he doing his live streaming across the world from his phone and how does he do it, and you can chat with him. these follow-up. let me introduce you to our panelists. we have a great group of folks to help you think you -- think through what is happening in social media and how it applies to what you are doing. they can come up and walk pages orome of their they can talk from there. first we have stephanie haberman. she is the social and digital reducer at nbc news. i like her description -- news junkie.eaking she has a website where she has so pleasemation, welcome stephanie. [applause] , a ceo have with us greg

of sawhorse media. he will tell you about that, and he says he is a member of aitter's first name club am and you can check him out. please welcome gregory. [applause] we also have with us today ca rla, who is the director of social media and engagement at new york and chicago, and she is the chair of the new york women's club, and gal about uptown. she gets her e-mail address out because she wants to connect and engage them and you can see that. you can see how social all of these people are in real life

and online. let's start with stephanie and have her talk, but let's welcome carla. hi, everyone. looking for my tap. haberman. stephanie ine."k on the show "datel i spent some time at mashable. in those three seconds i told you i have worked in tv, all digital, a magazine, and i worked at a newspaper at college, so i am running out of media to work with.

absolute main isession inside social media user-generated content, and how we can approach it without people hating up -- paying us for it. it is on my mind because two days ago -- with the capitol hill shooting and all of that, when i was reaching out to be book and trying to see this is a great image you created, you had people calling you a vulture all the time. weird and strange, because in my head if you are taking an image, a video, and sharing it, the intent is to have it shared. out, and, you reach you want to make sure that that assumption is correct. when you are sharing a photo,

would you not want it to be seen as many people as possible? that is what social is. it is bringing the outside world into your world. do not know exactly what we're are supposed to be talking about for these 35 minutes -- some of the things i am obsessed this is a now, -- little obvious and a little stupid, but this is the single most underused page on the social web. ridiculousd the most wealth of information here you can imagine. shtag in thisur ha area. it is the fastest way, the most interesting way to get information in real time on the web. a lot of people do not know that

this advanced search on twitter exists. it is cool. for those who do not know and want to go the easy way, i will be more extensive. this is something i think is one of the coolest things around. i should have signed in earlier. i will explain it to you. you can type in any location on ok, show and be, like, me what is going on here right now. and they will. through twitter pitchers, through instagram, twitter, youtube, anything that is geo- located, you can see it in real time. socialg that kind of mindset to a company or producer that may or may not be tradigital journalism thing, a way of finding the content when

you are not hardwired into the system -- you can request a demo? request a demo. this is what i am talking about and crowdntent social sourcing content. this is the stuff that i found all the the capitol, craziest going on -- craziness going on. definitely somebody making sure it rightou cannot see there, but all of this stuff. people talk about all the time is -- does crowd sourcing make sense? do you need to have goods on the ground reporters? absolutely, but crowd sourcing is a way of getting there before the journalists can even get

there, because -- sorry if i'm babbling -- journalists are not there the second it happens all the time, that someone is always watching. other ways i think are cool right now, nbc did something real cool this week with the congress shut down. they started a random hashtag. let us know how you feel about your congress. it was not a branded hashtag. arcongress. #de it invited people to talk and invited people to have a conversation about something --y are interested in within as of 6:00 p.m. on tuesday, there were 36,000 mentions on

the social web. it was the top on twitter for 24 hours. it absolutely took off. that is a real good case for how tv -- so many people will say it is all going to be digital, but i do not think it yet can be because everyone is watching in different ways. tv is just a really cool spring point for that. pulled this up because the conversation about -- [indiscernible] if you did not know what that social aggregation platform that rings in either ahashtag or twitter account, and elder is doing a cool project. ag, it ever used the hasht

pulls in these gorgeous images that people are pulling in about how people in san francisco are seen around town. the outs -- inng the way of bringing in the outside world in. i apologize i have babbled, but it is 9:00 a.m. good morning. of timell have plenty to ask her questions about the kinds of stuff she is doing. now i will ask great to talk about his work, starting with the shorty award. >> thank queue. -- thank you. [indiscernible] i feel like i might have made a mistake. i got into social media early on.

i created my twitter account, logged in. thought it was the worst thing in the world. logged out, and then it was nine i loggedr i -- before back in. there was no way to know who you should follow based on a topic. he created a website called the shorty awards. we launched it. within 24 hours -- it was the first website where we invited people to tweet out nominations. and our site with full that in, and 24 hours after launching it became [indiscernible] on twitter. we have a moment where people are going to want to come to this thing, so we dropped everything and organized the first ceremony in months. sawas at that ceremony we

before twitter was all that big, it was on a huge growth spurt, but a fraction of the size it is today. we saw journalists were on social media before anybody else. foundation.t we made an amateur mistake and ran out of booze in the pressroom and learned that journalists early on like to drink and they like to tweet. we could not do anything about the first issue. about the second issue, the we developedction, the first site to let you see all the journalists in social media on one place. we started with 150 journalists in 2009, and there is a funny thing where i talk to then, and theyk

would apologize for being on twitter. they said i should be doing a story, but twitter is interesting, it is fun, i am using it, and now, as i am sure probably you here, journalists well apologize for not being on twitter. the few that i have talked about no they want to be and want to get more into it. there has been a complete shift in the medium, and is revolutionary in that it is the first time ever a journalist could write anything without going through an editor without getting fired. muckrak, it shows you what links are tweeted the most by journalists right now. we have a team of editors that have verified over 15,000 journalists, and you can see with each one it not only gives

you a tweet, but the context the our editorial team and title and the publication of the person writing the tweet's, so who is saying it. is it a publication i trust? beat?y cover a relevant mentioned there would be a lot of people from the ap this morning, so you can see from any publication, we have a page that lists out all the journalists from that publication. it ranks them by the followers they have, and we did this as a competitive fear. oftentimes it is the interns who are on top. at the ap, there is an auto racing writer that has the most followers. figure outyou can which stories the ap are being

shared the most by other journalists on twitter right now. what isnew way to see doing the best on social media, other journalists. muckve other tools on rack. we have a bunch of tools you can use, and it takes a few minutes to sign up. apwhat you are showing, stories, what is being discussed by ap stories is different from the leaderboard of all journalists? >> that is a great point. with the rest of muck rack, what journalists are talking about on twitter is different than what the general public is talking about. it is a new way to get insight into what your colleagues are saying. you can also do searches and find other journalists. you can search by name, like we did here for fiona. othern search to see what

journalists are talking about at the new york press or what is happening in congress today or a really niche topic like a given bill. and when you get to the journalist profile, this is something journalists can customize. at the bbc, fiona where she lists herself, what she covers, what she does not cover. these are things people had been pitching her on. previous viewpoint pieces. -- she canlso upload also upload her performative, so some of her top articles, just a couple clicks away to put her best work in one place and display it. finally we have the new tool we launched several months ago called who shared my link?

whosharedmylink.com. you can pull in any link, your work, your competitors'work, and i pulled in the link for the website where we are today, and it has 914 social media shares. presswork to the new york club social media team. you can see that 12 journalists, starting with patricia, who is right up here. it makes for an easy way to -- it makes for an easy way to see what your colleagues have said about your link and how much is your linking shared. with that i should return to buy coffee over my comfortable

little seat over there. so thank you. [applause] carow we are going to have la from dna info. school, going very old- and have my notes on a cocktail napkin here. i want to prove to you that i still use pens and paper. my name is carla, and i am the director of social engagement at dna info. we are a hyper local news site here and in new york and chicago, and hopefully beyond in the coming months and years. and we do is really create tap into communities in urban settings. what that means is for our

journalists is basically figuring out once they are on the ground in the neighborhoods we cover, which is all of the neighborhoods in new york and chicago, proper, and really they a relationship that have developed on the ground and take those into the virtual world. the way they do that is to some like obviously twitter, facebook, instagram, all sorts of social media platforms that i am sure you have heard about quite a bit. what we are trying to do is take social media beyond just a broadcasting platform. one of the beauties of social media is it is a two-way conversation, and i think some of the errors of traditional journalists on social media in the beginning was basically feed,it as an rss replicating what they were putting on in print and on their

website, and just pushing out all of that content. duali said, there is this conversation that is coming on social meeting, and that is something that is new. in the past, for me, and i have only been a journalist for a little bit more than a decade, it used to be that maybe i would be lucky and received a letter to the editor about one of my stories. i had my fingers crossed that somebody had read the stories that i reported on, and whether that was good or bad feedback, i was excited. i still have a file of those letters. today, we have social media, and there is instant communication when a story is published. feedback -- what did we miss, what did we get right, what do we need to do next? the story is never static, right? we are constantly growing. to give you a bit of an idea of na info, we at d are digital only.

newslettersdaily each day of the week, except for weekends, and in that newsletter and receive information about everything that has gone on in your neighborhood, broader city stories, and information about the reporter in your neighborhood. them, how to send them to us. you can use the old social media platform, which would be e-mail, and respond and let us know if there's something going on. what we're doing right, what we are doing wrong. and i think a point that was me --whenase correct we take the step into social media as journalists, we are looking not just at what our competitors or friends are tweeting about. it is about really being into that community and finding out what the people, what the

general public, and what the very niche public are talking about. way to do that, i basically have worked with our editorial team to teach them how to follow has digging deepter, whatthe neighborhoods and they are discussing. some of the ways we do that is going into facebook groups. a huge piece for us in new york and chicago. reddit is a thriving community. are forums. i will actually bring that up. reddit has here that topics throughout the world come and you can really drill down

and learn about what people are talking about in new york city. you could also scroll down even further and look to see what people are talking about in my neighborhood in northern manhattan. let's see. so here is a person that is writing about having been homeless once and living in a cave near the cloisters in upper manhattan. this, and i can tell you if we were still covering that neighborhood, i would be trying hard to find this person. i have had numerous tips on stories this kind of way or people reaching out to me and speaking to me on twitter, facebook, what have you. one of the things i have talked to our journalists about is utilizing these tolls, but

utilizing them now come a growing your community, growing your presence, getting people to know who you are now before you need to store it. , are is a pet peeve of mine bad practice that a lot of us have gotten into, which is i have to write about a story. i will go crowd source through a bunch of people i do not know, who have no idea who i am. hopefully you have done the work beforehand so you had built a trust and you are having an authentic connection with folks. that kind of fulcher conversation -- i think -- vulture conversation -- i think difficult, and it is about relationship building. i was saying before that we are all about doping community, whether that is with the people who live in a neighborhood, the businesses in a neighborhood.

blocks ofthe building community, and there is no difference between relationship building on the ground and in the virtual world. another thing that we try to do is have our reporters tweet instagram,, post on whatever it is that your community is utilizing to communicate with, get on there. reporter, its started out that folks were on twitter and facebook, and then a lot of people moved over to instagram. thishad not been tracking and watching the communication that was happening, i would have lost out on a lot of stories. it is about not necessarily building a platform and finding the trendiest thing to use, but figuring out where people are talking, and having that kind of authentic conversation with them. -- i could go on

and on with a list of niche sites. there are really interesting conversations going on, and i some have given us the opportunity to patch into a community that we have never been able to speak into, try merrily younger folks, and towardk tends to skew older folks. that is where we try to find a community board meeting or a kid city council meeting, but it is interesting to learn more from the younger crowd on these trendier sites. that is why it is so important to be conscious of them and trying to learn what everybody is using. i think that is about it. >> can you talk about how you train people to do this, because not everybody comes with this -- built in?

constant training. our editors are trained to know the inns and outs of all these different platforms, and you wheny on a daily level, going over pitches and discussing what a story is going to look like you're out the day, really the editor's job is to say this would really go very well, it would be great if we told the story using feed back from facebook or instagram or something like that, really packaging the story that way. we do training. there's nothing that can replace one on one training. we have folks come in once a month, once every six weeks, and we take a specific platform and discuss with the rest strategy is for all of that.

i can tell you in the next few weeks i want to have our journalists come in and talk to them about google plus, which i go to these conferences all the thatand google plus is pink elephant nobody wants to talk about. i will tell you, if you are ignoring google plus right now, i think you are going to be sorry in the coming 12 months, 24 months and 47 saying that for a walk, but i see it really growing, especially if you have any involvement on the business side of your site. a very important piece in your entire social media strategy, not only to tap into communities, to make sure you get eyeballs on your site. >> thank you. [applause] let's get some questions from you folks. the mike? thanks.

good morning. i heard you talking about hashtags. justinallon and timberlake have spoofed hash tags. what is in this use? what is the proper use of a hashtag, and why do we use it? hashtags are an interesting beast. i try to avoid their use as much as possible. i know that sounds crazy. and a lot of the times when you are searching on twitter, if you search dateline or #dateline, you get different answers. nbc.k on dateline

while on the air i will use our hashtag so people can find ourselves. they are good for discovery, but when you are hashtagging the word friday, it is useless. it should be about something that is not happening all the time, and bringing the conversation into one place, for instance, a egg breaking news -- a big breaking news story, like a tv show, hashtags are big in social tv. those are the biggest cases for hashtags. threegif, it is gone in seconds and gets lost in the car. >> a good example is right now

where we could all tweet about this and find each other's tw eets. the new york rescue, and they invented a hashtag around this. yeah. #nypc2013. it goes on the board. good way to centralize communication. on a technical note, it is a fascinating progression where twitter started without #'s. arguably invented and popularized -- they would just tweet out and twitter finally adopted it. if you do tweet a #it becomes a

link and if people click on it, it gives you search results for that. there is this very functional component where if you are tweeting about something, then you are providing your followers with an easy way to find out more about it. think the other panelists have said a lot of what i would have said. i will add that i loved that video and thought it was hysterical. i do think there is an overuse. as a journalist, i am forgetting his name. dan victor. if everyone could tweet at him now. >> he is very anti-#. he wrote an entire he's about to them. #'s, i were it not for

think the reporters i work with would never have been able to get or tap into a stream of the community i am talking about. it.ress a judicious use of an occasional funny tweet is fine. --n i see someone who has likes to talk about making your tweets blue which means when you have a #or a url, it hyperlinks. you have one black character and everything else is blue, it is pointless. .udicious use >> something to bring up quickly, was anyone on twitter last night at all? the #game notice going on? hashtag game going on? every person in my time i was

using the same one last night. it is an example of how even if it is silly and a joe, sometimes they can bring people together around an event that you would not have otherwise. >> i am in the process of covering the west bronx. i have found there is very limited social media use in the west bronx. is it not useful in that case? not assuming it is digitally for us. >> that is an interesting question, but i would challenge

it. ago when i was covering northern manhattan, the way that i moved into all of this is i had a blog about upper manhattan and a lots of people said to me, no one is going to read that. the majority of people living in washington heights speak spanish and i was tweeting in english. things like that. what i found was, growing that relationship from the ground, the brick and mortar kind of relationship and bringing it online, it seized a little bit of a presence. something i suggest to reporters is that when they cover a community board meeting, or what ever kind of meeting that they are covering, asking sources where they are active online. it's and maybe that you do not have critical mass yet, but i'm going to guess there is something there.

it may be that folks are on instagram. in washington heights, instagram is a nor ms. whereas nobody is on a spoke. it's a matter of using your reporting tools and finding where folks are communicating. >> would you advise reporters to start a facebook group? >> sure. there is no reason not to do that. and you might want to promote it on your own page. i keep going back to the community boards because those are the folks that are most cynically minded. ask them if they want to join us. pick 10 people. get their e-mail addresses. ask them what e-mail address they used to set up their facebook and send it out and see if you can spark conversation. i think having that conversation now before you need to ask them a question about a breaking news

story or a story you are working on is going to yield greater results. >> by the way. the daniel victor date mentioned , he says that republican leaders are promoting a #so it should all be over pretty soon. >> everyone tweeted him. he is the social media staff editor at the new york times. >> i am with the staten island advance. i notice when you spoke about the woman who drove her car to the white house and was shot, there was a tweet that said active shooter still on site. i am indoors now. obviously, the only thing that turned out to be accurate was the i'm indoors part. how do you cut through the noise considering how much the national media has done so wrong in the meaty -- in the immediate

hours? >> something that is important to remember is that breaking news has not changed. it is just public now. always messy.is it is always going to be messy. even the term breaking news is overused now. to -- the only way to cut through the clutter is to know who to trust and understand that someone that is in that situation, that has just hurt 13 gunshots and they are sheltering at a place inside of the building i might not know if the shooter is still active. they are just assuming. you cannot automatically jump to the conclusion that they are correct. just because something is on social does not mean that it is true, obviously. you still need to go through the same channels. go to the proper authorities.

journalist, don't code to another journalist. go to the authorities. go to the police. figure out what is going on for yourself. not have that capability, know who to trust. you have to be fast, but you need to be right. it is a lot more important than that. clutter inlots of the social space recently when it comes to breaking news the kids everyone has a twitter account. thosea verification of tweets. , i guess,ave to know you have to know who to trust. >> thank you. >> i am a columbia journalism students. i am just running from the social media side of things --

wondering from the social media side of things, do things social media is disrupting the business ? or how do see it playing into the future? >> the business of journalism. even prior to social media, we all know the business of journalism has been disrupted in a really big way. i think social media obviously cuts both ways. i guess we will see at the big keynote there today. it iss exciting about they are primarily based around writing. both of those are skills that journalists have always had.

something that journalists have been doing for a while. for journalism, it is a big opportunity. there is a distinction between the journalists and the media company. they've got really big challenges because distribution works completely different. you do not necessarily wake up in the morning and type in the url of the new site. you see what stories come to you . if media companies have done a good job of getting in those feeds. but then for a lot of journalists, if you become very credible, through hard work and have many people following you, you can go anywhere and still have your followers and audience .

that is a lot now of what journalists get hired for. whereas it used to be the disposable.was more if they are fired and someone takes over their beat, you see the same column where it was. for journalists, getting on it, it'll be a good thing to have these channels that you can control personally and have a relationship with your readers. >> can i just add one thing? i completely agree about the focus on the journalist rather than the publication. opportunitiest of . that is pretty fascinating in terms of the publication. a wall street journal or the new york times and how they are treating social media. i was at another nyu conference last month.

some of the folks from there key talking about targeting social media followers and allowing them to break through if the wall street journal or new york times believes that the benefit of influencer,key meaning a person who will share your content and spread that to the most readers as possible, that is a really valuable tool. i am not sure how that is working just now. they are playing with us. i think it has a lots of potential if done correctly. i think rather than social media, in my opinion, instead of the to being a negative disruptor for traditional journalism, i think it could be an amplifier if used correctly. we are in that's in between states where we are not

quite sure where it is going to is a lots of potential in that joint relationship between the traditional and the social media. i may contribute in writer to forbes.com. how you interface with editorials. >> i will start first. my day is actually probably completely different. us ink out of the three of work in the most traditional way you can because i am in a very old organization at 822-year-old tv show. as much as i am talking about breaking news because that is my pet project, i work at a longform news show.

the first thing i do is check twitter and facebook. i check it for people who are contacting us directly. it is a news magazine that is very focused on justice. to helpe plead with us them find justice all the time. i will sort through these messages every morning. this is a story i think we can tell. let's figure out how to get it to our producer. we find a surprising number of our stories. it may not make it to air but we start pursuing them because of social media. it has become really valuable. we then have a meeting with stories every day. i work this one of the

organizations where not everyone is socially forward but they are getting there. we have a twitter account we use during the show that was developed because most of our producers and senior producers, they might not to be on twitter just because they are not comfortable with that yet. a lot of them go to me all the time. i am behind the camera for a reason. it's a slow and steady but it is a way for them to log onto twitter and join the conversation. there it is. that is who was our dateline producer last night. theyitch it every day so can talk about their account, their show, and they can interact with people despite the fact that they might not be a digital native. each week we change the person. >> at -- an interesting way of getting everyone involved. >> part of it is just for the conversation even if they are a little ahead of it.

10,east four times out of they will go, that was really fun. can you help me set up a twitter account and they will say, that was a good taste. i like how people responded to questions. let's do this. it is a way of inspiring them and training them in a real- world situation. it is a lots of training. shows i work on, we come up with them and we start reaching out. from inception to broadcast, it can be anything from a day if it is a breaking news situation to we just aired a report that we are following a family for six is a testament to the fact that we are such a long running news show that we can afford to do this kind of investigative stuff. there is a lot of long-term planning and figuring out how we

can be now and in the minute. a lot of times our show isn't. >> for me, i make a cup of coffee in the morning. that is the only consistent thing i do every day. you're pulled into something different every single day. often times, my day is dictated .y what comes up a lot of times thinking about what problem's people are facing and what products could we build to address it. the one thing that i learned is thatth social media things change every day.

if you have seen their platforms that have come up just over the , just thinking about what it means for these platforms that are over five years old like twitter and facebook, that they are being used in different ways than they were today through different features. but also knowing that a lot of what we are doing today will also be relevant in a year or two. what insights can we get to think about what kind of new products can we get for tomorrow. and then i usually have a second cup of coffee. >> the second thing for me is my husband makes my coffee.

i only recently switched into this role. my role is much more like yours it is definitely keeping up with what new tools are appropriate for us to be using and figuring out. what each department needs to be on top of. event,ying that kind of for me, i worke with editorial probably the most eache morning and speak to of the social media key folks there. make sure that we have stories that are most important getting out in different ways.

constantly on twitter, ourbook, instagram, interest account. looking at the google alerts i have set up as well to make sure we're not missing anything there . seeing what is trending and making sure that editorial knows that. i think our social media editors are taking on that role in a but there is ay constant evolving piece. another piece i wanted to bring , i think a lot of social media is a blend of the business side as well as strict editorial. tried as much as possible to protect that line for myself when i was social media editor and also for our social media editors. but there is a marketing mindset when you are

putting all of this together. i would be remiss to not bring that up because ultimately you are trying to get the most eyeballs on your story as possible. about that.be smart it goes back to building those authentic relationships and being honest. gone are the days where people were doing all sorts of shady things, buying things on facebook. you can definitely have a huge amount of followers and have no quality there. i try to make sure now that i am more on the business side, making sure that we keep up that integrity in teaching both our marketing department and our editorial department to make sure we keep that quality there. it is very easy to slip into something not so great. i am a student of journalism

at the university of connecticut. as a student, we have this to not have face-to- face conversations and their teachers are yelling at us, pick up the phone. stopped e-mailing. possible, you have talked about the quality of social media, using it correctly. is it possible there is too much of it? i have this image of reporters getting in the car and they are tweaking and instagraming and they miss a fire because they are just so involved with their phone. is there too much? how do you get past that? >> i think the answer to that is there is absolutely too much. you have to be careful. i think your question drives up the problem that a lot of folks have, trying to keep up. a lot of people carry around to cell phones.

it is just really hard. the amount of material is just mounting. years. took 3.5 now on youtube there are 100 hours of video uploaded every minute which means it is the safest place to put your top- secret video. no one will see it. a really cute cat. >> i would suggest as we wind up here, it is time for us to be thinking about how do we connect . we're doing it on social. with all the other stuff we need to do. looking up and looking around will be very important for us as we are doing things. i want to give you a couple of quick things you might want to note. excellent way to see all the tweets you want in one place. last hour wein the had 376 tweets were as yesterday we had 496.

by the end of today, i imagine we will have 500, 600. you can look historically at all of them associate it with something. here are things that people are posting from our session. think about this tool if you haven't used this already. going to tool i was mention, many people use this already. if you are trying to get a sense of social and you're not comfortable with that, the 12 that i used first thing in the morning for getting information is flip board. it works on an iphone or android. what yourt a sense of community is sharing. you can see it in a very visual way. any flip board users here, there are other tools like that as well. i would like to thank our wonderful speakers. [applause]

thank you very much, everybody. see you soon. >> it is 10:20. i am so sorry about that. i should've been looking at my watch. should we do a couple more questions and then give you a break? come on up here it -- come on up. i am thinking that i'm a former journalism professor.

what do you guys suggest should be taught in the higher education journalism curriculum? you have to learn how to do that. i was a first digital journalism professor. i had a lot of people say, what is the point? we got past that. how do we take the education part. do we lead this digital journalism? or does it follow? and who doesn't follow? at the bio here. it very clear about what he does. has his phone number. not just his e-mail address. >> i think journalism school is incredibly important. i think the one thing it always teaches you and it taught me is how to talk to people and how to tell stories.

how to tell the stories may change and sometimes it does not change quickly enough. school, ireland for a semester how to learn final cut. that is useful when you get into video and you realize everyone is on avid. it is a completely different world. a lot of it is real world education. when i was in school, i was only i think theears ago single most important thing is to get involved and do as much as you can in the real world, as often as you can. ineally think, send them out the real world, let them go on the scene, personally. >> i was a philosophy major.

i would see it firsthand. we hired some columbia journalism school grads. something that she was saying is really powerful, i think you can never understate how important it is to know how to write and how rare of a skill that is, sadly, today. it's really shows through. webid is coming into social and we will only see that accelerate now that we have smart phones that can handle to have that level of bandwidth and knowing how to use all forms of media and create in all forms of media. >> i definitely agree about the writing part. columbia and wanted to

and longform journalists now write 120 character set a time. i've never regretted the training. i would say the biggest tool for learning howid, is to really communicate, crowd source, have that ongoing relationship. pet peeve of mine, i see the incoming classes. i see them pop up and ask questions for a story i'm convinced is due that night. time.it all the i am sometimes tempted to call the professors and to say, you are not teaching this correctly. the other thing is verification. to what we're talking about earlier. , knowinghat to trust

how to check out a trail of someone's tweets in the past. they set up the account today? look at the timestamp on a photo . geo-tagging is huge now with the new iphones and phones that are out there. you can get a lot of data to see what somebody really at this and altered was in photoshop. learning those tools will be huge. the medium might be different but the core of verification is what journalists will have been teaching for years. >> if you will share some folks to follow based on someone who .oes good journalistic work

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> you can see the rest of this at c-span.org. the house is coming in for a senate debate. this one would temporarily fund programs. remaining. and the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran, has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. the chair recognizes the gentleman from idaho. mr. simpson: mr. speaker, it's my pleasure to yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, a valid member of our subcommittee, and an advocate for indian issues, the gentleman, mr. calvert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. calvert: i thank the gentleman. mr. speaker, let's be clear. everyone in this body wants to end this government shutdown. we're all aware of the significant impacts the shutdown is having around the country. and i'm pleased that today that

both sides have finally come to the table and hopefully will reach a compromised agreement here in the next day or so. but today we're here to consider a solution that aims to ease the urgent and substantial impacts to indian country. house joint resolution 80, the american indian, alaska native health, education and safety act, provides immediate funding for the bureau of indian affairs, bureau of indian section and indian health services. member of the house appropriations, interior, environment subcommittee, i'm well aware that the indian country was already experiencing significant challenges before the shutdown. at the adjusted reduced funding levels. now with the government shutdown, native american tribes across the nation are facing even more uncertainty. these tribes are now being confronted with different

decisions about which services they can continue to provide without government resources. just a few examples. tribal programs for health care, for the elderly and disabled, bus service for rural areas and infrastructure projects that were suspended indefinitely. i believe we must take action, reopen these critical government operations throughout indian country. i'm thankful that my colleagues on the appropriations committee, house republican leadership share my belief. specifically, i want to thank my good friend from idaho, mike simpson, for bringing this bill to the floor and his terrific leadership as chairman of the house appropriations, interior, environment subcommittee. i ask my colleagues to support this important bill on behalf of all americans in indian country. let's pass this bill and reach an agreement to get our entire government back to work for the american people. and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. moran: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to yield three minutes at this time to the ranking member of the natural resources committee, peter defazio from oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes. mr. defazio: i thank the gentleman. you know, this irresponsible, unnecessary, politically motivated government shutdown is unacceptable for all americans, but it's particularly offensive to those in indian country. the government's trust obligation to the tribes is not a discrigsary act. it's a if i -- discretionary act. it's a fiduciary pocket. -- responsibility. it is more than insulting. it's another example here of tabloid legislating, ripping issues from the headlines and trying to legislate based on negative public reaction to just

some part of the republican government shutdown. t's kind of like a game of whack a mole where an issue pop up, the far right continues to -- pretends to care and say, gee, we didn't know this would happen if we shut down the government, and then they cover their posteriors. where was this concern for the tribes when squegs ration kicked in? what about poverty faced by native americans every day? where has the compassion been to address the high rights of unemployment, educational challenges, accesses to resources tribal people face every day? challenges that have only been made worse by the republican sequester? this is so cynical. not only does the temporary measure for tribes inadequately fund few programs it identifies, picks and chooses, it does not cover the office of special

trustee? we have not done so well as trustees of the money of the indian nation's recently. we need the office of special trustee. oops. closed. what about the bureau of reclamation office for, now, disbursing settlements for indian water rights? closed. how about the native american low-income home energy assistance? closed. tribal nutrition programs? closed. even if this bill passed and became law, those would all still be closed. i guess, you know, their compassion only goes so far. there are many other things missing from this bill. i could go on and on. already sequestration has disproportionately impacted indian country. we don't need to rub salt in the wound with this continuing resolution that provides only 1/3 of the funding for these nations. the irresponsible tactics need to cease. we need to open up our government to the first americans and all americans. it's simple. we offered unanimous consent

requests last saturday when the republicans adjourned in a huff and went off for a couple of days while the government was shut down. any one of those exceeded to could have brought a vote on a six-week continuation of government at the republican levels of funding, with sequestration. that's a concession on the part of democrats. it's your budget. those lower numbers. the ryan budget. you could have done that. you wouldn't do it. you changed the rules of the house so we couldn't bring it up as a privileged resolution, and then you pretend to care. come on, guys. you can do better than that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. simpson: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. does the gentleman have any more speakers? ok. mr. speaker, i'll yield myself such time as i may require. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. moran: so here we are, mr. speaker, we're 14 days into the

government shutdown, a shutdown that has cost this country money, has created enormous anxiety on the part of the federal work force, the contract work force, the entire country. in fact, there was a meeting of ll of the leaders of the world over in asia, and we weren't there because of the government shutdown. -- tookese took vein of -- was there. they said we need de-americanize. we can't even fund our own government. we can't even decide whether or not we're going to pay off our

debts on time. and all of this apparently, we're told, mr. speaker, was an idea that came from the ted cruz tea party wing of the republican majority to shut down the government until they could have their way on what they called obamacare even though president obama ran on the affordable care act, which is its proper name, was elected with five million votes. still, they wanted to stop it, to gut it, gut its principle provations. so here we are 14 days into a government shutdown which really is an embarrassment to the entire institution, but it certainly should be to the house majority. and it's ironic with this particular bill because there e 579,000 uninsured american indians and alaskan natives, and

they would get coverage under the affordable care act. nine out of 10 of them are likely to qualify for financial assistance either through tax credits or by purchasing coverage in the marketplace, would get cost sharing reductions, eliminate their out-of-pocket costs or through an expansion of medicaid if their state chooses to do that. so the vast majority of them undoubtedly hundreds of thousands would be better off if we were not only to not have shut down the government but certainly by our having available to them the affordable care act. how ironic that here we are with a mini bill suggesting that we will fund a small share of the interior department to take

care of american indians and alaskan natives. well, obviously we should be taking care of native americans. it should be our highest priority, and i know it has been for the chairman of the interior and environment appropriations subcommittee, my good friend from idaho, and our colleagues on that subcommittee, mr. calvert, mr. cole, a number of them. we've all agreed it ought to be a priority. but we also have a bill that needs to get passed. we have other agencies that need to be funded. if we were to continue in this manner, we would get the interior department funded by halloween. that's not the way to do business. in fact, this bill doesn't fund native american education programs and the department of education. doesn't fund the law enforcement programs at the department of justice that carry out the

violence against women act which was a key component, thanks to mr. cole, the violence against women act that we passed makes sure that native american women are protected. doesn't fund native american social services at the department of health and human services. they don't get the childcare and temporary assistance for needy families that they otherwise would have gotten. it doesn't fund the department of house. and over 14u7bd,000 h.u.d. employees are furloughed. it doesn't fund the training programs at the department of labor, native american environmental programs at the environmental protection agency. it doesn't office the office of secretary of indian affairs which oversees the bureau of indian affairs. it doesn't fund those that administer $3.7 million in tribal funds and more than $700 million in individual indian accounts. doesn't fund the office of navajo and hopi relocation.

settlement activities that is between the navajo and hopi tribes. doesn't fund the institute of american indian arts or the native american water rights settlement activities. doesn't do what we need to do which is to fund the interior appropriations bill. so i have to ask the majority, since this bill only funds three 7% cies, which represents . of the discretionary budget, what will we do with the 99% of the discretionary budget? what about our other federal obligations to native americans? what about their housing and their childcare services and their legal protections? this bill doesn't care of that. still leaves 50,000 interior department employees still

furloughed. even if this bill was to be enacted, which we all know it won't until the government opens. no money for the bureau of ocean energy management, for new offshore oil drilling permits. there's no money for the bureau of land management that processes lease sales and permits, to offer onshore oil and gas. they award the timber sales. no money for any of that. no money for the fish and wildlife service. so they can manage visitors to our national refuges. no money for hunting or fishing permits. what about the forest service? mr. speaker, i'd like to say this was well intended, but i know that it's an attempt to band-aid to hide the government shutdown. we need to open it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. simpson: has the gentleman from virginia's time expired?

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. simpson: 521 years ago an explorer named christopher columbus sailed west from europe in an attempt to find the west independenties. he landed in the bahamas. and he named the local inhabitants indians. and i note the irony that today has been designated columbus day. and here we are debating a bill to reopen key parts of the government so that the united states can honor the treaty obligations our forefathers made to the american indians, the first americans. the bill before us today is a good thing because it gives us n . this is a long complicated and difficult history between the united states government and more than 500 other sovereign nations that were here long before we were here. while we recognize and honor columbus, let us recognize and honor the first americans for

their proud history and the sacrifices they made and continue to make for this great nation. that's why i would encourage everybody to vote for this bill. frankly, i hope this bill isn't necessary. i hope we can find a resolution to the differences that exist between republicans and democrats and reopen all of the government as mr. moran just stated. i agree with him. we need to get the government open again and address the issue of the debt ceiling. it is heartening to know that leadership in the senate and hopefully the house and the white house is having some quality time together, that maybe we can come to a resolution before more dire things happen and get this government open, but i don't know that that's going to happen. in the absence of not knowing that is going to happen, wouldn't it be wise to have some of these bills that fund key elements of our government ready to go in the senate so we can

open some areas that i think have bipartisan agreement that need to be funded and need to continue. i said in my opening statement saturday that indian issues have been bipartisan on our committee. they have been supported by both republicans and democrats, whether it was under mr. discs' leadership or mr. moran or my leadership. a bipartisan issue to try and meet our treaty responsibilities we have to the first americans, american indians. i want people in indian country to know that regardless of the vote on this resolution whether people vote for it or against ship will partisan

continue to address these critical needs in our nation and treaties and moral obligations. i encourage my colleagues to support this resolution and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 371, the previous question is ordered. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the joint resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it, third reading. the clerk: making continuing appropriations for the bureau of indian affairs bureau of indian education for fiscal year 2014 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 1-c, further consideration of house joint resolution 80 is postponed. the house will stand in recess

atthe house will be back in 6:30 eastern. that's will be followed by speeches. of course, meetings and negotiations continue on the government shutdown and raising the debt ceiling. nancyminority leader shouldtweets -- no man have the power to block a majority of the house from ending the shutdown and averting default. -- never in our countries history have we exceeded our borrowing limit and been unable to pay our creditors and debtors. cardin, i look forward to sitting down with my colleagues to negotiate a balanced plan that first open the government and pay our bills. >> we want to know how the

government shutdown is affecting you. >> make your short video message about the shutdown. tout.com/cspan. toutingt others are about. atwe are here at the house stanford university. it was the primary resident of the hoovers. she was the one who designed it. she had such a strong grasp of design and how she wanted the house to look even though she was not an architect. we are lucky to have a lot of the original designs and correspondence. the influence surely came from her travel in the southwest of the united states. also from her travels in north africa when she traveled with herbert hoover. andas inspired by her ideas

she had a very close involvement in all aspects of the houses creation. tonight.the first lady also on c-span radio and c- span.org. councilational iranian held a discussion earlier today on iran's nuclear program between the u.s. and other world powers. we will show you what we can he for the gap -- he for the house gavels back in -- before the house gavels back in at 6:30. morning, everyone. welcome to the second day of the leadership conference. we are elected to have you all here. i'm impressed that all the iranians were here on time.

there has been significant improvement in the political culture of the iranian -american community in the last couple of years. we are delighted to have here some of the most watchful and knowledgeable people with in- depth analysis of the situation. havect, i would say we done plenty of conferences and panels on this very issue. never before has there been a panel that has been timed in such a way that we could say the atmosphere has been as optimistic as it seems to be right now, for good or perhaps not unwarranted reasons. today we will be joined, first to my far right, a former undersecretary of the united nations and has spent a tremendous amount of time dealing not only with the diplomacy but specifically with iran. he is one of the individuals, probably the individual in this

had morehat has successful negotiations with the iranian government since the 1980's whether it is from the time of mediating the end of the iraqi war, to releasing hostages in lebanon. and isow the president based in new york. to my immediate right, we have the professor who is the executive director for the center of strategic and diplomatic studies at the university of south florida. have paid any attention to u.s.-iran relations analysis,s excellent the latest being published by foreign affairs. he has probably interviewed everyone that members -- that matters. phone, due to one thel complication, we have former deputy assistant secretary at georgetown

university. people in this town know that he has one of the loudest and most respected voices in washington. in the obama administration up until one year or a year and a half ago. job, butk at his old continues to be very active and published several publications on this topic. are you here with us? here, thank you. i am the ghost from beyond. >> if i were to start, put it like this. never before has there been so much optimism. the flipside is this may also be the last best chance to get something resolved. last best chance to resolve this nuclear issue?

>> do want me to say? >> yes. >> good morning to all of you. i want to thank you for inviting me. i express my appreciation for what you and your organization have been doing. thank you for a wonderful job you have done and keep up the great work. the former secretary of defense once said you go to war with the army that you had a monopoly the army that you want to have. you negotiate with the government that you have. if not with the government that you would like to have. with a, today, i can say great deal of confidence that the administration is the best possible government that the islamic republic of iran can produce. if the u.s. government cannot deal with this kind of government, i am afraid you cannot deal with any kind of as theent as long

current leadership is in power. i am cautiously optimistic, but i also understand that there are incredible obstacles both for president obama insists -- in this country and in iran. ofhas had 33 years animosity, hostility between iran and the united states. in fact, the countries have been in a secret war against one another. one cannot expect that relationship to be improved quickly. we should understand that it will take a long time. the long time to reach level that we can say it has become normal. however, when we think about the relations, we should make a distinction between the nuclear negotiations between iran and the u.s. and

the relationship between iran and the united states. i would argue that we have a better chance of resolving the first issue, that is the nuclear issue, then we have of improving the relationship between the two countries. whoran, there are people include the revolutionary guard. imports and elements of the revolutionary guard. who aree people dialogue -- ideologically against enforcement. there are people who have benefited financially in the past 30 years. country, we have those who are approaching -- we have the congress of the united states. we have the people who still remember the hostage crisis. at the regional level, we have the state of israel who is

morerned, but much important than the state of israel in my judgment is saudi arabia. get back to israel and saudi arabia. but before we go there, giandomenico said this is the best government they can produce. at the same time, you can turn to iran and say the obama administration is the best possible administration the united states could produce when it comes to something like this. iranians capable of dealing with the obama administration? >> i am sorry. important to contribute to answering your recallingy perhaps

-- perhaps even known to a large part of players in the world about iran. mention two practical facts. everybody mentions facts. sometimes, facts do not tally. remember in this conversation that over the last ofyears the islamic republic iran and most of the u.s. has been involved in negotiations at least 12 times. 12 different kinds of negotiations. i know. i only refer to the negotiations that i was either mainly ,nvolved, marginally involved and they were both actors in informing what they have done.

seems to remember this. of course, i do, because it was my life. this starts really from the beginning. they were successful with negotiation. in my view, the greatest between iran and united states was done , but by the government of the u.s. and iran at the end was001 which the agreement between the u.s. making, so to speak, of afghanistan, was the disagreement of the two countries. i will be delighted to tell you since i was involved in so many of them, they were successful, for another reason. slight variation

with the process are. i am very fond of the onn because in b they were so significant that we can hardly diminish it, but they a simplermed by formula that was in line with the times. we know that something happened in 1992, when the bipolar world nged, and the modus operandi had to change. those who do not change, do not succeed. the afghan the gay sheesh were relevant because although there nn, four powers in bo went for tea and two went for coffee. the other thing that i wanted to

paradoxically, of the 12 negotiations i mentioned to you, and i contest testify,can't i had the good fortune of dealing with a man who has been involved with negotiations. you would not have the freedom of [indiscernible] in spite of the agreement i made with rafsanjani. you will not have many other successful negotiations [indiscernible] and [indiscernible] i say this not because [indiscernible] he has been a friend for a long time, but for other reasons. you do not negotiate with a country is my statement. negotiateation -- you

with the person in front of you, and you do not negotiate on the theory of negotiation. i ask myself the question first time i was kidnapped in lebanon. up in the car. usually that makes you think. i hope that does not happen to you. , you ask happened yourself, who can teach you how to negotiate when you are in the middle of the night in beirut? if you did note realize before, which i thought you canhat if you think negotiate and teach the world can negotiate with iran or russia or sweden, you will never make it. you do not negotiate with up structure nest's. obstructionists.

you negotiate with people in front of you. i got all the information from the intelligence that was given me, but you are different. it does not seem like you are italian. i said, right, you are. you want to know where i was born? my place of birth is the eastern out. -- alps. growing up on the physical border of the iron curtain. that is how minority develop -- that is how my narrative developed. the kgb did a tremendous job on those, and unfortunately the machine of the sony it -- of the soviet union collected so much information and the system cannot benefit on that. by the time 1992 came -- what i

am saying is for the time the, and i apologize for being long, but i want to make a point about negotiating with individuals. we have a great opportunity not only in front of us, but i think we are all here smart enough to understand that the way we negotiated in the 1980's is gone, it does not apply. the way we negotiated in the 1990's is gone, because the region has changed. the region has changed. two years ago, when the syrian -- i had the impudence of saying let's forget about syrian civil war. that is what the entire architecture of the -- from lebanon to the hindu kush

established a hundred years ago. it is no more. and we have to operate in a region that is different than it was in years ago. if we do not look in the eyes in the person we negotiate and do not know why, and we keep saying we have to negotiate with iran, will someone tell me how can we negotiate with iran if we have never done anything with iran? the negotiation was done on the basis of back and forth. [indiscernible] was a totally different affair. the man was different. each man is different. -- the story how -- the story asian

of the negotiation is -- you negotiate with that persons. say this is the value of the negotiation, in this specific case, in geneva come tomorrow, the man heading the negotiation is the person you are praising. if i could bring in colin. on the iranian side there will be an experience to glaciation negotiator who has a narrative. , john kerry,rson who will not be the negotiator. are we to make anything of that? minort relevant or a point, that the iranians are sending a foreign minister and the united states is not sending your secretary of state? >> i do not think so. this meeting was supposed to be at the political director level. wanted to attend

so you could put his stamp on the negotiations. my understanding is he will make a presentation and then he will depart, leaving it to his deputy to continue with the conversation with the p5 plus one. my sense is if the iranians come back with a serious offer and there's every indication they are thinking about doing that, that i would not be surprised if there is a very fast follow-up meeting at the ministerial level or a bilateral -- i do not have forrect information that, but obama and kerry seem to be very interested in what the iranians have to stay, but i suspect they will not invest a considerable amount of additional capital at the highest levels until they hear what the iranian team does present the p5 bus one in geneva. it.uld not make too much of it would not have to be john

kerry. it would have to be at the ministerial level across the representatives of the p5 plus one. i would also say that it is good news according to reports the iranian and the american teams will be separated, which has not happened in a number of years. that is all good. a couple of points based on the previous speakers. i think i would agree we are at a diplomatic inflection point. ll ors could go we things could deteriorate. we have a greater opportunity to make progress for the reasons mentioned. the iranian team is both talented, but also committed to find some way to reach an accommodation on the nuclear file. you also have an administration in washington that is open to diplomacy, although cleared eyed about the requirements for

success. here's another thing that drives urgency, a technological factor, that sometimes in the next year or so the iranian nuclear program, if it stays on its current course, could start to hit some milestones that could be very problem attic from the u.s. -- problematic from the u.s. and international community perspective, that while they are not likely to develop a nuclear weapons next year, it may hit a threshold in the next 12 to 18 months where they have the ability to move so rapidly toward the explosive material for nuclear weapons that they could not be detected. if at that rate cap point -- that breakout point, the decision where the to diplomacy comes to it and has to be reached. there is a technological urgency.

if the diplomacy, given all these factors, if that diplomacy in the current environment collapses, i am concerned you will have spoilers on all sides, hard-liners in terror on the will use any failure to bludgeon rouhani, or whether that would be hawks in washington who take the failure of diplomacy as a sign that the window is finally closed and it is time to move in a different direction. all in one to go sanctions for the purpose of regime change, which is the goal of some in washington, and others will call for military action. i am hopeful, cautiously hopeful, but also concerned that if there is not real progress to my things could go badly. last point is that is not an argument for washington to sign up to a ad deal. i think there is a bit enough deal out there that would put meaningful restraints on iran's

enrichment activities, substantially expand international expections, reduce it stockpile of enriched uranium, take other steps that would reduce -- >> [indiscernible] >> we should go for deal like that, but not for one that does not put meaningful limits on iran's program. >> i want to get back to the contours of the deal. i want to ask you another question. you have been involved in these negotiations, deep inside the u.s. government, and as result you may be a good person to ask this. we ask ourselves the legitimacy, canaps too often, though, the iranians deliver, and we loaded up our structure and isder whether rouhani powerful enough to strike a deal, whether hard-liners will prevent it, but are we perhaps

not being sufficiently self reflective, because we are now in the middle of the u.s. government shutdown. art of the reason i want everyone could show up on time today is there's no traffic in washington right now. the ultimate manifestation of the u.s. government currently not functioning. how will that affect the negotiations? how will the united states deliver on the type of sanctions relief that i am sure you would agree would be necessary to get to that good deal we will talk about in a while if the u.s. government simply is not functioning and there is nothing short of a war going on between the president and powerful elements in congress? >> it is a real issue. it is hard to communicate across a whole range of issues internationally whether washington can function, because apparently washington cannot function. least forews is at the initial stages of a deal,

you would not require congressional action. i think the president and the administration as a whole has enough discretion as it relates to suspending and waving some sanctions if the iranians come forward with a real and meaningful deal that at least for some time the administration probably has enough discretion to do something on the sanctions front without congress. a challenge is not in the immediate term. the real challenge is if a series of confidence building or interim steps is actually successfully implemented, then the administration would have to make the case to congress or more enduring sanctions relief, and that will be a very tough sell. in part for the reasons that you there is atrita, least a group of individuals in congress who will oppose the president on everything and it's opposite. it would not matter what the subject is, just that they at oppose the ministration.

then there are others who are policy hawks in that congress on the iran issue that will be skeptical of what every deal comes out. it will be a real challenge. it is not insurmountable. the way you overcome it is by , aing a broad framework roadmap about where we are going to go, and then concrete steps that are implemented on the iranian side. if you can show iranians are not only negotiating in good faith, but changing their behavior, then you can forge a bipartisan consensus on the hill. it will be tough and it will are the administration to invest a lot of political capital. that is still several months down the road. >> on that point, how do you think the iranians are viewing this? side, themerican argument is that the iranians have to put forward a serious proposal. the iranians have to be serious. rouhani -- is a

perceived as being serious, and if not, what are the implications of that? >> on the part of iran, mr. thingni said some very interesting. they said they expect the governor -- the neck and government to speak with one voice. difficulty that president obama will have. from what i understand in their conversation between the two residents, obama told rouhani i understand you have tough days and he years ahead of you. please understand i have tough days and years ahead of me. there are a lot of obstacles to this. when we speak of the deal between the u.s. and iran and whether iran can deliver, i, to

be honest with you, i think this intelligenty question to ask. it depends what kind of a deal. netanyahu hashat said, that iran should have no enrichment activities, or no nuclear program, this is not going to happen. no iranian regime can accept that. if you are talking about enrichment as an inalienable right of the islamic republic of iran and then we expect intrusive inspection by the international atomic energy agency, and then perhaps temporarily closed down [indiscernible] maybe we are talking about something. in return, what is the u.s. willing to deliver to iran? as you correctly said, the days when [indiscernible] rouhani negotiated with

germany and the u.k. and france, those days are gone. orthose days, iran had 186 187 spinning centrifuges. today iran has over 18,000 of those centrifuges, and most importantly, i believe iran has developed the capability and the infrastructure to build a bomb if it decides to do it. it is going to be tough, but i -- they are more or less where they want to be all along. we talk about negotiations, we have to be realistic. the reality of it the least has middle -- the reality of east has changed. after eight or nine years of sanctions, devastating sanctions imposed on iran, those sanctions have hurt the iranian people, but they have not changed the calculus of the islamist

republic of iran. when the sanctions started, iran had few centrifuges. that i have over 18,000. we have to be realistic about what iran can deliver, but i ni, the ultimate decider, he is playing a very clever game. if you know this, when we had that famous telephone call, president supreme leader khame nei said that while he embraces the discipline attic initiative -- the diplomatic initiative, at the same time he said i'm very critical of some aspects of what he was doing. then the day after he talked, the commander of the revolutionary guard explicitly said that iran made a tactical mistake by talking to president obama at that stage. this takes me back to the game hamenei is playing.

he is on reggae and -- he is on record for saying that he's is not trust america as a reliable partner. he believes america is going to get what it wants and then they are going to go to the business of overthrowing the islamic republic of iran. if these negotiations succeed, say i told you i embraced the diplomatic initiative. if on the other hand, the west does not give iran the kind of concessions that iran believes it should receive, and the negotiations fail, then khamenei will say i told you so, i told you that this is going to fail. the only reason why i excepted it because the iranian people, 51% of you spoke. we have democracy in iran, and

therefore this is not going to go anywhere. ism, i believe, iran today in a much better position to deliver then the u.s. is. i think the obstacles president obama faces are much more powerful and much more difficult obstaclesver than the that the islamic republic faces because we have an authoritarian regime in iran, and when the head of the system decides that the yield is a deal, he can deliver. we have a democracy in this country, and i am not very sure if the major centers of power have reached a conclusion that the deal must he struck with the islamic republic. -- when these types of impasses are taking place, a common line of thinking in washington is to believe that there needs to be more of a

threat of force to get movement. they are were foreign to movement on the iranian side, which there is doubt about in washington, but you negotiated several days, you got hostages released, and your book is called "a man without a gun. oh -- gun." this goes against the premise of to begton that there has a military threat to get any deal. in the case of iran, specifically right now, would a military threat, as some people are arguing, or the threat of more sanctions the helpful or progress,r diplomatic baserunners periods? >> if i knew the answer, i would not be here. i would be signing more books. two things. first of all, i think i appreciate what dr. kahl mentioned earlier about the

state of affairs of the nuclear dossier. i think that there is one element, like we do not mention or do not recall how many negotiations between iran and the west have actually produced results. we also seem not to remember -- i have this bad habit of keeping notes -- we have cried wolf in general because i have to go home with two legs and not one -- we have been crying wolf about the nuclear weapon in iran , to be specific, since 1991, 16 times. 16 times. we have been told that in two years, sometime 18 months, iran will have a nuclear -- if i said something like this to in 20ldren 16 times years, they would have told me, daddy, can you please

[indiscernible] before talking? anyway, this dimension, to together with the dimension of what has been achieved, does not seem to feature. of -- we go to the question you asked about how to negotiate with iran. allow me to repeat, we do not negotiate with iran. we are negotiating with the possibility of the islamic republic of iran in 2013 out after what had been in the present time brought about. the negotiations with iran at requires, as we have said, to have a clear cut view of who is actually on the other side of the table. it requires each one to understand the narrative in the mind of people. knowanybody in this room

the case of the working jews -- was the result of something -- during a negotiation with vietnam? i do not think many would. that is what actually happened. do you know who invoked the kissinger formula for that particular case? the president of iran. these are the facts i see. all the stories about writing is interesting reading, but does not bring any hope. the question is, there is no generalities in this case. there never were generalities in this case. there are no generalities when you are talking about human life of any kind. at least not in my book. at this moment in time, what we have, we have to try to understand better who is in front of us.

i'll want to drop something which many here probably will not like, especially outside this country. i am not sure that having gone from a multilateral dealing with eral, its down to minilat think we should go down to bilateral listen. -- bilateral. seem toral does not work well. i would focus on using the mask of the [indiscernible] good, fine, but in reality, to take what the secretary has said over again, we do bilateral, that is a great movement that has an implication for the irani and site, and the a ring inside his thinking about that more than what it means. it does a tremendous step forward in my view, and this opens for possibilities. let's be realistic. we are not talking theory.

we're not negotiating with iran in general. in 2013 we have this cast of characters and we have to understand what their narrative is. you could not have negotiated with khatami about his knowledge of [indiscernible] you would not. he would not have negotiated with rafsanjani if he had never been to -- and this is what happened. way --dy in a different if you talk to me just because italian, you would be mistaken. you would be wrong. since my childhood, [indiscernible] the basic things that how does my mind at work, my mind works in my own way, as each individual mind works in their own ways. on top of my, evolution is going

on, and we do not seem to talk about it. to scare you now to understand what we have to take into account. the reality on the ground b, not blah. blah does anybody realize the importance of 5034 in the sheer narrative? i'm sure everybody knows. it is a very important point. it was part of the change of the world five centuries ago, but he changed it back? this country changed it back. i had an iranian official a few years ago who said to me we do not know how to explain how generals, the american government dess generous the american government has been

because of brock back to us -- it brought back to us 1534. conquered in 1534 by suleiman i. why don't we apply 1946? if iran hade today not kicked out the soviets? not because we know things, theuse they play into narrative. there is always a different narrative. i understand, but that is not the whole story. >> there is a narrative in washington that says that is not important because congress is about to pass new sanctions. how do you deal with that narrative, that reality, that in the midst of these negotiations,

there are bills introduced, bills passed, three days before rouhani is inaugurated, congress passed new sanctions that will go to the senate in a few weeks. what will that do in this specific environment, based on the narrative of the individuals you know on that other side, for the prospect of getting a deal? and please, chime in on this as well. >> i am sure this question can ahl better answered by dr. k and professor milani. >> what would happen if that takes place? >> it will complicate the negotiation process. significantly. i think those in the leadership in iran who are suspicious of american intentions are going to become even more suspicious of american