secondly, i think our force, whose average age is 20-ish, this is how they live. this is what they have grown up on. four leaders, i think it is really important to be connected to that and understand it so as not to be as facile as they are, but to understand it. i think communicating that way, whether administrative information or information in warfare, is absolutely critical. >> i would just add one point. what admiral mullen just said i think is absolutely critical. what i have been saying in terms of our hiring a new assistant secretary for public affairs in the department of defense, when i have talked to people and when i have interviewed, the key

issue i have been after his we have 2 million people, most of them in uniform around the age of admiral mullen -- around the age that admiral mullen that described, and how we communicate better with them? how do we get reactions from them to things they are doing? how do we get better plug dint with what they're thinking? also, in terms of this strategic communications, that is the age is not younger of many of the people around the world we're trying to reach, and how we reach them in a way that they understand. this department i think is way behind the power curve in this and is an area that needs a lot of improvement. >> has anyone been stepping up your communication with the chinese, south koreans, japanese about interdicting north korean ships? if so, are you sensing more of a willingness particularly on the part of the chinese to monitor

and interdict north korean ships? >> i will just say when i was in singapore, i had bilateral meetings with both my south korean and japanese counterparts, and then we had the first ever tri-bilateral meeting of the defense ministers of the three countries. our focus was on how we improve our defensive capabilities together in response to what is going on in north korea. i am not aware, i certainly have not had any communications with the chinese in terms of north korea. >> i have not, although i know admiral keating has engaged both japanese and south korea, and i am not aware of any contact with china. >> you correctly said in terms of pakistan, there was a ship after long time of paying lip service, pakistan takes the

taliban as a threat. is there a shift in the way that the chinese view north korea and are more amenable to the thought that north korea is a problem for them as well, not just the u.s.? >> that remains to be seen. communicating that message was one of the purposes of the delegation led by jim steinberg, the secretary of state, to china a week or two ago. it was, yes, we understand your concern about instability in north korea and its implications for you, but you need also to be concerned about the implications of instability in northeast asia created by the behavior of north korea. since that visit was relatively recently, it remains to be seen whether it had any impact. tom? >> talking about iran and communications, the obama administration has announced a

new initiative on the cyber command on terror. it is the pentagon watching what iran is doing, the government trying to control, monitor, shut down communications internally to draw lessons from what they might do offensively against this nation? >> to be honest, i am not aware of analysis going on along those lines, but there are 3 million people in this department, so somebody may be doing that, but not to my knowledge. >> he said the capabilities to try to control these networks as an offensive capability that could be used against the u.s. and allies and interests? >> i suppose so, that would be true of all the government's that try to shut down the internet. it is not unique to iran by any means. >> the department is engaged in the defense review, the department-wide review of

strategy, weapons systems, and i take it from your public comments that the framework is that the u.s. should be focusing at least right now on the current conflicts of the regular type that could last into the foreseeable future. there are officers in the military to a leased privately express some reservations -- who at least privately expressed some reservations that large conventional forces is the way the united states should be looking at the world in terms of its defense. as you do this review, will this construct itself be under review? will you be analyzing whether this type of operation is what the u.s. should be focused on the next decade? >> those who believe that is what we are trying to do, and that is what i believe, do not

understand what we're trying to do or what i believe. the reality is the vast preponderance of the defense department procurement budget will still be for large systems used, sophisticated systems usable against near peers, and it will continue to give us a technological edge for the next 20, 25 years. what i am trying to do is simply get a place at the table when resources are passed out for those who are fighting today's wars and to institutionalize what we have learned about counter insurgency so we do not forget it like we did after vietnam. so this notion that i am tilting the scale dramatically against conventional capabilities in order to fight their regular or whatever, asymmetric worse, when everyone to call it, is just not

accurate -- asymmetric war, whatever you want to call it, is not accurate. the fifth strike fighter is not a trivial investment in the future. neither is -- i have hardly. about the fact we are initiating the replacements for the ohio class ssbn with this budget. the notion we're not taking seriously the range of potential future conflicts i think frankly is misunderstanding of what we're trying to do. it drives from my view that the old way of looking at their regular warfare as being one kind of conflict and conventional warfare as a discreet kind of warfare is an outdated concept. my belief that conflict in the future will slide up and down a

scale, both in scope or scale and lethality. we have to procure the kinds of things that give us the maximum, the kinds of equipment and weapons that give us the maximum flexibility across the widest range of that spectrum of conflict. frankly, i think there is broad agreement on the part of senior military leadership that that kind of construct going forward is what we ought to be looking at. if there is one major aspect of the qdr that i have insisted we get away from, it is the construct we have had such a long time that we size our forces to be able to fight two major combat operations. i think that is not a realistic view of the world. we are already in two major conflicts. what if we have a third or fourth or fifth?

how do you on that spectrum, where duke characterized has blood that has more missiles and rockets in most countries -- where do you characterize a hezbollah that has more missiles and rockets than most countries? it is the versatility of our force and the ability to respond to a wide range of conflict that we are trying to build the programs for this department for the future. but there is a huge investment in trying to protect our technological edge for the future. frankly, to be blunt, the notion that not purchasing 60 more f- 22's imperils the national security of the net is this i find the complete nonsense. but mark me down as undecided. [laughter] >> yesterday, and president obama's announcement on federal or benefits -- federal benefits

for gay employees, the you have concerns about any type of double standard -- do you have concern about any type of double standard? also, before the announcement yesterday, there seem to be back-and-forth between the white house and congress on who was taking the lead on don't ask, don't tell. who should be taking the lead from this? >> this department's position is dictated by the fact there is a law. and the law only applies to people in uniform. on the civilian side, we will absolutely apply and implement everything the president announced yesterday. but until law is changed, our ability to change the policy is

extremely limited, if not nonexistent. >> it has been some weeks since you removed from afghanistan. there continues to be head scratching about the way it was handled. recognizing that what is done it is done, do you have any regrets about the way that it was done? >> i think that -- i think i probably could have framed it better when i announced it. particularly, in terms of the desirability of just as we installed a new commander in iraq, when we initiated a new strategy, the belief that it was important to have a new commander in afghanistan as we initiated and execute a new

strategy, and in particular to have one, to have a commander who could be there for a prolonged time in the implementation of the strategy. one year, 18 months, or more. whatever time. so in all honesty, in retrospect, i would have done at general mccarren a better service to describe it that way. >> mr. secretary, you had said earlier that in the event of collateral damage and civilians are killed in afghanistan that the u.s. should be as upfront as quickly as possible. are you and all concerned that by this investigation being dragged out that america's credibility in afghanistan is being undermined? or do you think in this

particular case, the battle for the hearts and minds of the afghanistan people is already lost? >> i do not think that battle is lost at all. but i think -- what i have said in the past is where we believe there may have been civilian casualties, what i said months ago, was we should immediately expressed regret if there were indeed innocent civilian casualties. if necessary and appropriate, make amends, and then investigate. the truth is the way that we do investigation, which is to say fairly, takes time. that is the problem. in the past, we have not taken the first two steps until we have finished the third step. the changes that general mccarren put in place months ago put more emphasis on doing the

expression of regret and making amends if necessary, and then carrying out the investigation. i do not think the length of time of the investigation itself is an issue. i think we do -- i think what we do in the immediate aftermath of one of these tragedies is what is important. i don't know if you want to add anything? >> you said there was a training issue? after the priority, mr. secretary, that you gave to this issue, how could there possibly be a lack of adequate training in regard to avoiding civilian casualties in afghanistan? >> very complex environment, for an extended time, complex change of platforms involved in the fight. exposed some deficiencies from a trading standpoint that we have to back all the way up into our

schools here and make sure that that is trained with in a reversal exercises, etc. as the fighting changes over time, we constantly adapt. what we found from this investigation very thoroughly is there were some things -- there's an awful lot of things that went well. there are some things from a training perspective that we have to face. >> with their excess of deficiency in this case? -- was their excessive deficiency in this case? [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> up next, a house hearing on the privacy issues involved in internet advertising.

then syndicated columnist george will from thursday's "washington journal." and the ceo of the chicago federal reserve talks about the economy. tomorrow morning, we will bring you remarks from ayatollah khamenei. he will be speaking at tirana university in the wake of mass protests against the official results of the iranian presidential elections. that is at 6:00 a.m. eastern, here on c-span. at 7:00, it is "washington journal." we will discuss health care with mary agnes carey of kaiser health news and world bloom in our -- and earl blumenauer. >> every weekend, "book tv" has

the latest nonfiction books and authors. from the garden of eden to today, eduardo galeano recounts the history of the world with a collection of short stories. and also airs sunday night at 9:00 eastern. also sunday, books on the economy. former investment banker john talbott expose is the myths of the recession and what it will take to recover and jay richards on what he thinks are the best way to protect the environment. also, the end of overeating. former fda commissioner david kessler explains how americans can control their eating habits. there are a lot more books and authors this weekend on "book tv." our website has the entire schedule and great new video --

and great new features, including streamy video, easier searches, and several ways to share your favorite programs. >> now a house hearing on the internet and the use of behavioral advertising. this technique has given rise to privacy concerns because it involves advertisers tracking the web browsing habits of internet users. bob rush of illinois chairs the commerce committee on consumer protection. this is 2 1/2 hours. >> good morning. today is a joint hearing of the subcommittee's on commerce,

trade, and consumer protection and communications technology and the internet. i want to welcome all of you to this hearing, and i want to just give you some advance notice that in about 20 minutes, we will be called to the floor for a series of votes. some have estimated to be -- we are scheduled for about 27 votes on the floor, which is certainly going to extend the hearing. we ask that you be patient with us. we will try to conduct this hearing and be mindful of your time, but our actions will be dictated by the house schedule

and the votes on the floor. i now want to recognize myself for five minutes of opening statements. as i indicated, today, the two subcommittees, commerce and consumer protection, are combining our commitment to privacy -- and resources to conduct the import hearing on behavioral advertising and consumer protections. i want to just take a moment to think the chairman for not only his cooperation on working together on this particular issue, but i want to thank him also for his past championship and dedication to this very,

very important issue. this is but one hearing along a continuum of legislative activity examining online consumer privacy and how companies handle and treat consumers' personal information. most recently, the subcommittee on commerce trade and protection, which i chair, hr- 2221, the accountability and trust act, a bipartisan bill which addresses security of personal information, bridges of that security, and corrects some of the resulting harms to consumers. i am hopeful there will be more hearings. there are currently no further laws specifically governing behavioral advertising, nor do we have a comprehensive general policy or general privacy law.

as members of congress, we have anticipated for some time that this hearing would be highly informative and very valuable in helping us answer the question that everyone seems to last -- -- that everyone seems to asked -- is federal privacy legislation necessary, or should companies be allowed to discipline and regulate themselves? at this hearing, i look forward to hearing from our very distinguished panel of witnesses about this growing trend of online behavior advertising. market research firms have estimated that behaviorally targeted ad spending will reach $4.4 billion by the end of 2012. that number is by opening as it translates into almost 25% of

all online display and spending that is projected to be spent by 2012. as privileged as these ads are becoming, so, too, are the buzz words which are purportedly needed to flesh out the upper. contents of fair information principles and -- flush out the content of their information principles and practices. words such as transparency, choice, notice, consent, a consumer expectation. they mean different things to different persons depending on an array of variables. there is feedback here. has that been --

such variables may include the identity of the user, whether he or she has registered with the website, whether the ads are being served by first or third- party sites, the conspicuous ness of pre-existing privacy policies and exposure, the robustness of user enabled settings for user privacy, and the list goes on and on. all of these variables are important on whether legislation is needed. i will be listening intently on your accounts of how upfront. they're collecting from consumers.

i want to thank all the witnesses coming in this morning for sharing with us and sharing your busy schedule for providing much needed input into these matters today and preparing for this subcommittee for this hearing. now i want to recognize for five minutes for the purposes of opening statements the next five minutes for opening statements. >> thank you, chairman. i want to thank you for these hearings today. i think it is a good issue we need to be talking about. privacy continues to be an issue

of increasing its turn to consumers, and i am pleased we will be looking at all the relevant issues to determine what the problems are and what the possible solutions are that may exist. what was once thought to be an issue limited to business with him consumers had a customer relationship has been forever altered by the internet. progression and innovation in digital technology of the last 20 years has transformed many aspects of our lives. by the same token, that progress has open the possibility to potential abuses and innovations in our lives. and the connected world of the internet, where data is instantaneously accessible to anybody in the world, we have learned how vast amounts of sensitive consumer data can be indirectly disclosed or subject to malicious and intentional theft. we also know that the main reason consumers should be concerned about the amount of personal information out there on the world wide web is that sensitive personal information can be used for harmful purposes, particularly identity

theft. thankfully, we are addressing some of those concerns with the data security and preach notification legislation moving through committee right now. the oversight and as security issue opened our eyes to the types of sensitive personal information many institutions ranging from businesses to government maintain about us. what information is kept about us, maybe for legitimate reasons that mandate data retention, for instance law-enforcement purposes, most consumers do not fully understand how information gathered about us will be used or with whom it will be shared. these concerns are legitimate. what is more, these concerns of personal information are exacerbated by digital technology and capabilities of internet technology. information that filled rooms of file cabinets in a paper based business cannot be stored on devices that attach to a key ring and he sent over the

internet in seconds. making information theft easy and often untraceable. the ability to instantaneously collect, analyze, and store consumers online behavior for marketing purposes stretches this further. the internet quickly evolved beyond its original purpose as a communication tool to become a means of commerce, education, and social interaction. a generation has been raised on the ability to find ever mission relative to their interests and communicate in ways that we cannot imagine 10 years ago. most expect these services to be customized for their preferences. many of these technologies and practices that deliver high levels of customization present new challenges and concerns for consumers, primarily understanding with the trade-off is for the services. do we need to relinquish personal information about ourselves and the internet for

the purposes of generating more users specific advertisements in exchange for access to the information we seek on the internet? if so, who has are access to this information. the internet has been a successful tool for commerce and has benefited consumers with convenience, choice, and savings. irrelevant -- relevant advertisements will be more beneficial to the consumer and business, which is in concept no different than away marketing research determines which advertisements are selected to be placed in magazines, newspapers, or television based on the intended audience. however, in practice, the internet is different because of its ability to track preferences one a minute by minute basis. the question is how advertisers engage in the process of identifying their potential target audience, specifically, what information is used to generate target advertisements. i have a son who i will