is premised on white in the aperture insane if i met a dinner party every not going to talk about abc in the underground roles of the dinner party. i don't didn't sell. if you stack the table successfully you bring all of that to the table. you bring a savant, somebody who's crazy this way and that way. you bring different talent to the table and through the miracle of alcohol you've added all sort of come out. take your watch is often somebody famous that the ultimate in holidays nick him to the party. we are having a good time. that is what we want the radio to be like again. we have to do that with an format and. i get that.

this is a free flow. i think we need to start rod into perspective. it takes courage to do that. we have a cooking analogy and no throat noodles against the back of the salmonella models. you will try things that i won't work being you need management supportive of that and everybody has to realize we've got to try things differently or we are not going to move forward and figure out the way forward. >> a couple more questions and then we will move on obviously. i was going to ask about local and national but you answered it in your answer to the other question. so let's talk about the balance of talk and music. most of the stars in radio today on the top five. the radio star is usually a talker. most of them are syndicated and most of them are produced. they are not by the natural anarchy in the period they are

kind of plastic. is there in a future for dj and radio or is that just a bad ear we are sports.two. what is going to happen with music radio in terms of radio talking. or is it a temporary drought. >> you're asking me some tough questions. i think back to the tail end of my last answer. all of us have a responsibility to do it differently and bring them encourage talent to come in. our biggest selling proposition is to reach of our media. that is the one thing we can positively say ppm has done for us and we don't talk about that

anymore. i remember the pitch when everybody was talking about changing the methodology and going into this one with measurement and the pitch was all about making radio easier and it will open up more dollars and there'll be a cost per point reset. i looked inside that's great but i didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday. that's a bunch of do know why. we will never quantify that or sell this, but you have to lead with able give us a better opportunity to demonstrate the expansive reach of radio and it has. the approach of 5 million is huge. it's crazy. back to talent and he informed talent and we have to continue to push the agenda looks at radio and broadcast ratio. if you look at broadcast radio and the vast reach if you are a

gift to the cap kind of fellow or what many want to get into the business in ea brand is a prior panel was discussing on my course discussing prior to the panel, where else would you go. this is the place to blow up as a brand. it has only been advantage under ppm and where we sit today. as much as i can assist that. if you try to become a nationally known person or figure. there's no better place to do that than on the radio. if someone is truly talented you'll love records out of the way. and unless the format is premised on something entirely

different and you went looking for talent you allow people and give them more rope and connect in ways >> john, the greatest comments anybody could pay me a new ad is the ask of tough questions because i would hate to stand here were secured in front of our peers and asking softball questions. i wouldn't ask any question i didn't think you could answer. my complement back to you as you did a heckuva job answering some tough questions and i'm very grateful. [applause] >> thank you very much. good morning everybody. i was just sitting here with brian killed me today.

i'm a long beach guy, so the long island guys are well represented this morning. i work right down the block here a couple blocks away so it's an easy job this morning to come in and say hello. i thought i would wear black the way everyone is talking about radio these days. it is amazing the amount of negativity no matter what part of the business you're in. i've actually been in the same job since 1989. same time same station. same station since 1989. i lost them somewhere along the way after 19 years. one day i looked up and he was gone. i sent out knows, everything.

he is doing fine on a different part of it. obviously it is serious. but all you read now is consolidation leads to clusters which to me is a dirty word. cutbacks. nobody has a good word for radio anymore. i am here to tell you even though i am probably a letter closer to the finish if i was pounding on the door twinge of symbol and on that and it took me 18 interviews to get hired. i would ea is bullish on radio and thought how about getting the career and feeding my family now as i was then. i'm just telling you. i will tell you why. i know you don't believe me.

all you hear now as companies -- i worked her big company now. i'm telling you i haven't talked to them in my. maybe years. you can read about it. i'm not going to discuss that today. i would like to but i won't. the point is yes it is hard now. it is much more fun and i am a big loser although we at sean in so many people that it does so well with brilliant industries and businesses doing network radio. mine has always been live and local and the media and i've always liked this small city here is kind of my home turf. i think of it as my own as a matter-of-fact folks.

my point is yes it has changed. it will not change back. we know that it is going to be owned most of the time. most of the stations will be owned by people with a lot of stations managers at more than one station to run. salespeople involved in more than one kind of programming. all that stuff is all true. it does not change the dynamics of the business. i'm just getting over a cold so i apologize. the point is live and local has to go back the matter what part of the business you are running because eventually it is about a guy who has a show room or a storefront he wants people to walk into or a restaurant he wants people to eat in and your job is to sell that in the works from there. whether you talk about a network empire like sean haas or one station where i've been able to

control things for a long time in new york, either way it is still the same dynamic. it gets back to the same dynamic. it has to eventually get back to the community and back to life and local. but it's changed because you now have to do with the digital aspect of this. digital is not going away said digital has to be a partner in all of this. look what it's done for sports. that's obviously what i do. the owners of the baseball teams, the football teams guys you see who are given credit for being so much smarter than they are because they didn't know what was going to have been. they own some of these teams for many years. they bought most of them out of vanity. some guy get lucky and gets richer was born rich and decide i will buy it seems like a

publicity. somebody finds out who i am and that's where the jerry jones of the world comes from. my point is they fell into the digital end of this, which is now producing insane amounts of money. i can give you an accra-based always make it a billion dollars on one app. nfl is making billions in digital revenues. the digital part of the business on the radio side has to be enhanced. there is no way around it. it has to be embraced but that is the way to success because we talk now about social media and we all do with it. it is something that has been at first an intrusion and then you learn to live with it. i've had to do that. but think about it. the first real social media was radio. the first real mass social media

was radio. radio was twitter's father. they are the same relation. a matter-of-fact, facebook is harder to apply to radio, but twitter is the most perfect. they don't know what to do. they still don't know what to do with twitter. just like a lot of people in this room have it figured out how to modernize the digital part of radio. explain to me this. the digital part of this monetize it. i've not got an answer yet. you hear every day how to monetize. but twitter is immediate and is a nonstop information source. radio is immediate nonstop information source. they are the perfect marriage. maybe not smart enough, but the guy who marries twitter and

radio will make a fortune because it is the perfect complement. they are the same. they are from the same lineage. they fit perfectly. we use twitter a lot. my producer is on at the entire show. we use it to our own device. i'm not going to tell you why or how, but we do. the point is whether you are in management, whether you are in sales, you have to marry what is the live, local base part of radio for everything starts with their local radio or network and married the digital part of this. that is not going away and it will continue. now everybody in the world carries the transistor radio. we all do now. we all have one and everybody has one. and now everybody has the radio in their pocket. that is an advancement from where we were 20 years ago when

basically radio was in a car drive time don't worry about the house. don't worry about anything else. now you can touch people out there where they are anytime anywhere. hopefully not driving a train. if you are the management part you have to embrace that. if you are the talent part of a couple things you have to do. number one you have to understand the audience has more information. they care about a certain team in a certain person so they can get more information right now about a single subject. it is got to be more entertainment. it used to be informed. not anymore. it is now about your take. you have to have the opinion that stands out. personality and presence when you perform and then you have to

figure out a way to cut through and be a brand. if you are not a brandy won't be successful. they are so much noise out there, so many people out there. so many people working now or you have to stand out. if you are not a brand, you would be appear if you weren't a brand. if you weren't a brand, you wouldn't be doing this. that's how it works. on top of that, you have to understand and figure out how to utilize the monetize and figure out the value and this is essential going forward of what you do with the secondary and tertiary applications of your content. what we are in radio as content providers. my content has always been five and a half hours live every day. later on they became we are

going to do the interviews and then we are going to cut them up and then the opening and interviews to the website. i'm like no don't do that until the show was over. we fought about that at one time. they did it anyway. i said wait a second what you are doing is wrong. instead they sat this is the right way to enhance. i said tell me how it is going to make money. never got an answer. figure out the value because you're a content provider but not anymore for just radio or just television. it goes to a podcast. i'll give you an example. my stuff goes from five and a half hours to cbs local sports.com, slate.com and then it goes to different places from there. the other day an interview after he won the triple crown, the white-haired guy.

to nine different places. that is not secondary. and i don't get paid for any of those. my misgiving. the point is if i was not and i was starting out i wouldn't want to put a value on every one of those applications. they have to monetize those. if they are not they are not doing their job and you have to be able as a broadcaster to put a value on those because the secondary, tertiary to the ninth degree of content are white you are providing. you are a content provider. you are not just a broadcaster anymore. that in all of those different places are all selling it to somebody with a plan is to sell it to somebody and you should be getting something for that. that is what is got to be

decided. our business committee executives and to the lesser extent the time ted dabney terrible job of monetizing the digital aspects. i've never gotten a straight answer in all of these years on how we monetize even the websites and now i gave you all the different places. the point is if i'm going to produce content and it goes a places and be sold in eight different places, i have to share the pie. if i was here 34 years said make sure i share the pie. i would not worry about that now. you are not just a broadcaster anymore for a tv person. you're a content provider across these different levels that are going to be better and more created weather podcast all the different ones. look at all the different ones they keep creating every day. they had these cartoons which

i've never been approved but they say we own the content that they get a tremendous amount of hits in key producing and all they are are my old interviews and ran my old monologues. the one where they said i fell asleep on my yankee cohort about 1.3 million hits on youtube as an example. i was on letterman or events in a row which is a little much. the point is this stuff is used, abused and worn out and you have to -- the company has to figure out a way to monetize that accurately and you have to be part of that. it's not just whatever your hours are in the radio. and i understand dynamics change when you talk network versus local. i'm talking nine. sean can talk is. the point as it gets to the same place. if radio forget it all gets back

to life and local imac i trying to sell a car in the show room then you will be wearing black for radio. thanks for coming out. have a great day and we will see you soon. thank you. [applause] >> this is a great panel on this is a big picture. we've are to talk about the big picture. we are going to do it like a tv show appeared real fast, no one answers. short sound bites. alan colmes, we'll start with you. first, but beset by befit alan colmes postbox news radio, fox news channel. holland cooke, one of the smartest men i've ever met. he is a consultant. karen hunter. i once did a radio show us your cohost on debbie w. r. l. in new

york and she taught me how to rap on the air. it was fun. chris oliverio, there is a fellow who worked his way up from being an intern to be one of the most influential and important executives in all of radio. he is the evp of programming at cbs radio. and joe shaka who is new to a lot of you. please say hello to him and tom schott echo is that us from the "boston herald." they've been doing something i've been talking about for years and i had the honor of the masking for my advice then they take it. had a radio station on a newspaper platform. the newspaper is the other stick. if they can't give you a place to your radio, what better place to do news talker sports radio than a big metropolitan newspaper website and platform. they are doing it and it's remarkable. joe has to be here.

craig schwall, p. b. wabc new york. the local program director is like a forgotten person in our industry. let's find a big one. the program director. there have been times in my career when i have sat with the program director of wabc. i remember rick squire. you shipped in your boots been in the presence of the program director of wabc. a long heritage they are. and julie talbott the best marketing person i ever met in this business. i met her when she was about 19 years old. >> 21 now. >> the president to premiere networks. alan colmes soundbite. what is the state of the left right political stuff that we keep coming back to. it seems to be the mainstay of

news talk debate partisan politics and we always talk about how it's dead. you are right in the heart of day. >> bad. he wanted a short answer. it's a great question because it is so much about radio has been for a long time. i thought it was interesting in what mr. dickey said in that there is so much more to talk about at a cocktail party. if you are talking to your friends at the water fountain that radio can and should be. i'm happy to see there's so much more radio is becoming a nasa paradigm change is we are doing a lot better with much more information coming in. we have much more opportunity to talk about so many different things on different platforms. i don't think the left right thing is the future even though i am on the left. i do so much more than not any radio show than just talks about

left or right is missing a great opportunity for a much broader audience. >> or perhaps politics is more than left versus right. thom hartmann and i had a wonderful conversation on my podcast and then i followed up with marco van. the two of you have more in common is not a calm and get people to characterize u.s. right. it's like sports used to be xml. you don't hear that anymore. it is important but not the whole potential which takes us to julie talbott. you are in the heart of all of this. your major project is in toxic radio left versus right boycotts. what is your take? >> listen to the shows. with absolutely been diversifying the content. politics is an import issue but so are the other current events happening. i really believe we have taken a

much broader approach than we are certainly doing testing with other programming. >> thank you julie. holland, i've met some of the most fantastic people who are friends and clients of yours. local radio owners do exist. iona station and so-and-so played and i'm selling spots to the car dealers. and they are such characters. they are the salt of the earth bright and i love them because i was an owner of the local radio station and i just love the smell of the turntables and the ink in the newsroom. the sound of the teletype. radio stations -- radio stations used to have a smell about them. you remember what radio stations in l.a. don't you? the artificial new car smell.

you send. so tell us what is the state of local radio ownership? >> there is a curiosity about a hunger for any frustration about executing more local programming for all the reasons everybody who has spoken this morning how sad and what we will hear undoubtedly this afternoon. i am asked a lot about can we do local programming and i want to answer the who, what and where of that period to give you a specific answer i will make a couple people blush here. terry hurley in atlantic city if you can find somebody who knows the market, who has embraced and break news and it's why are dead and has a rolodex that is cold. where do you find them since consolidation clobbered.

it is frustrating not to do a casting call. it used to be a buyers market. now it's a sellers market. if you can't find or become a harry early morning mayor mr. name of market character, the station i work with in boston has a couple of shows on the air whose business model ought to be and start it to you. how we car is here. barry armstrong is not. both stations are heard and a dozen more stations around england. i have thought the unplowed ground in syndication is bigger than local, smaller than national. argue potentially a statewide footprint? ..