before that, he worked at a tv station in phoenix. p.m.oduced the nightly 10 newscast. he majored in broadcast journalism. tmz can be a punching bag for a lot of people. you have been blamed for the decline of civilization. [laughter] i want to give me the opportunity to turn the tables a bit. >> the fall of civilization? [laughter] >> when you see networks, newspapers do political coverage, how do you look at those stores? are there things that you know from the work you have done at teams he that makes you think, hey, and this can be done better? >> i will take down civilization now.

no, i listen. tmz dabbles in politics. --o not think what we do what we do is part of the menu at this point. the way that people need to learn about politicians. what we try to do is make politicians personalities. we get people interested. when we do politics, it is more on the surface. policyot talking about or how the senator voted on a particular bill. we are just talking about the personality of the person. there is a new interest in finding out about these people and not just as politicians, but drawing people into learn about the policy if you tell them a little bit about the person aside from politics.

some of our most trafficked political stories were for instance -- a photo of aaron showing his abs. the congressman from illinois. he is ripped. we were shocked at the interest he got when he put that photo up. suddenly had constituents that were reaching out to them that never ever knew he was the representative. they thought, wait as second. [laughter] it is funny that it took a photo of his abs to get people to pay attention. thatnk it is a little sad people are interested in that anyway, but if that is what takes, then that is what it takes. now his constituents were paying attention to how he votes

on things, whether they like it or dislike it. at least now they're interested. they now know who he is. >> give us a window on how the sausage is made at tmz. there was an essay that argues that tmz as a news organization is a lot more vigilant than a lot of the major newsrooms. ofhas a sort of mission reporting disciplines of phone calls and a lot of checks that other places do not do. is that true? >> yeah. people say that a lot and say, how do you know about these stories?

it does not a magic formula other than what you said -- making phone calls or three dozen phone calls. you kind of get used to people hanging up on you. you get used to that. it is the only way. you go, ok. who will i call next? we always tell new employees who want to become producers -- we say, how many phone calls did you make? i called this person and they said they will coming back. why are you waiting for them to call you that? you will miss out on the story who is actually making the phone calls and trying to find out what it is you are trying to find out. there is always more than one way to skin a cat. don't wait.

make as many phone calls as it takes in a short amount of time is necessary to get the information. when it is confirmed with multiple sources, then we publish but you cannot wait. that is the new environment of journalism. if you wait, you lose. >> i went introduced our next guest. forare remembered well reporting on 9/11 at the world trade center. you have one awards. you are an abc news anchor now. you lived in this town when you were really young. i'm curious as to what you

think. this moment where people get their information. campaign,covering a you're more likely to see the candidate on an entertainment show or daily show than in front of you answering detailed questions in an open-ended interview about policy. popular websites and pop culture often drives political coverage. how should journalists negotiate this? your time to bring news of politics and government to this world. do you want to play these games? do you want to be on social media? do you want to be a character on tv? >> i was shocked -- the same thing happened to me. they took a picture of me without my shirt on. [laughter]

>> got that photo right here. [laughter] >> but you did not have it first. [laughter] >> there were a bunch of questions. these guys did not invent that kind of television or information. i honestly -- these things have been around forever. they do it in a different way on a different medium at a different level. particularly it threatening to journalism at all. in fact, if you listen to what he said, we make lots of calls and we check it out and verify and then republish it. whatis pretty much

journalism is. that is pretty much what it is. they do it on a guy with a really good abs, but it is just journalism. if arnold schwarzenegger was not a hollywood guy -- i'm sure mayor candidates felt quite lonesome here. he is a celebrity. i do not think journalism has changed. i think what we all need to do is stop pandering on it so much. get back to business. he is interested in these stories. i'm not interested in chasing his stories, but i am glad he is not chasing my stories.

they have a disciplined about the way they work that would be scary to me. i want to make sure that my guys are playing the same discipline to the stories that we are chasing that his folks are applying to the stores that they are chasing. >> journalists say, i am under pressure to be on facebook and twitter. there is just eight times up, right? that takes the time away. >> it somehow did not get in a lot of people's ways. mark might be the most prolific tweeter on the face of the planet, but he is also the most formidable, white house correspondent there is. if you are looking for a reason to bitch and moan, i had to tweak today and could not get the story, but honestly, it is 140 characters. let's be serious. 940 question was about

characters. it cannot be that hard. [laughter] >> fair enough. >> no offense. >> none taken. >> your network seems to be under incredible pressure. >> look -- >> how do they do it? >> figure it out. equate a vacation with a natural disaster.

it is more entertaining. cnn has always been cnn. it is a public utility of news. you want to know what is going on. you fill your pail with news. you turn it off and then you want to be entertained. you have mud wrestling and bill o'reilly telling someone to shut up or whatever. that is more entertaining. what cnn is yet again trying to figure out -- it is a hard thing to do. figure out how to make the day when the national disaster does not hit and the day that planes did not hit the towers.

make those days as engaging as every other day. you know, it may be that you cannot do that. on those days you better hope that anna nicole smith dies. [laughter] just to pick a name out. >> on that note, let's introduced our next guest. spent nine years as a film and tv producer. he covered the entertainment business for the wall street journal. he has degrees in european election history.

michael, there was an interview in 2001. a great line in the movie business is that the material is everything. the material is actually nothing. it does not matter. you can show up with the greatest script on earth and pop it down and thought abc to executive and can come back with the greatest reasons not to get involved. what really drives the entire business is by star power. that former studio executive is you. >> and that is true. >> do you see that change, some version of that change happening? >> i think so. andcoming out of print you're coming out of broadcast, we're coming together somewhere in the middle. there are radically different equations.

there is sort of a false dichotomy here. we're talking the infotainment and how that might be changing things. tmz, having looked at it up close, i would say it is one of the most intensely organizations i have ever seen occur in this town. you have to look underneath the skin of the subject matter. it can distract you. notrealize you may or may be interested in that, but within the small, contained universe, i have looked up both and am fascinated at how you work with courts and law enforcement and you get it right and you do all of the things that back when we were better staffed and print publications, we used to do, for print locations are broad.

staff are coming down. we no longer have the intensity of focus. you are ganged up in small areas. is that lack of importance of the material taking control of journalists? yeah. look, what i see happening let's say internally, i do not want to say if it is good, bad, or different, that is a different equation. it is hard unless you study it meticulously to make a judgment. if you look at the way we handle entertainment in the new york times, particularly on the web, there is now a vast amount of

material posted and sometimes printed that does not matter. it is absolutely vacant stuff. it are driven to the south and look at miles of things that choke out the real stuff, we have miles and miles of that on he website in the paper. hose of us -- because we are old timers trying to jill in and do some things like tell people something they do not already know, which is getting to be one of the rarest elements in the news. much is a regurgitation of what s known. getting that first impression is rarer inside of print stories

and telling people something that matters. we have web reducers that have evolved over the last four or five years. people who used to post my stories go out and will do a q&a with any celebrity that draws raffic on their own. that would push stories that ight take us a week. i will look and there will be seven stories pushed down because the celebrity junk is basically clouding it out. it is taking time and space and energy. it is fundamentally all traffic driven, at least on the website. the more frequently you mention a celebrity name, the higher your traffic will go. if you want a lot traffic, keep

a constant flow those things. it is not matter if people have done it or set it. you have got to keep moving those goods. >> i do not disagree with that answer. i will tell a little story that is in your world, but you will disown it, as you should. the single worst day i had on tv was after robert blake was arrested for popping his ife. the actor robert blake had won a very good performance in a tv series and is arrested for killing his wife. we spent four hours on it. not like a figurative four hours, literally for hours.

we were asking extra correspondents who we booked for no reason that i could figure out to keep this sucker going. how do you think this will impact his career? he has no career. [laughter] there is no upside to being arrested for your wife's urder. four hours -- so i go home at 2:30 a.m. in the morning. my wife who is a reporter looks at me half-asleep and says, why? [laughter] honest to god, i do not need this right now. i do not need it. the next day at work, there are 15,000 e-mails. on an average day we get about 4000 e-mails. i looked through a few

hundred. not one said, dammit. you promised us you were going to do serious news? not once did you do enough obert blake. y bosses were going crazy. you have got to decide, too. that was the biggest number we had since a plane crashed two months after 9/11. 10 years ago, celebrities were driving ratings. 20 years are now celebrities ill drive ratings. i just don't think it is new. >> it has just gotten more painful.

to think about how bizarre it s, think about the oscars. 10 or 12 years ago, we wrote about the oscars two times in the course of a year. there were nominations and then it happened. that was about what enterprise was worth. starting in about the year 2000, i believed i was personally responsible for a terrible, terrible corruption in this process. i was working that time as an editorial director for nside.com. it was kind of a first early experiment in web news. like instantaneous news, traffic delivery, we did all the media overing. the only thing that made money on inside.com was something that

i and a couple of actors called the oscar tracker. we figure it out as a lark, we would get him to do a mathematical model and add up all of the factors -- from color of hair to nominations -- create a model that you could then feed information into and every single day for five months, rank all of the contenders. he said to take it down to a decimal place. that will fascinate people. for five months straight, we posted a ranking, a horse race of who is getting ahead. we instantly sold the entire page for the run to an auto company. every day for 120 days, i had to rite a handicap that went with

this oh stop i was doing as many as three appearances a day the cable news shows. i would be called in because people found this fascinating. as you go forward -- >> i knew i knew you from somewhere. [laughter] >> they found something that orked. why did someone not apply that to the rest of the operations? they found a working formula. what you are saying is that a lot of what you do -- the scary part is when you feel that you have become a slave to it. >> any story that takes -- look, when you'd be the papers everyday, there are lots of intelligent sounding stories in that paper. they are still pretty intelligent. if you know them from the inside

and you have done them for 20 and 35 years, you know that there is a styrofoam quality to many of the stories that are being done in a day of what used o take a week. a classic example -- not that this is not a great story. i think every story has to be valid and do something. back in the middle of the 1980's when no one in this town -- everyone in hollywood talked about someone who is hideous and running the hollywood business and is corrupt. there had never been one single newspaper story about him. not one. he prided himself on doing this all in the dark. i'm sitting on the wall street journal and i thought, screw that. we will figure out a way to put them on the wall street journal.

i took two months and i dogged that man everywhere. he would come down the tairs. i would piece together who the hell this guy is. ultimately we ran on the front page of the journal. it triggered this entire reversal in his behavior. he decided he could not hide anymore and went public. many stories came after that. if i took two weeks on that story today, i would be fired. >> aren't there ways to exploit it? my own experience with arnold schwarzenegger becoming governor of california was a gift from god. people read our stories. i got stories into the l.a. times about hard topics, local

government finance, taxes for businesses. i even wrote a book about the initiative process. i was able to do that because i dress them all up as stories about arnold schwarzenegger. e was the way into that. >> it can get dropped as arnold schwarzenegger because he was lready a movie star. a lot of people in congress or the senate, they are very interesting people. if you can get to that and peel back a couple of the layers, you might find that they are interesting. maybe seeing want to give representatives playing asketball and realizing he has a great jump shot might be nteresting to some people.

>> do you have an agenda? >> no. like i said, we will not delve eeper. sometimes we talk about someone's politics, but we try to make these politicians personalities. learn something about the personality and you might be interested in them. hear something about them on cnn, marco rubio voted this and this, though, that is a guy i saw on tmz and how he is into hip-hop and talk for five minutes about why little wayne is not the new tupac. [laughter] we had this conversation with them. there is a part of me that thought badly we do not delve

deeper into his politic and what he is voting on, but that was ot the conversation. i really want to hammer him about reaching for water in the middle of his response to the state of the union. we had a fun conversation with this guy. maybe the people will be interested now and what his olitics are. we will hand it off now to people who will delve deeper into the politics. there is still huge appetite for that. we can create more of an appetite for to learn about politics. people are turned off by politicians right now. why not make it more interesting? then people might pay more attention to what they are voting or not voting on. >> here's a question -- media has real consequences.

i cover this area of chemical belts. a plant that the blowing up. i kept asking an engineer why this kept happening. e said, the problem is that it is not about -- they think they know how the government work and how politics work, but they don't work. i guess it gets to that question of are we crowding out things that would make us better informed? should we use celebrities to etter inform us? >> that is outside of everything we are talking about. maybe people have it wrong. i'm not a great believer in the hurch of journalism.

i think it was john stewart many years ago who said the only hope was to have maximum freedom and maximum outlet and maybe if we are lucky on a sunny day, the truth will find is take shape among all of it. i think there is a huge multiplicity of outlets. god bless. let everyone go at it. the more you have got, the greater the hope that ultimately you will be able to feel what is real. >> just a little point here. i'm a great believer in democracy. viewers and readers, they will figure out what they need to know. they will make judgments that are appropriate to their lives. our job is to put it out

there. but we need to put out there correctly. it comes back to charles -- in the last couple of weeks there has been an amazing story. sarah palin had signed a deal ithal jazeera. there was a story that a person had filed for bankruptcy. both stories are put out by a satire website. they both made it out there. maybe rather than worrying about all of this big stuff, we ought to worry about the small stuff. check it out. before you run it, part of the conflict with the web is that it s killing us or you.

it makes it -- it is like an e-mail. you say things that you never would have written in an e-mail and you can say things on the web you never would have written down. it is easy to push a button and it is out there. i may not care about the guy with abs, but i care a lot about teaching students with the journalism they are doing. if you learn to be a reporter, you can report on celebrities, politics, sports, the economy, but if you do not know how to be a reporter, all you can be as a celebrity. that is all you can do. >> what scares me the most is that the huge vacuum, the stuff that we do not know that no one is touching it. the illusion that everything can

be known by getting online and tickling something with your thumbs leaves this gigantic vacuum aren't actual information that is never uncovered. in santa monica last year in the branch court, there was a stunning case in which 20 young, jewish professionals filed a lawsuit for anti-semitism against a hotel, which they had been thrown by the owner on a sunday afternoon, for the alleged was afraid -- she was pakistani -- and that her family would pull funding if they found out there were 20 jews raising money at a pool party, which was authorized by the hotel staff for the idf. she came in and threw them out. they filed a suit. this is sitting in the santa monica court.

one quick round based on the complaint goes on the internet. i wonder who is right and who was wrong. what really happened? what did she really say? what are these young professionals like? do they have a chip on their shoulder or are they for eal? i live in santa monica. my wife looked at me and said, i have grown up there my whole life. get down to the courthouse. i want to know if this happened in santa monica. believe me, i will go do it. uninvited, i dropped in and sat in the courthouse with what turned out to be a three-week trial. i kept dodging my duties and running in there to listen to testimonies. t was amazing. the jury found against the elder and with good reason after she testified. there was not one reporter at any level in that trial. there was no local reporters.

nothing. if my wife had not chased me into that -- i thought for the executive editor of our paper -- these people are just like your daughter. we will run it. how many times a day does that happen that we do not know about these things anymore? >> there is this blurring of lines and no one seems too unhappy about it. i look at it and i can tell. i'm allegedly a professional journalist. i cannot tell if the actors are running the government. it is also the mixed up. there are political scientist who argue, this is great. we are returning to the late 19th century when the public was ost engaged. the ones who could vote, voted in huge numbers.

here were parades. those were the glorious times a real political engagement. now we are much more cynical. the blurring lines, does that have consequences for things like ethics? there are some media organizations that pay for tips. tmz i think is one of them. there are others that don't. should we worry about that? should we worry about confusion? >> two things -- first, we do not pay sources or pay for information. we pay for photos and video. now -- [laughter] >> i had something in my hroat. i do not need a rubio. [laughter]

>> clarification made. >> why do you care? what difference does it make who is running for office? what difference does it make? it seems like you want us to be upset about this blurring of the lines. i do not know what caused this and why there is this fascination with celebrities, but you cannot deny it is a reality. you can sit and whine about t. you can complain that it is harder to cover a story now or you can deal with the reality of it. this is the way it is now. i do not have any issues with having politicians or entertainers becoming politicians. i think the problem with ethics

-- your deadline is two minutes ago. you cannot wait for the printing presses to start running. you had to do it now. that can cause a problem with ethics and people decide they will play loosey-goosey with the facts. if you do that, you have a problem with ethics. i always tell the interns, what is really important here? what is important is speed. what is more important is accuracy. e need to have this now. i want the actual story now. that is what you need to push

for. before you hit the button to publish, make sure what you're publishing is correct. the day that we publish the michael jackson death was iterally six people standing around the button and harvey double ere and said, we double checked. we have this and this. are we sure? yeah. hit the button. that was a story that was so big that you have got to triple, quadruple check and say this is correct. then hit the button. but if you just ran off and printed something and hit that button, you will get screwed. >> i'm not opposed to being contrary. for what i'm being paid tonight, will be contrary.

remember jackie o's time. i wrote something about it to my editors -- and brought it to my editors. everyone was really excited. we ought to find out if she is dead. [laughter] pretty much of the baseline. >> it can be really mbarrassing. >> honestly, it is no different. the speed pressures are different. imagine they are. i the economic gestures different? -- are the economic pressures

different? absolutely. but the basic truth of journalism is that if you do not get it right, you do not last very long in this. i do not think it has changed much. >> focus on the area where lines have blurred. i personally find it troubling. it makes it incumbent upon all of us to think more clearly on what we do. a lot of the political and historical information we get is coming from movies. i cover movies. what has occurred is that movies at the lower end and a fair number of dramatic films of long as they're not the big, special effects driven blockbusters, oves very quickly.

this physical activity, new movies like "social network" and zero dark thirty" -- they come across in almost real ime. i think there's something very beguiling, particularly about documentaries. you're sitting there and you are watching the movies and it creates the illusion that everything you're being told must be true because i see it. i see but a horrible thing he just said. the back of your mind or thinking we'll must be true because the camera never lies. the camera always lies. in film, the camera of the

director restructures reality nd doesn't report reality. how are we being used and manipulated in seemingly benign or inspirational political tales that are being told? i would love for some to do a plit level documentary and see all of the same footage -- i would like to see the first minutes as an anti-bush documentary and then re-edited with all the same materials but to stick up. you can do that. that is the one place that -- >> two things. i think most of the documentaries are preaching to the choir.

whatever harm there is, i believe there is some harm, it is confined to people who suffer from this primary information disease of our time, which is simply wanting to hear things you have already heard or believed. thus on the subject of historical, i live in phoenix. i go to movies really early in the day. it is what you do when you're old in phoenix. it is fabulous. we walk out of "lincoln" and there is this elderly ouple. the husband says, i thought that was great. the husband said, i cannot get over how much he sounds like lincoln. [laughter]

i go through life trying not to be noticed. i turned around and i was like -- but my wife grabs me and says, come on. maybe things are happening too damn fast. >> that is maybe one case where the lines are are blurring. maybe it is an issue. we were discussing this today. does it bother you that the first family seems to be attaching itself -- and this started beforehand -- attaching themselves very publicly to celebrities? is that an issue? does it bother you that maybe they are getting too close to them? why are they getting close to them? because they want to be seen? they want some of the shine that

hey get? >> maybe it is the other way around. maybe the celebrity wants to hang out with the president, hey get the shine from them. >> there was a complaint about the oscar show where they were upset that michelle obama showed p. not one person i talked to that morning said they like that. hollywood rebelled deeply. >> this is a great conversation. we want to bring the audience into it. >> time for questions. there'll be dozens of them and really have a limited amount of time. everyone from the form will be at the reception upstairs. please come to us. we member to say here first and last name before your

question. this is being reported and will be put up on our website. you can share it with your friends who could not be here tonight. c-span is also here tonight. it will probably air next month. jennifer has the first question. >> my name is aaron. i was troubled by the fact that one topic i thought was not really discussed much was that we live in a democracy. people vote and our innocence responsible for the decisions made by our government -- and thus are responsible for the decisions made by our overnment. when entertainment starts crowding out real information that people need to make these decisions, i think that is a problem. if anyone is going to vote for

or against marco rubio because what he thinks about some rap star, we are in real trouble. i think so. is that not something that bothers you? isn't there some responsibility that journalists have to our society? >> i agree. it would be a huge issue is someone voted for marco rubio a ause they also like tupac. maybe if you listen to what he says and make an informed decision, listen to what he says about issues and then make an informed decision. he is on your radar because you heard about something that appeals to you. you are right. all of the information is still out there. i guess the problem is that it is harder to find. they used to be you could turn on the news at 5 p.m. or 6 p.m. and you would get that information. now you're not getting it there. it is still out there.

you just have to search for it a little bit. >> a slightly different take on this. you will be offended by this. i will tell you put this in a gentle way. if you go back in your lifetime or my lifetime, you'll find that the more likable candidate wins the presidency almost every time. here are ties. johnson goldwater -- and goldwater, neither you wanted to hang with. goldwater was less likable than lyndon johnson. say what you want about george w. bush, but he was more likable than al gore in my opinion. the more likable guy wins. particularly in a president, the

one the guy who comes into our living room every day to be likable. while i do not think musical taste is a reason to vote for a person, knowing who the person is tells us a lot about those things we can't anticipate happening, but do happen when someone is elected president and they had to respond. that might be more important than knowing how they feel about the deficit. >> but the camera always lies. i don't believe for one second -- look, you read a landmark book. it has been 40 years that we have been dealing with this phenomenon. the nixon-kennedy debates. we are trusting image. >> no, there are truths here. kennedy was more likable than

nixon. even mrs. nixon liked kennedy more. [laughter] >> many of the things occurred, he might not have been more likable. >> let's get another question. >> hi. david bloom. as a former longtime print reported that handles social media on a new site, i'm curious. you talk about the speed driving the decision making process. the other thing you did not get into was the impacts of big data, our understanding of the stories that people want to watch. part of what is driving the infotainment interest is that what are the audiences are showing in a very hard to refute way what they want to ollow.

it is him is like big data in understanding the hard numbers of social media and seo are hanging. they are going with the money us. -- is. >> true. hat happened to magazines. magazines told you about something outside of yourself. it shrunk and died one by one. stories that you could hardly dream were occurring out there. every magazine was demographically driven. magazines have been put in a place where they fundamentally a mere were reflecting -- mirror reflecting the desired eadership. t became a niche market.

there was a wallpaper for the people who are ready feel that way. - already feel that way. what is happening with the internet, it is impossible to refute the pressures of traffic and the numbers. you will always do better by iving people what they want to stop but that is -- what they want. but that will not necessarily create value. sometimes a single, true fact that no one wants is still a single and true fact and is important. >> to me, what this stuff has done is make that data more precise. but the data is what it was before. it was clear. people and executives would call and say, what happened at 10:15?

we covered the war. i do not know what got into us. [laughter] >> has it been painful? > it is funny to me. there is a lot of me in the cart. but like most people who watch lawyer shows and doctors -- first all, no one is having that much -- first of all no one is having that much sex and it is not that good. [laughter] so -- i think -- like a lot of things about the internet it is increased speed but speed was always an issue. it is micro targeting -- the information is more precise it

is not that we didn't have a sense of it before. i think we did. so while i understand the argument, i think like a lot of things it just is someone that always ed of what has been. dianald see that princess sold magazines but we knew that before. >> it is a vft difference though. you come from television, everyone has known that. in tv, you grew up with ratings, feedback, and -- believe it or not, until this day we have editors says i don't care if one person doesn't care about this go out and do that. >> where is he working now? >> there was a great story about

chinese centership in american movies. it had to do with the american studios are running their script -- gh chinese century son sensors. nobody asked for that story. there is one kid in the whole world was a colorado state student asked me why you're not going something about it. i spent a week and a half and did it but there was no demographic value to that. >> but it ended up in the paper? >> yes, it is in the paper. >> randy oldson. is this a crisis or not that at one end of the spectrum is cnn and "the new york times" you feel more urgent about it. the crime rate is down and it

does not seem like the society is unraveling, is this a crisis or not? >> i really -- i don't want to sound defensive about this, which is a conclude that i'm about to. -- clue that i am about to. i don't represent cnn. i'm comfortable on the network television broadcast. i don't want to be seen that way. i'm not comfortable and i don't think -- i was an employee of abc but they don't want me speaking for them either. is it a crisis? i don't see it as a crisis. i don't. i think information democracy is messy sometimes. but this is -- this can get messy. but it has always been us in some way or another.

this might sound like a cop out, maybe it is, what we need from you is some diligence in what you do. that you have to look for stuff, it is there. honestly, you wouldn't know it from this conversation but "the times" is an amazing newspaper to me. reading it every day no matter what the story is, i can't find it anywhere. if you only look at the home page you don't get it. in every sense you don't get it. so all and the kids we teach and all that we need to work harder, better, smarter, and more efficiently. but so do you. > is there good info todayment

and bad? >> if it is about important things and gives us what reality is. >> that is objective. i can't put my finger on it but i hate that word. i just hate it. when i got the invitation to be here i looked at it and -- it is either entertainment. it is almost as if people don't like the word news. they are getting news but they don't like to call it news. they want to be entertained. maybe people watch msnbc or fox news channel because they are entertained while getting the news. they don't want just news. so, i don't know it is about the word but i'm getting off the subject.

i don't think it is a crisis. bad or't say if there is good information. if you want to read about paris hilton or someone else, if you don't want to go to "tmz" that's great. you have the right to go to "the new york city times." >> i think you're right. it is not a crisis. in order for it to be a crisis because you would have to believe that things were wonderful before and things have died now. you have to be an idea yours truly to think that is true. it's not. t is a time of enormous chaos. it is periods of chies history. we're in a period of chaos and change. i think it is incumbent on everybody to do more thinking about what they are reading, what they are seeing, what it

mean, what they are getting. i don't think 10 or a 15 years ago that you would have getting togethers like this. they occur all the time now. everyone is sharing what is happening, what is this all about? i think that is a good thing. >> we have time for one last question. please join us upstairs for wine, beer, soft drinks. you're in great company and all the guests will be there tonight. last question. >> matthew ross. i wanted to talk about this idea -- i don't know if i'm making this up but eback journalism. we talked about how parody information came out and how it turned to be actual news. like what you said about palin. associated press has done this for years and people are following stories and it has

been this way. but piggyback journalism is happening so frequently now. enter it is entertainment or news, a lot of misinformation is going out because of this. one person gets it wrong everyone gets it wrong. do you feel this is dangerous? >> that i think -- i don't know if i use the word dangerous but that comes from what you're talk about there are sites that are just getting a story on their site that people are searching for. if sarah palin is a hot topic they are going to put the story up there. that cab a huge problem for ethics. if you walk into work and your goal for the day is i'm going to get the biggest numbers i can get today. doesn't matter if it is true or real, i'm going to find the

stories that people are searching for and it is easy to find that information. anybody can do that research. yeah, that is dangerous. because i've had so many times people walk up to me, and say hey, is it true -- i think my sister called me one night. it was a ridiculous story. i was like no, that is not true. where did you hear that? i a she's like i heard a few times and i figured it had to be true. people started passing that stuff around and -- again, i don't know if it is dangerous. >> we've been finding since the last 18 months there's been a shift of some kind. that phenomenon has created enormous opportunity for us. once everybody gets in the habit of piggybacking and moving in a wave of one direction, it makes

it far easier who has a simple common sense to act in a way or think ahead a lig to pick off the next story and lead the next wave and lead the next wave. when individual reporters or editors develop that habit and i know many who cultivate that skill it turns that into great opportunity for everybody else. >> is there an argument because of that confusion for -- like what "tmz" does. you're transparent. you're as transparent as heck. you have a show that shows your process. should everyone do that? but someone on "tmz" could see the show and get a fair idea how you work work and make decisions on how much they want to trust you. in the morning shows you see a little bit of the scenes but it

is the main stream "the new york oz" " and the "wizard of thing it is still behind the curtain. maybe we need to take a camera into a story meetings. i was one in once. bill keller argued. >> i don't know if i would take them into a meeting. i would distract all of them. one to great problems is, if you're drilling in hard on something that is difficult that people do not want you to tell. it could be big or a little story. you are going to deal particularly in a hollywood you could print it on the record live or you can get bottom of this.

i would not be too quick that you put a camera over every reporter you will see a great deal of truth rung out quickly. >> i was thinking about the sarah palin thing and i don't know how to quantity fie stupid. [laughter] the thing that worries me is art of what i learned, i think as a young reporter, is not what was the story but what isn't the story. if there's one thing to me beyond the business of journalism that has changed it is the gatekeeper of function that has changed. there is no gatekeeper function. nobody is saying that ain't the story anymore. someone is running the story. there with was a story back when for erry was running

president about him having an affair with an intern, which was a sensitive subject after clinton having an affair. as these things go and then on talk radio. my boss called me and said why what are you doing about the kerry story and i said nothing. i said there's a problem there is not a fact in the story. people are talking about a story that has not a single fact. that was the gatekeeper function of journalism that is gone. the next day the candidate goes tv but is not a source of journalism and denies having an affair with the intern. at this point, i had no choice. the candidate has denied something and i have to do it.

what we do, because we played this i'm above it all game, which is why i'm sitting here tonight. [laughter] we did a story about the anatomy of a rumor that we call dressing up pig. t was still a pig. what the internet has stolen from us editorially, it is not that this stuff gets out there, in the weird way people figure it out. it is the stuff that shouldn't be out there at all. the gatekeeper function is gone and it is never coming back. you have to live in a world where news, forgive me, is just thrown up out there and for you to pick through it. i, you know, that's what scares me. if you want to use the word crisis, if someone agrees that there is a crisis tonight, i will agree that is a crisis.

more than some dude's abs. >> i think we'll have to leave it at that. [applause] please join us for a drink and aaron will be signing shirtless photos of him. [laughter] thank you. ♪ >> this week on "newsmakers" our he will richard trumka talk about minimum wage proposals from president obama and democrats in congress, and the union federation talks with the u.s. chamber of commerce over workers and what they

should be paid. watch 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. some news out of afghanistan today from the associated press. e u.s. handed control of a providence to kabul ending a dispute with president karzai. the handover is part of the accelerated timetable. most forces will be with drawn by december of next year. u.s. operation forces will continue to visit the afghan eam. general john allen led the nato mission in afghanistan last year. he talked about meeting with afghan president karzai. here's a look. >> i've known president karzai for a long time.

let me talk about my relationship with them because it is in that context i hear his comments. i've known him since early 2009. i got to know him well from the time i took command in mid 2011. ryan a phrase from crockers' book president karzai has the hardest job on the planet. the things he has had to deal with on a regular basis, he does have a difficult mission. he does have a difficult set of challenges on any gifpble day on virtually all issues. he has to balance a domestic constituency that is both tribal and ethnic. he has to balance his rhetoric with the potential for peace.

he has to balance what he says with regard to his regional neighbors. all of that goes into the pot, i says, n terms of what he how he says it, when he says it. when i was in afghanistan, my mother passed away. i didn't tell anybody. i didn't want anyone to focus on that. i didn't tell him of course. i had the chance to come home and lay my mother to rest. afterwards my family -- we were having dinner and he called me -- i got a call that the palace wanted to talk to me. i thought this is not good. so i went outside and took the call and it was president karzai and saying i just learned your mother died. why didn't you tell me? i said, mr. president you carry

the weight of the world on your shoulders and i did not want to add any burdens to you. he said our mothers are precious to us. i want you to have my condolences and i want you to know how sorry i am for your loss. he didn't have to do that. the relationship we have and he called me after i came back here to offer his best wishes. he said we did not see eye to eye on a lot of things but you did what you believed was the best for your country and i believe that i do the best for my country. with that as context, he has to balance a lot of things in the palace, in kabul, and across the country in what he says. often those remark, i believe

are intended to draw the distinct between him as the leader of afghanistan and those who have supported him in the international community for some time so he does appear to the sovereign independent leader of a country that is trying to move into a developing society. sometimes that rhetoric is harsh. we don't have to agree with it. we don't have to condone it. we don't have to like it. on those occasions where i've publicly been confronted in testimony primarily with some of his rhetoric, i in fact reject it. i reject comments which would put our troops at risk, that put his troops at risk. if, in fact, the president does believe that the u.s. is co-lewding with the tall back, i'm here to tell you i would know and we ain't. [laughter]

>> you can watch the entire event with general allen at 4:20 a.m. eastern here on c-span. r any time online at c-spanvideo.org. last week former c.i.a. general david petraeus gave his first public speech since stepping down. he also talked about caring for wounded service member, honoring from the university of southern california, this is 25 minutes. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you, good evening to you all. thanks for that welcome and

thanks for your kind introduction. thanks for your visionary, energetic, and inspirational leadership of this great institution. a true national asset and thanks to you and your team for your wonderful efforts to demonstrate such sincere appreciation and impressive support for those who have served our country in uniform. we're all grateful to you for that. [applause] i am very pleased to be here tonight with trojan nation and i think it is a nation, not just family. usc stands out as a leader in the effort to support our country's families, veterans, active duty and to support those who currently serve our nation in uniform and will serve in the future as well. in the past day and a half i

have been able to get acquainted with a number of your programs. speaking of that, where those intrepid rotc members who dewent with me this morning? [applause] it was a privilege to run with them. they and i are still standing. despite experiencing the stairs in the coliseum. i never knew how many there were. we did four sets. i look forward to spending time with all the cadets tomorrow. in any event, from europe -- from your impressive rotc program to your world-class military social work initiatives, and your recent serving those who served endeavour to your office of veterans affairs and student

veterans of america chapter, programs are truly exemplary and i know that all here appreciate that deeply. well done on that as well. again it truly is a privilege to be here with you this evening. all the more so given my personal journey over the past five months. i join you keenly aware that i am regarded in a different light now that i was a year ago when president -- the president invited me to speak at this event. i am keenly aware that the reason for my recent journey was my own doing. so please allow me to begin my remarks this evening by reiterating how deeply i regret and apologize for the circumstances that led to my resignation from the cia and caused such pain for my family, friends, and supporters.

but tonight is not about me. it is about your veterans, your active-duty military, and your honor -- rotc cadets and the efforts to support and recognize them and their families, particularly those who have sacrificed so much in the difficult campaigns of the past decade. as one who was truly privileged to serve with many in this room in cold war europe, haiti, the balkans, and above all, iraq and afghanistan, as well as various other places in the middle east, i am very grateful for the opportunity to say a few words this evening. but before continuing i should note that a southern california native briefed me before coming out here on the usc-ucla rivalry. [laughter] i used to do intelligence.

it appears that this is as emotional relationship as that between army and navy its football season. in fact, discussion of the usc-ucla rival reminds me of a story i heard this afternoon. apparently there was very nearly trouble at a party downtown attended by some usc students a few weeks ago. the way i heard it, one of the usc students leaned over to the guy and said do you want to hear a joke? ,he guy next to him reply before you tell that joke, you should know something, i am 6 foot 5 inches tall and i weigh 230 pounds and i go to ucla. [laughter] the guy next to me is a bruin too and the next guy is 6 foot 3 and he goes to ucla.

do you still want to tell that joke? >> i guess not, the usc student said. not if i am going to have to explain it three times. [laughter] [applause] well, thanks for laughing. you know what they say in this town. i am only as good as the material they give me. [laughter] of course, that ucla student romld still be swmarting f women's volleyball championship or women's tennis or all those olympic medals in london. [applause]

those bruins are so sensitive. let me turn the focus to our veterans. thatuld begin by noting the post-9/11 generation of better rations -- a veterans have become the greatest generation. the members of the post-9/11 cold war have responded with valor, purpose, a skill, and courage to the defining conflicts of their day. they have learned their place in along a line of patriot soldiers on whom our country has always depended. we should also note that america has never had a group of men and women who on average have served so long in combat or have spent so many tourists down range.

this is of course the result of our country. the shift from the drafting forces that fought our past wars to the professional force that has prosecuted our post-vietnam and in particular, our link the post-9/11 engagements. that is a policy with which i strongly agree, but one that obviously means that the burdens of military service are borne disproportionately by those who volunteer. well over 2 million servicemen and women have served in iraq and afghanistan and other places in the post-9/11 era. many have left the military. hundreds of thousands more will take on the uniform in the years ahead. in view of that, the focus of my remarks this evening is these young veterans who have done so much for our country. in particular, i want to offer my view that while our country continues to improve its support

for and recognition of these and all our veterans and their families, we can and must do more particularly in certain respects. it is in fact appropriate at an event such as this to ask what our nation owes our veterans. what are our obligations to those who have risked everything in the service of our united states? i believe that our responsibilities are four fold. we must look after the families of our fallen heroes. we must take care of our wounded servicemen and women. we must help our veterans transition successfully to the civilian sector and we must recognize and honor our veterans service. first it goes without saying -- [applause] it goes without saying first that we must do all that is

humanly possible to look after our gold star families. our fallen, our fallen in the words of abraham lincoln, gave the last full measure of devotion in the service of our country and we must see to the needs of the loved ones they have left behind. second, our nation has to take care of those who returned for more with once, seen and unseen. war changes everyone who has experienced it first hand. in some cases, the changes are positive. many returned home with greater resilience, a former sense of purpose, and a keener awareness of the blessings of life. others, however, come home scarred and would it. -- and wounded. this group includes those with physical scars and wounds. and to the brain. it includes those with the

unseen wounds, post-traumatic stress and other mental challenges that can lead some of our veterans into a spiral of hopelessness that contributes to a suicide rate that remains far too high. regardless of the injury we must provide the assistance that is needed by those who have been wounded waging our country's wars. third, i believe our country must help our veterans transition successfully to the civilian world. doing so will help enable those who have served to continue to be all they can be in the next chapter of their life's journey. such efforts will not only strengthen our veterans, there will also strengthen our country. some veterans make the transition relatively seamlessly. they begin applying their skills straightaway. in school and other forms of government service or in the private sector. however other struggle with the

transition. we see this most starkly in the post-9/11 veterans unemployment rate which is typically several percentage points above the national average. we also see the transition challenges in some veterans who enter school or find new employment but still have difficulty developing new skills relating to new peers, or finding the meaning in their new pursuits of the experienced while in uniform. let me elaborate. there is often a view that because an individual was a great soldier, he or she will naturally do well in the civilian world. military experiences are seen as so exceptional as they assuredly will carry veterans on to further success. in reality, the transition from military service to civilian pursuits often is quite challenging. as many here now, hanging up the uniform and living ones comrades

are very difficult. and neither going back to school or entering the civilian workforce is as easy as it might seem. in light of this reality, we need to ensure that the right transition programs are in place, whether they are the improved military transition assistance program now being offered at the conclusion of active duty service or other initiatives such as the college refresher course. better job skill training, transition measuring, or more in-depth assistance programs for veterans struggling with persistent unemployment or even homelessness. it is not enough just to have all these programs. we must also work hard to connect our veterans to them. there are two reasons why it is important to help veterans realize their goals and -- in civilian life. first, helping those who have given so much is simply the right thing to do.

second, it makes good business sense. veterans to bring distinct capabilities and valuable leadership experiences that often are exactly what businesses are seeking in today's marketplace. i might add that i recently agreed to support several non- profit organizations. the mission continues, american corporate partners, a team rubicon, and team red, white, and blue and i would likely will assist others as well. i am doing so because of the importance of programs that help our veterans identify and then make the most of the opportunities available to them. in fact, their representatives from these organizations and other veterans out its here this -- outfits here this evening and i would like to ask all of them to stand up and be recognized so we can thank them for what they're doing. [applause]

while i am at it i should also note to that there are three representatives of the gray u.s. -- great u.s. military academy class of 1974 this evening as well. they are small but wonderful bunch of guys. we clearly should recognize them also or will never hear the end of it from my west point classmate. please stand up. good to see that you are still sober. [applause] as i mentioned, there is one additional commitment our country has that needs to continue to recognize their service and their sacrifice. this is important not just for our veterans but for our country. much has been made of the fact that a very small portion of the population is carrying out this generation's wars.

honoring our veterans service is a small part of a larger effort we must continue to insure that the so-called civil military gap is as small as is possible. this is a moral imperative. of our families and helping our veterans and decision successfully to civilian pursuits and recognizing veterans service, it is fair to ask how we believe our country is doing and helping them. we should recall george washington, at the willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of earlier wars were treated and

appreciated by our nation. i an overall assessment, think it is fair to say that the u.s. has done reasonably well meeting its obligations to those who have fought to help keep us safe. even so, with any endeavor, there is room for improvement. , thethe last decade veterans administration has received significant increases. some 40% in the past four years alone. it has established the post-9/11 g.i. bill, which some of you are using. it not only pays for college, but also for technical and non- degree training and apprenticeships. there are also other initiatives like the new benefits management system and integrated electronic health record that is so important. the president and congress are assuring that va funding to

sustained even in the face of the toughest fiscal realities facing our country. the is hugely important as va works in particular to reduce the time required to see to our newest veterans needs and to process their claims in a timely .anner it is a task that all involved recognized that it is imperative. there has been support for the row grahams overseen -- programs national andother state and local programs are supplemented and suitably by a variety of nonprofit organizations devoted to fighting additional support to our veterans and the families of our fallen and wounded heroes. beyond that, in stark contrast to the shameful way we treated those who returned from vietnam, americans have worked hard to

honor those who have served, even when the policies that are executed have been questioned by some citizens. i remember driving from cambridge, massachusetts to the airport in boston in 2006 after spending time with our son at ,.i.t., where he was in rotc by the way. we saw a larger sign in red, hate the war, love the troops. i said to my wife, 50% ain't bad. they made the right choice if they had to choose between the two. there is no question that we need to do more for the families of our fallen and wounded warriors and loved ones and those who returned unharmed. as i mentioned, the veterans of unemployment rate consistently exceeds the national avege