congress. one rule in particular is getting attention. a proposal to fine members who live stream video from the house floor, in response to last summer's democratic sit-in that was streamed by several democrats. on c-span 2, our live coverage of the senate starts at noon eastern and includes the swearing-in of senators. opening day continues on c-span 3 with live coverage of the swearing-in of members of congress. at 1:00 p.m. eastern, vice president joe biden presides over the swearing in of individual senators. and at 3:00, speaker paul ryan swears at members of the house. we will have a full replay at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and c-span 2. in his last weekly address of 2016, president obama highlights with united states has accomplished this year. senator cory gardner of colorado

has the republican address. he talks about some of the legislation passed by congress during 2016 and outlines goals the gop has set for 2017. pres. obama: happy new year, everybody. at a time when we turn the page to the future, i wanted to take a minute to thank you for everything you have done to make america stronger these past eight years. just eight years ago, as i prepared to take office, our economy teetered on the brink of depression. 800,000 americans were losing their jobs each month. in some communities, nearly one in five folks were out of work. almost 180,000 troops were serving in iraq and afghanistan. and osama bin laden was still at large. on challenges from health care

to climate change, we have been kicking the can down the road for way too long. eight years later, you have told a different story. recovery, our businesses have created 15.6 million new jobs since early 2010, and we have put more people back to work in all other major advanced economies combines. the resurgence in the auto industry has added nearly 700,000 jobs and is producing more cars than ever. poverty is falling. incomes are rising. in fact, last year, folks' typical household income rose by $2800, the single biggest increase on record. and folks at the bottom and middle saw bigger gains than those at the top. 20 million more americans got the financial security of health insurance. our kids' high school graduation rate is at an all-time high. we brought 165,000 troops from iraq and afghanistan and took out osama bin laden. through diplomacy, we shut down iran's nuclear weapons program,

opened up a new chapter with cuba, and brought nearly 200 nations together around a climate agreement that could save this planet for our kids. almost every country on earth sees america as stronger and more respected today than they did eight years ago. and marriage equality is finally a reality from coast-to-coast. we have made extraordinary progress as a country these past eight years, and here is the thing -- none of it was inevitable. it was the result of tough choices we made and the result of your hard work and resilience. and to keep america moving forward is a task that falls to all of us. sustaining and building on all we have achieved, from helping more young people afford a higher education to ending discrimination based on pre-existing conditions to tightening rules on wall street to protecting this planet for our kids. that is going to take all of us working together.

because that has always been our story. the story of ordinary people coming together in the hard, slow, sometimes frustrating but always vital work of self-government. it has been the privilege of my life to serve as your president, and as i prepare to take on the even more important role of citizen, know that i will be there with you every step of the way to ensure this country forever strives to live up to the incredible promise of our founding. that all of us are treated equal, and all of us deserve every chance to live out our dreams. from the obama family to yours, have a happy and blessed 2017. sen. gardner: hi. i'm cory gardner. i am proud represent the rocky mountains state of colorado in the united states senate. it has been a busy and exciting year marked by numerous bipartisan achievements. from the passage of the first long-term highway bill in nearly two decades to securing funding to fight the zika virus, the republican majority has proven they can put politics aside and

deal out real compliments to the american people. that includes providing our armed forces with some of the resources it needs at a time when we are facing evolving security threats at home and around the globe. we also approved a well-deserved pay raise for our troops and worked to ensure the v.a. is accountable to the veterans it was established to serve. we are working to deliver on the promise this country made to those on the front line. one bipartisan bicameral a couple schmidt i am articulate proud of is the 21st century cures act that was signed into law earlier this month. it fast tracks the development of treatments for cancer in diseases like alzheimer's. it also tackles opioid addiction and addresses the mental health crisis. it's an acknowledgment that federal policy must be updated to keep pace with science and innovation. encouraging medicine's brightest minds to pursue breakthrough discoveries and getting government out of the way. republicans led the way on mental health reforms, opioid addiction, and recovery

policies, and we fought to deliver an economy that benefited everyone, not just the well-to-do. this past year, the president also signed into law a bill i authored to tighten sanctions on north korea, a recognition of years of failed policy towards pyongyang contributed to the regime's nuclear weapons program. it is the first time congress approved standalone sanctions on north korea, and the first bill to impose sanctions to counter north korea's increasingly sophisticated and malicious cyber attacks. these are just a few of the legislative successes from 2016 that will have a real impact on the lives of americans throughout the country. the new gop majority governed the past two years putting real solutions in place, and we will spend the next two years fighting for every american who has felt left behind. now we turn our focus to what lies ahead for congress in 2017. in november, the american people spoke and signaled they are ready for a new direction. coloradans and american's everywhere are eager for more

opportunities and to get away from big government policies that have made it harder to run a business and supportive family and get ahead. on january 3, the senate returns to washington and will get right to work. we work to repair the damage of obamacare, a law sold on broken promises to the american people. a law that has led to soaring premiums, failing insurance markets, and dwindling choices. in colorado alone, more than 750,000 people have their health insurance plans canceled over the past three years. in 2017, health insurance premiums for the individual market in colorado increased by an average of 20.4%, and that number is even higher for some people. one study found that 150,000 coloradans saw premiums increase by 77% from previous years. to put that into perspective, it was reported woman living on the one western slope of colorado saw her premium cost rise from $300 per month to $1821 per

month. that is why we are committed to removing washington from health-care decisions and return it to doctors, patients, and states. empowering patients with the tools they need to best manage their health care. and removing barriers to choice and access so you can select a health care plan best for you and your family. we will also work to address regulatory overreach, something that westerners are all too familiar with. whether it is the waters of the united states that unfairly burdens the farmers and ranchers, endangers the water rights. or the anti-coal rules, jumping up energy costs. excessive federal regulations have inhibited growth and job creation over the past eight years. its negative effects are particularly evident in rural america. the cranes in denver are a stark contrast to the small towns of rural colorado. growing up on the planes, i know

the challenges small communities face when it comes to attracting new businesses and also retaining their services. that's why i will work to pass the decision that incentivizes economic development and makes it easier for small businesses to not only start to succeed, but to thrive. it is my hope that congress will act to simplify and reform the tax code to keep america competitive, encouraging investment, and to stimulate job growth. lastly we are facing , increasingly complex challenges around the world, and our next congress will fight to address that through strength and leveraging our relationships with our allies. whether it's holding iran accountable for its support of terrorism, ballistic missile programs, and human rights abuses, or ratcheting up pressure on those that do business with regimes like north korea, we will lead with strength and action. a republican in the white house and a republican majority in congress presents tremendous opportunity to make real progress. we assume that responsibility with the promise that we will work hard to do everything we can to deliver more opportunities to americans

tomorrow then they have today. we have a lot of work to do, and we approach 2017 with the new sense of optimism and a commitment to find solutions to revitalize america from coast-to-coast. now more than ever, we recognize there are better days ahead of us, and we know with confidence that through the hard work and might of the american people, the world will once again look to the united states as the land of freedom and opportunity. thank you for taking the time to listen. i wish you all a safe, blessed, and happy new year. >> c-span. where history unfolds daily. in 19 70 nine, c-span was created as a public service by america's -- in 1979, c-span was created as a public service and are brought you today by your cable provider. now, a discussion on the challenges of covering emerging technology in silken valley and

other parts -- in silken valley and other parts of the u.s. this is from the annual dawn or at purduerence university. it is 50 minutes. gerry: good morning. i'm gerry mccartney, purdue university cio, director of the dawn or doom conference, and i'd like to welcome you to this year's opening event for this year's dawn or doom. this is our third year, and we're very excited about what the event has become. a global leader in many areas of technology, and we think it's important to let these types of discussions about what happens with these technologies when they move from our labs into the real world. we are pleased to have a great group of journalists join us this morning. so you can about the industry that keeps us all informed about what is going on in science and technology.

i also want to welcome c-span, who is here today recording this and other sessions for broadcast later this year. let me introduce our panelists. natalie diblasio, digital editor at "usa today," where she manages the publications, social media strategy on the west coast and writes a column called launched. #launched. focus on the intersection of tech and culture in the bay area. as a reporter, she's covered everything from political conventions to tragedies including the aurora theater massacre, super storm sandy, and the boston marathon bombings. she will be leading the conference early tomorrow to head to the presidential debates . so she will have a busy week. next, i'm delighted to introduce jared council.

jared joined the "indianapolis business journal" and covers technology and finance. before joining the ibj, he worked as a reporter on jobs and southern indiana in cultural virginia, covering beats including crime, city government, and defense contracting. he has won state awards in virginia and indiana for both investigative recording and technology reporting. emily dreyfuss is wired news' opinion editor. she leads wired's new national affairs coverage, focusing on social upheavals that will shape the future of america. before landing at wired her previous and diverse include acting as a managing editor of cnet social media and homepage, as well as executive producing cnet tv's, rumor has it. emily will also be speaking a second time today right here in the hall at about 3:30 about her experiences working in the san francisco offices of wired as a telepresence robot.

and finally, but certainly not least, quentin hardy was a deputy technology editor for the the "new york times" and formerly executive editor for "forbes" media. he began his career at "the wall street journal" and is witnessed was on diverse topics such as the internet, africa, finance and hardware and software, management, satellite, energy and the marijuana industry. congratulations. >> which accounts for my add. gerry: he began his career as an international publisher and has lived and worked in a dozen countries including japan, singapore and united kingdom. finally, the bureau chief and san francisco was not able to be a today. she is still going to be one of the final judges for the student writing contest, and we hope katy can join us next year. our moderator today is the

widely known steve tally. steve is an author of two books, a former columnist for men's fitness magazine and a former magazine editor of 1330 esquire. he is now our senior strategist for stem and public affairs. now, please silence your devices, but don't put them away. we hope to see you tweeting for the hashtag #dawnordoom or posting to facebook, snapchat, instagram, or whatever other local poison you prefer. please join me in welcoming our journalists. thank you. [applause] steve: thank you, gerry. thanks everyone for coming. we are going to start off with what i hope is a very easy question. so starting with jared, could you tell us a little bit about where you went to school and just a bit about your current job, what do you do? jared: ok.

yeah, so 28 years old, born in philly, went to hampton university and -- which is not far from virginia beach -- and graduated in 2010, and so i've been in journalism for about six years now, and i think i've been a geek for about 28 years. [laughter] love learning about stuff , and i got into journalism as a way to learn about stuff. i got to tell others about it, learn, and get paid for it. so that's kind of what attracted me. and like i said, graduated 2010, worked in southern indiana. my first job out of college covered crime and government there, and then moved to virginia in 2012 and covered defense contracting, tourism, so what is so forth.

and after that, i finally moved to indianapolis, and it was my first time covering anything related to technology. i don't have any background in tech, didn't get a degree in tech but i knew had to talk to people and tell stories this is really what attracted me to the field, because of the promise in andperils -- the promise the perils as this whole conference is about. -- i kind ofcover look at it in two ways. i cover not only i guess technology, but also the business of software. businesses run their businesses better whether it's marketing or procurement.

so i cover all of that but also the business of technology in terms of how do you start a tech company, how do do you raise money for it, and ultimately how do you chart a path for a successful exit. that's about it. >> natalie? >> i'm natalie diblasio with "usa today." i have moved to san francisco to work with our technology team in december. before that, i was in charge of a fitness publication in virginia that was online only, and before that i was with "usa today" for three and half years . i went to the university of vermont, and my job now is i work purely in "usa today" which has significantly fewer people and a headquarters. i'll write tech and breaking news and help manage our paper social media strategy, but also work with the tech reporters and

our west coast reporters to make sure we are optimizing anybody -- optimizing anything to do with our social media presence. helping everyone elevate themselves on as many platforms as we can. >> thanks. emily? >> i'm emily dreyfuss with "wired" magazine. i went to wesleyan university in connecticut, and i was an english major. i stumbled into journalism , because i had no idea what somebody who's only skill was writing would do after college. it suddenly occurred to me that journalists get paid to write words, so i became a reporter -- >> that used to be true. >> well, i got paid very little to be frank. my first job was as a report at a tiny newspaper on the coast of connecticut, and i was the only staff writer on the paper. i had zero experience but that didn't matter. i wrote about crime which we actually did have some. i had to cover standoff in the streets but also covered the building of the new skate park

and i was the restaurant reviewer and the playhouse reviewer. i did little bit of everything. from there, i just fell in love with the craft of journalism, and i became an editor. francisco, to san and that is where i got into tech journalism because san francisco is where tech is everywhere. i didn't identify as a geek. i kind of thought to myself i'm going to get out of this and go back to the literary arts, but i quickly realized that technology is everywhere and is inescapable. i sort of bring the perspective of the reluctant technologist to my coverage of the tech world , because i think whether you are super into it and you are a gadget hound or not -- technology is happening to you

and that's the perspective i like to take on all the coverage. at wired, i'm trying to take the perspective in how technology hits every aspect of our lives a look at it now through the presidential election. >> thanks. quentin? >> i definitely went to a couple of colleges and have some degrees, but i think there's a couple other things that are sort of more interesting where my work has been sort of one enzyme third-generation on both sides of my family and journalism, cartoonist and writers and businesspeople. so watching what's happening now is of interest. i spent 13 years overseas. i started out as a traveling salesman, and then i was a correspondent in tokyo back in the days when we were worried american high school students were not learning enough japanese. that will give you some perspective. so, in some sense, i'm back in something like a

foreign foreign correspondent, and that's really appropriate stance to take in the kind of thing uncovering now. because emily just said something really important. technology is now shopped through every the internet used -- through everything. even the internet used to be a place, now essentially the internet pervades all of society. all of the physical world, the way we think about things, in some ways has the tropes of the internet in very important ways. what i'd like to do is try and look at that as a braking phenomenon, but even more is to go to nonobvious places where it's taking hold and try, by using the off-center approach, shifting peoples views about things. a couple years ago i was north of you writing about a family farm in indiana that had to become so data smart, or i went to north dakota and wrote about the drug industry outside of grand forks, or i went down to texas and wrote about what it's like to be a high school football coach in an age where everything is being videoed all

the time. you're getting all these instant messages from people with 30-second shot of the kids doing a tackle. it's an entirely different dynamic. so that's what i do. >> thank you, quinn. i will come right back to you. so what do you like most about your job? what motivates you to go back into the office everyday? >> i like, i mean, i get to go to school. it's fantastic. i get up in the morning and i think what's the coolest thing i can think about today and who can i talk to about it? peoples to pick up the phone when the press calls. they are really welcoming. they want to explain themselves, want to be understood. it's a tremendous honor and responsibility to try to present that fairly. it's just a blast. >> emily, even if you're going into the office as a robot, what motivates you to go in? >> i think that just the fact that all have to do all day is think. i get to think and be curious about things. i read the newspaper wake up and read the new york times, i read "usa today." i read local newspapers and that i think what do i have to say about that and what can we contribute and where else can we look and what more is there to say? that's just fine. >> natalie? >> i have a lot of questions all

the time. when i'm with my friends in social situations, they tend to be like stop interrogating the uber driver. so when i get to work i'm allowed to indulge my never ending questioning. i think the same thing. everyday i get to go in and learn something new. the cool thing about journalism is you go to work every day and you are honing the story selling skills. no matter what the platform is. it is totally different because the news is totally different. a perfect about working toward something and working toward something completely different everyday. >> and jared? >> i agree with all of that. i think more specifically, i like where i'm at in journalism, in terms of being able to cover the technology industry in central indiana. for decades, i'm sure as many of you know, the tech scene here in terms of startups and financing has really been a desert out here. back in the late 1980s, it

started to change a little bit with folks like bob compton and don brown, interactive intelligence, really planting the seeds for this ecosystem to grow. and today, i feel like i'm on the front end of a growth story with technology here in central indiana. anjie's list is a household at a publicly traded company. -- and a publicly traded company. interactive intelligence while it's not so much household name, about $1.4old for billion a month or two ago. the biggest story is target which started out as a digital marketing company aimed at laundromats, to now or i'm sorry, a few years ago selling, sales force. we are still seeing the ripple effects of all of that in terms of folks going out and becoming investors are starting their own

companies or just lending their skills to startups. i appreciate being able to be scribe to cover all that as it is happening. >> there are a lot of exciting things happening here in central indiana although we can put our own spin on it. tech for example going on. so this is for anyone. is anything about your job that surprises you or has surprise d you when you went to your current position? anyone just jump in. >> i've got some. there's a lot of things that surprised me. i think the first thing is how very different our audiences are depending on what platform we are reaching them on. people who find "usa today" on snapchat are consuming news completely differently and are not also consuming news on their

mobile app. same thing for tablet users, facebook, people that are reading us. no matter where, they are reading us for different reasons. also when it comes to understanding the content, people are all over the map as far as if they are really, really already interested in something or if they're totally new to a topic. we are finding that we're doing, like when, for example, when the fbi wanted to get into the iphone after the san bernardino shooting. we wrote a story about how the -- explainer about why it would even matter that raking in the phone might have consequences down the road. then we need to write a story about how people reacting to it. the reason is the slot to talk about but also because people understand completely different things about a topic. because with such a broad audience, i was surprised to realize how many different ways

people -- different ways we need to write on different platforms to reach everyone whether at on the platforms they are at. >> i didn't expect that. whitten, the "new york times" has seen and he knows about the change and is a leader in changing journalism. so how much, what sort of surprises to you? >> what surprises me? what surprises me would be the appetite the readers have for difficult subjects. they always have, but it used to be chinese foreign-policy or it was very politically driven. and people are extremely hungry to know more about what tech is doing. it's transforming everything in the world. they are willing to go very deep and learn things with much more depth than you would expect. i think the question is also about the times itself and what is surprising in that. well, the amount of video. fantasticsee designers and experiments in

animation which i think is extremely powerful. the way we are having different sorts of relationships with the reader -- much more direct -- where various newsletters and e-mail reminders and whatever become extremely important in having this kind of bilateral relationship. there's a feature "called what we are reading" where various reporters will pick out things elsewhere on the web. people are interested in that. they want to know what else am i looking at? this is a very popular item. so what that is telling you is -- first, it is really nice to see people reading the same things i am reading, but it also develops his relationship with the reporter at the paper which is to be a relationship with a paper generally. we want to see where that goes. >> that is interesting. i know a lot of outlets encourage people of the own social media presence. >> within reason.

you can fill that in off-line if you want. >> can i say something? >> please do. >> i don't know if this is a surprise, but it never ceases to astonish me -- the lack of diversity in the field. i'm the first black reporter at my paper which started in 1980. rarely do i encounter folks of color covering a beat or in positions like me, covering this industry. >> why do you think that is? >> well, i don't know. it's probably a whole host of reasons. i think, i mean, take a black for example. we are 13% of the country but when you look at diversity surveys on google and facebook,

we make up 2% or 3% of that at some of these companies. i wouldn't put all minorities in there, because we see i think a proportionate number of asians or indians, but blacks and hispanics, it's just, we are largely missing. in terms of the reasons, like i said, we did kind of have a whole panel discussion on that but i think one reason might be wealth. when you look at african-american wealth, it's a slice of what caucasian wealth is in this country. that matters when you have an idea to start a company but didn't have any friends or family to come to the right that first see check. you know, it matters when, if you want to pursue and i give much about the luxury to take off work or quit your job. i think that's one reason. and why that is, not exactly sure, but i think the the way we we can turn the tide or at least

begin to -- i am sure there are tons of efforts already underway , but i think people want to be what they see. if we have more minorities in executive positions -- tristan walker is one person who comes to mind. he runs the shaving company, you know, people, it actually give somebody something to emulate, you know. colork by and large shouldn't matter, but it does. if you don't have folks in an industry, again, that can can -- that can serve as examples for people to aspire to be, i mean, it's it's a tough sell. >> i think you are right. i appreciate you bringing that up, and you're right we should have a panel. maybe next year we will. >> can i dovetail off what jed was saying? i think it's an important point and it's not just a problem in

the industries we cover but it's a really big problem in journalism itself. i think you are really right to bring up that various and the cost of entry and journalism is like that. our industry is really dependent on unpaid internships as a way in. in order to be up to afford to take an unpaid internship, you need to have family support and institutional support the hide you cannot make money for three months. in my case, i first started writing in connecticut as an unpaid internship after college, and then it turned into a staff writer position where i got paid money. that i think really contribute to lack of diversity as a barrier to entry into the field. then, there's a million problems that percolate up and result in a whiteness in journalism.

but another thing is the segregation of our networks and how we find people to work with. because it is this whiteness the very beginning and other people you are working with are not a person of color -- so then, when you're making of hiring someone, you reach out to your own network. we are a diverse country, but we're a segregated country for a multitude of reasons. people, whether they intend to or not, with absolutely benign neglect, reach out to those that they know. we know people who are like us and, therefore, we insulate ourselves. it's a really big problem. we also, in journalism, have this thing where you want to cover all topics, but if you look at any of our organizations, we cover the topics that as we set are interested, are interesting to us. when we wake up and we like what is a thing i want to talk about today, this is important with different types of people in the newsroom asking questions.

what's interesting to me, and what's interesting to quit and will be different to someone else. we are grappling with this at wired. it's a real problem and we desperately need other voices in our newsroom. i have no idea what the solution is other than to just, if you are a nonwhite man wanting to go into journalism, please do. please do. do it. >> it's a very important topic, and we will be returning to that. you're right. that deserves more attention. so, i think everyone here except for emily and works at a tech publication sort of has the beat of tech. i guess, emily, that is your publication. >> that's fair. >> as we read the news these seems cap is everywhere. in politics, you read stories about e-mail servers and cybersecurity, so many business stories about some new tech

development. is there still a tech beat, or is all reporting tech reporters now? >> i think because so much conversation happened on social media and where considering social media tech, we talked about that in our newsroom about what is new technology and are these companies, social communication platforms tech? we decided they are. right now, in the evenings the day of politics will happen and then the night of twitter and facebook and like write a commentary to send on, and then what the night stories into being is what people are talking about. what happens is the news happens and then people talk about it , and we do on the street interviews. but also, we do the big conversations. strangers are argue with each other like fiercely on social media. that is what's happening. it is almost like we need to

cover conversations socially as a metro beat. what is everyone saying in new york city? in the twitter verse? so in that way there's always a tech infused social feedback piece. i think a social media metro desk would be fascinating. quinton? >> let me spend a second on that. in a world where 98% i think of wall street trading is computer-driven, or where the president is putting less money into an aircraft carrier and more money into the cia and nsa, or where agriculture is about, -- it involves genetic modifications of crops, everything is a tech story. are areporter inks they tech reporter. which is just fantastic for

people like me and natalie to spend our lives sweating bullets to get this stuff right. jared, too. everybody thinks, i got that one. no, you don't. i really wish you would talk to me about that. that's just a family stuff. there is still tech reporting though, which is spotting that crossover of science and engineering into commerce. that fuzzy area where things are being developed and invented, and they're hopeful that they -- hopeful but they have not attached to the world or they not attached yet to the world in a novel way. they are not baked in yet, and that's a very rich patch right now. >> to work in tech journalism, to be a text editor or reporter , do you need a background in engineering or computer science? or is it more about the reporting? >> i think it depends on what

part of tech you are doing. for me, i don't have a background in it, and i am a tech editor. i assigned stories, and i write stories on cybersecurity and robotics in the future of work. i learned on the job. i definitely need of technical skills, but i acquired them on the job at cnet and that wired. but i do think some of the best reporters. we have let saint cybersecurity which a very complicated topic and in order to explain and airgap attacked at the computer you really need to know about the injury and how things work. one of our reporters does have technical background and the other one doesn't, but they are equally adept in a conversation

at the axis of talking they are all experts. as long as you note which questions to ask, you can learn. you are good at learning. i don't think you do need to but it depends but if it's very, very technical i think it would probably be very helpful. >> i think having a variety of reporters with a variety of different backgrounds helps andcause i have this column what it is about is i just moved to the bay area and i'm a millennial unlike every millennial who is interested in tech or wants to debate any of it. it's expensive and ridiculous, and when you're there it's like being in a different world because everyone talks about and that's talks about it.

understanding these things that don't matter everywhere else or are not happening yet. my stories are coming at it from that lens. it's like outsiders view of an insiders place for everything is like kind of a latin in this weird new tech way. but that being said, we've got, our cybersecurity report is brilliant and she's great. when i was tasked with helping with the story i didn't even realize what i didn't know. so having her around to kind of bounce ideas off of or to handle some of it was wonderful. so i do think it helps to have all of it because our readers are looking for all different kinds of understanding of technology. >> so my next question may be a little bit of inside baseball, but science writing and medical writing i recognize as specially -- i recognize especially feels within journalism and they have their own conventions and things like medical writing, the rule on when you can write about studies. there is a national association of science writers. there is a medical writers association to s.res. i know there is no technology writers association, national association. is technology writing -- >> by technology you mean computers basically? it is such a broad term. >> and that's what i'm sort of what i'm asking. is technology so broad that

there is not a specialty field of technology? do you think it will be or do you think as technology continues to spread, that as we were saying earlier, perhaps every writer will be a technology writer? do you think you will become its own specially? >> i think it is to be its own specialty and it isn't anymore. back 20 years ago, when cnet was first started and wired was first started, it was very much thing.on thing -- niche we were focused on gadgets. we were focused on computers, and how they are going to shrink down, and what the internet was going to be. now, that is a pervasive part of all of life. at wired, people are constantly referring to wired as a technology magazine, though that's a really how we see ourselves anymore.

only because we see technology so much a part of society that we think we are covering a bit of everything. we haven't entertainment desk -- we have an entertainment desk and a national affairs desk and other desks. and science writing, which is a very intense specialty because it's so hard to understand what ph.d is our publishing insights and nature journals that you really need a specialized person to be able to interpret it. we have that all under the umbrella of what i think if i consider tech writing. >> there's some people in the audience right now that are looking at the phones behind consumer products that were manufactured in china by cheap laborers. they are checking social media. so they're going to these organizations, some which are inside amazon web services, these enormous cloud computing services and are using that computing to map social relationship beauty -- using artificial intelligence. there's like five different tech stories just and someone sitting right there looking at the phone. it's kind of the egg. where do i stop? >> automatic. >> sorry, we did not mean to

call you out. >> we encourage you all to be posting a a social media about this panel. >> basically, have it checked my twitter and 20 minutes and the kind of making me nervous. [laughter] >> it's a real change for events like this were used to be people were looking at you -- looking at their phones meant you were failing. now, if they're not on the phones, you know something is wrong because they are not posting anything. there's so many product developments and company announcements and technology. i also don't know how you all keep up. but it does make me wonder, so with all this daily churn, do you think technology stories you're missing or you would like, you wish had more time to spend every? >> yes. >> are you asking if i'm paranoid? >> i think there's so much happening, so the people developing so many cool things and so many people that are trying to get, so because facebook was successful,

and by successful i mean one that is in the start of world dreams of being the next facebook. s&s am an idea which makes anyone, they're running with it. i probably get speedy which facebook -- >> sorry. >> we were getting inside. that's the hazards. you can get so far in hoping it's going to be the next thing, it is called falling in love with your source. this guy is so great. i love this thing, you know? kind of an example of falling in love with your source and hoping you spot the next best thing. >> do you all know what an talking about? >> it was a company that, the coverage took a different direction in the spring and -- >> it wasn't everything that turned out to be fake. >> it's a great idea if it would work. >> it was a good idea. but having turned out to be fake. >> the thing with it is that it if it coulddea

work. everyone would want to be true. >> sweat vodka is a good idea. >> hashtag. >> silicon valley is promising to make the world a better place. that's than narrative that is being sold to us. as tech journalists one of the things we have to be on guard for as i think quentin is making people foresaw a false promise. it's sort of easy sometimes to see it because places will also something that is so absurdly but now that you would never give them the credit that they want. they will say like it's almost like the 30 rock ad where they were like do you ever have trouble putting bread in the toaster? no, no one has ever had that problem. silicon valley is often trying to solve problems that don't exist just to make your life more convenient. but it was a a blood technology company that was saying there is a high cost to get medical tests done. if we could make this easier and we should be able to because science has all of his

abilities. if you could it at home and make it fast and streamline it than that would be great. and we as journalists, a lot of us, maybe not particularly on the stage but our colleagues and a whole industry was like that's a great idea. and we let them tell it. >> i'm going to come to you with the next question but i'm not trying to imply anything. do you think tech journalists, journalists, and can because of the speed of news, do you think tech journalists sometimes end up erring on the side of being cheerleaders for industry? >> two things. first i would say i think sometimes we in the media business at large but especially in technology, we have short attention spans. we will cover something because it's what's new and what's next and it's hot. and then we won't really follow it through. i think one example of that, no offense to anyone here, but when

three d printing was what was hot a few years ago, it was kind of like the way, this going to change change lives dramatically in the next two years and we haven't really seen that. i think for the most part a lot of these technologies, they take time to gain traction. they can be the best idea in the world but at the moment is it right? the moment isn't right. look at virtual reality technology in the '90s. kind of the window wasn't open yet. i think sometimes we can just again focus all this attention and say hey, hey, this is next big thing, when it really has yet to prove itself out. as far as being cheerleaders, like i think that sometimes the stories were telling are not really that sexy so we have two spice it up and get peoples

attention. you know, whether it's self-driving cars or drones or whatever. and i don't think we are being cheerleaders by doing that, as long as we can talk about the reality and the hurdles that are present for whatever the technology is. >> i was just going to say that i think even without trying to be a cheerleader, just writing about a company in a way that isn't immediately like condemning it is cheerleading it in a way because there are so many companies and everyone is just fighting to get noticed. social media, people are not necessarily reading the story. they're just think the headline and if your company is named, your higher in search results. your data will get that specter facebook page will get more views. just by writing about the ones that might be interesting, by picking one of nothing other,

giving that company a giant like jump over its competitors and in that way it's not cheerleading but it is like, just a properly timed interesting enough start up falling in your lap can really change the game for the startup... i'm guilty of for sure but it's like, you know , now their noses on its knees but somebody's probably going to figure out spotting proteins for disease tracking and at that point we will be exhausted and we will go oh yeah , and not recognize that

something can do magic has just occurred in the world 's i think as emily said, these are things that we are at least attempting to solve problems in our society, problems that we have globally and we want to see progress and i think a lot of us are on the dawn, we want to see human progress and i think it sort of comes down sometimes in our writing we are seeing big progress and big changes and no one is excited. it's like, we are taking a substantial step forward on the

right direction in this front, kind of so that's just what you are... >> the kind of incremental improvements. >> is also true for who we depend on to write the story. people don't want the process story. i am constantly saying to scientists i want to hear the story about all the failures that went into you coming to this discovery because they will publish a paper that took them 10 years to get to this result and i find it fascinating to hear about the disappointments and at the time they thought the cells were going to give them the data they wanted and they didn't but individual researchers and companies don't want to talk about that because that quote unquote, bad press. >> i once talked to a guy who was building a refinery of failure so that other scientists would see that's what you're in for. a social network of i'm going to try this , or forget it, it doesn't go quite it's so helpful. >> but the other thing is, we're kind of covering delusional people. >> you have to be. >> otherwise, if you knew the odds on what a startup is and how often they fail, you wouldn't get out of bed.

in the technology they're making has been so transformative that they see shaping the world, they don't just see building a product. elon musk last week said here's how i'm going to colonize mars. and i mean, okay. >> but he might just be the one to do it. >> he's the far end of the true thing. >> so hashtag, delusional press people and i apologize, we are running a little bit shy on question so we have time for a couple questions. there's a mic appear if anybody has a question for the panelists. since this is being recorded, if you would ask your questions at the microphone, we would appreciate it. >> i appreciate all of you being here. we've got a variety of panelists

here, two editors, two reporters and emily mentioned waking up in the morning and wondering what am i going to cover today? for the reporters, how do you decide what to cover and for the editors, how do you assign and how has that changed over the last few years? >> okay, i'll start. i am the morning news editor as well as the national affairs editor so there's always kind of two different timelines. there is one of the stories that we are working on on a longer timescale because we've assigned them, the reporters are working on them for weeks or months depending on how much research they need to do and that's something i have in the back of my mind, knowing when those are going to come in but in terms of mourning assignments and looking at how i decide what other people need to be talking about, social media has really changed

this equation for me and twitter has become a resource that i rely on almost too much for this moment because there are two different movements, one is, is it important enough that we are already talking about it and it's something out there that we need to weigh in on because of this moment it's happening or is there a thing that no one else has discovered yet and we need to be focused on bringing it to their attention? i look at social media for the former and to discover the latter, i either depend on my reporters who will bring me hedges or i have my proprietary secret places of the internet and the world that i am looking in an effort not to let anyone see all the tabs that i have because that's my secret way in to try to get it out of me. >> i like the way you framed that. to me, it's a little bit different because i am not a reporter focus solely on central indiana and a lot of times , there's already stories out

there that pr folks are pushing and that companies are trying to sell, whether it's a fundraiser or a new hire and that's the stuff that everybody has and if it is important enough, we are going to go after it but we're always trying to find those distinctive stories that nobody is telling. i'll give you an example , about a month or so ago , gop which is this hot tech company based out of chicago opened up an office in indianapolis last year and said they wanted to hire 300 people by, i want to say 2018 and last month, i got a text saying this is eric, what's going on with wikipedia and come to find out they were laying people off and it was like okay, if this company is signed a deal to hire this many people , and now they're laying people off , it's a big deal so i started

calling, he was largely unreachable, he was at some conference and couldn't call but i said you used to work at gop yet, by looking at the linkedin pages and folks that i knew there and finally, finally got the story and when i talked to the ceo of it all, this is obviously a story they are not going to want to push. they want to make these layoffs and keep it moving but when i talked to him he was like, how did you find out about this so quickly, i just told the employees area and i gave credit to my sources for that one but those are the type of stories that i think to go back to what you were saying about cheerleading, we need to cover the good stories, we need to cover the companies that are hot and have a lot of promise but we also need to chronicle the ones that are struggling or that fail to really make sure we're getting both sides. >> we will make one more question and make it quick.

>> thank you so much for attending. my question is on, sometimes when you look at tech news it's like chasing everything that school. as a bystander, from laugh yet indiana who has no involvement in terms of what uber is doing, do you think text have a responsibility when there is new technology coming out to refusing it, that is and extent of people in somewhere in indiana. for example, instagram or snap chat. they come up with new features. it's really like a new? >> and then if you are talking to a 35-year-old male he's like, what should i care about? >> and then if you are talking that's a question that reporters refuse it because sometimes when

i read tech news it's like everything that is new but less in terms of how do i make sense of how i say it? >> that's a good question, it gets down to what you are saying about now you have all the different audiences. >> people say the snap chat news that's a question that reporters comes out and we have this population that you use is snap chat can't wait for these features to come out and they are up on the latest ones in before seeing it, they probably understand how they are going to use it. we really need a news tory says this is exactly how you your physical app is going to change and how you're going to need to touch it instead to do new things and were going to need to tell someone, there's a thing called snap chat. >> but all three are very valid stories that need to happen because the people that are learning that even people that don't understand how snap chat works are missing out on the fact that there is a segment of its population that is mutating with disappearing messages and the impact that's going to have down lot the line is going to be

important so it's important to figure out how to break down the story for all these. i guess the answer is yes, that's super important and we are trying to do it all the time. >> i'm afraid that is all the time we had. will you join me in thanking our panelists and graphic artists. [applause] >> thank you all. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> at same also included cyber forensics expert marcus rogers, who heads the computer and information technology department at purdue university. digital about footprint and how data is collected and used by marketers, government, law enforcement, and other sectors. this is 45 minutes. digital footprint >> good morning. i am happy to introduce our next

speaker. marc rogers is here at the polytechnic institute at purdue university. he is a forensic research psychologist, you should pay extra for that, that is exciting. [laughter] >> the university faculty scholar, we know this is serious, and he went to the american academy of forensic sciences. dr. rogers is the coeditor of privacy and security crime department. his areas of research cover the behavioral aspects of the deviant use of technology, cyber criminal behavior analysis, and understanding cyber terrorism. today, he will be presenting a talk entitled, cyber security and social media, how big is your digital footprint and why should you care?

as we do at every one of these, i will ask you to silence electronic devices, but do not turn them off. we hope to see you tweeting or posting to facebook, snapchat, instagram, or whatever flavor of social product you use. i also understand halfway through the presentation, you might stop doing that. please join me in welcoming dr. marcus rogers. [applause] marcus rogers: thank you. can anybody hear me in the back? i have a voice that tends to be in. welcome to "dawn or doom". my talk will be about the concept of the digital footprint. and i will warn you off the back, it will come across on the doomy side.

i am a tech guy, i have my toys and i do online banking. so this is not about fear, this is about understanding the cost benefit analysis of technology. nothing in life is without risk. it is the same technology, what is the cost of technology? what is the cost of the convenience we have with these devices? nothing is for free. we know that. so let's talk about the concept of a digital footprint. of a digital footprint. we will look at what is it? and more important, why should you care? ok, this is a concept that is out there, but with different does it make to meet? what can we do once we understand some of the risks of the footprint? and then we will put our hat on

and look at what is coming down the pipe. digital footprint, we are aware of the concept of the carbon footprint. it is something that has been in the popular media and we are concerned about how big is our carbon footprint. but very few things about how big is our digital footprint. and think about it, we are a wired society. especially the next generation, the current generation. they are wired, connected 24/7. they love to share information every 15 minutes and in 140 characters or less. it is a wired society and because of that we have a trail that we leave behind. the concept of a digital footprint is exactly that. it is the information, the artifact, the traces you leave behind when you use technology.

when you use the internet. when you drive your car. when you use that smart thermostat. when you do a lot of these things that we do not take into consideration, leave traces of who we are what we like, and what we do. there are two types, there is -- this is really creating, then when you are surfing the internet, when you are talking on the phone, when you are doing things we do daily. and it is really collected without you knowing it. so as you go and surf the web, there are things called web -- if you search for a particular term, there is information stored about you because of the ip address. so that is passive. active is what we voluntarily share with companies.

think about this, data or information you put on facebook, on your twitter account, your instagram -- and this is information that we voluntarily share. we know we are sharing it, but what is interesting with this and the concept of risk and benefit analysis, while we share it we are not sure what will happen to the information once it is collected. there is the issue of ok, i shared the information with company x, but what do they do with the information? where does it go? can we control it? should we be worried about it? what is interesting is on the investigative side, there is always a balance between security and privacy. when we are talking about digital footprint and the artifacts or traces, another term that is used, especially in

law enforcement, is evidence. because an investigation -- the digital footprint can be used as evidence. why is data collected? for several reasons, the main reason is usually to do with money. commercial, there is a commercial reason for doing this. your information is worth a lot of money. now, your individual information might only be worth pennies, but if you take 50 million people's information, the value of the information has increased. say you have people like direct marketers, they want to send you something. they want to look at where you have gone and what you have done and what you are shopping for, what you got at the grocery store and directly market it to you. because this is a better way of potentially swaying your purchasing opinion, then doing the math -- massmarketing to everybody and not knowing if it is of interest to you.

it is like profiling. trying to understand what it is you like, what you do not like, then trying to influence your buying decision. you also have these organizations called data aggregators. what companies do is they are the kind of big daddy, the big data grandfathers, they collect information from various sources all over, all of these traces, the aggregate the data and supposedly they sell it to a lot of these direct marketers and consumer profilers. so we also have government. and thanks to some of the things that have happened over the past couple of years, the disclosures, the individuals that decided to leak information, we know that various government agencies are looking at this data. our concern about what is

happening online. using some of the same information that the marketers and consumer profiling people are doing, and using it for investigation. using it to try to determine the next terrorist attack, using it to determine, is somebody going to commit a crime or has committed a crime. and then you have others, the cell phone companies collecting information, supposedly for engineering purposes, for purposes of troubleshooting networks, publishing, this is information that while it is used for those purposes, says a lot about where you are, what you have done and where you have gone. and you have health insurance companies, information collected so they can get a medical profile and understand maybe what issues you might have better health related. lot about where you are, what

they could look at passing it on to underwriters so they can look at what is the risk factor much of your policy goal of the next time you try to renew it. information such as that. and there are positives, is there something in your health history they can tell you about early so you could be proactive, as opposed to reactive, with your health care. so there are various reasons why information is being collected. some of it good, some of it back, but mostly it is neutral. data collection is not good or evil, it is neutral. it is what we do with the data that determines how much risk there could be. so looking at technology, this is all kind of technology. as we speak, new technologies are coming online to track what you are doing. this became obvious when the last bunch of operating systems were updated and browsers were updated, and in the browsers was the concept of ad blocking.

it annoyed the companies trying to collect information on the past information, and now they cannot track easily. and if you go to some of these websites with the ad blocking browsers, it would come back and say, wait a minute, you are using ad blocking browsers. please do not use this, because in order to keep the site going, we need to collect information from you. it is an interesting concept. and you have things like malware. we have heard stories about systems being taken over, information being ripped off of the systems without our knowledge. and you have interesting things like invisible disguise links, they look like one thing and you click on it and it takes is a place different. so there are all kinds of tracking technologies that are

both inherent in the technologies we are using, and some are rather creative ways of the companies, those entities i talked about, tracking what you are doing and creating this large database of what you do, where you go, what you like, and you associate with. when you enter into the data, this is where becomes interesting. this is stuff we share. this is the active side of it. email, texting, you are voluntarily giving information away. so you are talking, in some cases, what you are talking about -- dependent upon the internet company, even the content of your mail they are allowed to look at. credit card purchases. this is an interesting kind of a

positive to using these credit cards, you will find that these companies keep profiles of your buying habits, of spending habits. how many of you have purchased something that was a little bit out of the ordinary, only to get a phone call that says, is this you buying it? how do you think they are doing that? they are not fitting over your shoulder, they have created a profile and you do not fit it. that is a good thing. especially if that purchase is happening in new york the same time you are in lafayette trying to use your credit card. but to think about the information they have collected in order to develop that consumer profile. twitter, social media, facebook, and those to come, the other technologies to come, part of their business is not to give you free access to their services.

it is to collect data and make money off of your data, that is how they stay alive. they market. with data aggregation. at least on the side of the house, we should be aware of the they market. fact that it is being collected and we should have made an informed decision that we are ok with these folks collecting our data. we should probably go a step further and be ok with what they are doing with it, who are they selling it to, who gets the information and how is it being used. this is the side a little bit easier for us to have control over, as far as what we now think is acceptable risk for our data. so it is collective? we understand why, we have an idea of who, ok, but what? you would be amazed at the information available,

especially to get involved and the correlation of a very large data depository and you can start doing trend analysis and pattern analysis. basically, the information that is being collected is enough to create something like a personal narrative, your profile. start doing trend analysis and what you do from when you get up in the morning to going to bed at night and everything in between. the ultimate big the ultimate big brother from "1984" on how we are being surveilled. there is a lot of information they know, what road you took to work, how fast you want to work, what time you get up, what time you go to work, your coffee brew, what time you get home. this is a lot of information. in the good old days when law-enforcement wanted to be in on someone, they had to do the old-fashioned stakeout.

they would get the binoculars out, watch people. law-enforcement does not have to do this anymore. you are giving them this data. you're giving them a narrative they can follow. in a lot of cases this data has been used for good reasons. there are stories of people who got lost. older people i have dementia that wander off, and they are able to be found through the ability of technology through geolocation. to find out where you are, which hotspot your wi-fi came from, where you are sitting. for everything that has a bit of a negative flavor, there is a positive. we are aware of the positives, so i want to educate us on the a negative flavor, there is a

more risky sides. your personal narrative -- this is a lot of tricky personal information i am not sure i want everyone to know about. i am not sure i want marketing company to know all this information. while it could be good for directed marketing, there is a real downside. just briefly, this is some of the information that is data can portray about you. what you like to eat, what you like to drink, what you watch on tv. that is streaming, not necessarily the low price you are paying for it. that cost is the information you collecting about what you like to watch. the business of ratings has changed with streaming video. your partnership status.e si ofr

religion, sexual orientaon, political affiliation, your circle of friends. why would we be concerned about who knows who our friends are?an applying for loans for credit, who were turned down as being a high risk because the group of friends th it didn't fit that profile the financial institution font was -- thought was non risky. using your choice of friends can affect decisions about you.

your current health. these days with telemedicine, everything is online. i am not sure i want everyone to know i hope information. i am not sure i want my employer to know everything about my health information. sherman my doctor -- surely my doctor, but not my employer. this can cause people to go hey, that is a little much. combine this altogether, and it can become much bigger. one of the issues with your digital footprint and collecting

this data, you have no way to see if this is an accurate picture of you. think of that. a level data is collected about you. they are creating a digital version of you. i'm going to show you the decisions being made based on the profile. and you do not have access to fact check to make sure it is correct. if anybody does not think there will be errors made, a law of this is done on a statistical basis. i have news for you. there is a good possibility it is not all accurate. why should you care? people say, i am not a criminal, i have nothing to hide. there is not one person in this room that has something they don't want to be made public. nothing criminal, other reports of our lives that are private. -- but there are parts of our lives that are private. privacy is a big issue. what do i care that this information gets out there? who is going to attack me?

you would be surprised. if you simply have a connection to the internet, as you do with your phone, you are a potential victim for someone to attack you. in a lot of cases, they are not after you. they are in an entry point into your bank, and you become that portal into the institution. your information gets used to create an attack vector to go after something bigger. in some cases, the attack is against you. we have heard about identity theft, they really dark side. let us have a look. what are some of the privacy concerns? a big concern, what if it is inaccurate? essentially you could be denied employment. employers check data, right?

they purchased this information from data aggregators and make decisions. it is interesting when i made a decision about what was posted. information on digital footprints is geared toward high school students. the only warning they have is don't post bad stuff to facebook because you won't get a job. obviously it is a lot more than that. employers will go and purchase information. if it is inaccurate, you will have a problem. credit card companies due information. diligence. they look at this stuff. they create a risk profile. you can be denied health insurance. public humiliation. you could be slammed, defamed on the internet, have your picture

on the front page of the local newspaper. what is interesting is that the media is quick to put these pictures up there. if it happens that if you are innocent and it wasn't you, that is a byline at the back of the paper. that is not going to be a reduction on the front saying oops. you will have to go digging for that. you can basically be found guilty simply by being in the press. and in some cases, even arrested. information could have shown that your phone, your computer was used to attack a financial institution, your persona was used to create an identity and information could have shown committed a car. wait a minute. all of a sudden it is you. what if it is inaccurate? you could still be denied unemployment, credit. this information is being used to make some very life-changing decisions. in some cases, even getting into

a university. this data should be used in such a way that at least we have a chance of defending ourselves against it, or challenging the accuracy of it. also from a privacy perspective, why should someone else make money off of your data? it would be a great idea if you got 0.001% of every transaction that was made with your data being sold to somebody else. that would be a pretty good income considering the millions and millions of pieces of information being shared. in some cases, it is without

consent. ok, i willingly allow this company to take my data because i want that functionality. i want the convenience of online shopping or fast delivery. i did not agree for these telemarketers that are going to call me at 9:00 a.m. on sunday. where do you think those numbers come from? telemarketers are better than asking, hey, can we have your number so we can bother you 24/7? they are a little smarter than that. they are buying this information. if you do not think that information would have been shared, he would have readily agreed, even if you meant getting deliveries a day early. it is understanding the cost-benefit risk trade-off. one of the questions that comes up, great, but can you ever really be anonymous online with technology? that is a good question. there is not one we can get into here.

we feel that the concepts of anonymity gets into the concept of privacy. can you really be private? my generation and current generation of digital natives has a completely different definition of privacy. in my generation, privacy is a binary decision. it is either private or it isn't. to the generations since, privacy tends to be on a continuum. something can be kind of private. we are in constant pseudo-privacy, which is bizarre. it is part of that wired culture. it is part of the wired generation. let's look at security concerns. interesting to see that this is not technology geeky internet stuff.

look at the information i have shown before. somebody knows which way you drive to work, which coffee shop you go to, where you take your lunch, which park your kids play at in between what hours. that is a lot of information that someone with various plans could use in the real world to do physical stuff. physical kidnapping. if you look at the counter surveillance a plot of big companies do, one thing they told to do is don't share your daily plans with anybody. take a different route toward every time you go. don't be an easy target. if you are willing to share that information, then we are becoming very easy targets. people also have things like cyber stalking, which is kind of the new trend.

you have identity theft, or criminal account takeover. the rate of identity theft is amazing. it is staggering. about one year ago, the statistics i saw was that it was the fastest-growing nonviolent criminal activity in the world. something like i don't know how many millions, but the chances of being a victim of identity theft is extremely high. where do you think they get the information from? from these same data sources. these data breaches from these data aggregators have all this information about you. not only can they create a digital persona of you, someone can take that and great a physical persona and go apply for that loan.

in some cases, file a tax return that claims the irs owes you money. tax return fraud is staggering. one of the studies said it was a 200% increase since last year. nothing worse than going to file your income tax only to be told by the irs, oh, we already cut your check for $5,000. we sent it to your house in new york. uh, i don't live in new york? i will take the $5,000 if you want to give it to me. now the fun starts. now you have to prove you did not make that return. when i say fun, i don't mean fun. it's not fun. there is a high risk that is going to happen. this is not just privacy, there are real-world security concerns. but it can be used for good.

i for o would not want to go back to the daysne of having to wait three weeks for a catalog. i would love to go online. i would stop by and have it the next day. i don't want to go back. purdue, big university. i don't want to go back to the days where we have to line up at the forums. it is nice to be able to do it online. it's nice to be able to file your tax return online. you don't have to mail it. streamlined health care. there have been numerous cases where the information aggregated has saved someone's life. in some countries, the pharmacies actually have large databases.

at least a couple of instances, they were able to save somebody from taking two different types of medication that would have killed them combined. they were able to go to the pharmacist, wait a minute, you are taking such and such? you can't take this because that will kill you. being used to determine disease outbreaks, zika, hnh1, avian bird flu. to find out where patient zero is. my friends who do epidemiology, trying to find that hotspot ground zero is essential. it is the wintertime, and flu season happens. the pharmacies can start stocking up. they get reports from the cdc. guess what, folks? indiana is getting hit because

people are googling flu symptoms. the information is being collected. it is being used to predict. we better start stocking up at the pharmacy because the flu is rising. data has been able to prevent suicides. through the users and their own monitoring, they were able to determine the information and attitudes of the individual who had this social media site was becoming very dark and negative. they were going into a very bad place. they were able to do early intervention, call workgroups and present somebody from committing suicide. to me, that is a pretty big

positive. public personal safety. tornado warnings on your phone now. you don't have to buy the darn storm radio that you can't find the batteries for. this summer there was a lot of flooding in my area. on the way to work, through the work of geo sensing, i have a pop-up that said wait a minute, the bridge is flooded out, take a different route. that is pretty cool information. i would like to know that before i end stock tires deep in water. yes, there should be some good. my argument is not that the collecting of the data is necessarily bad. w neede to be aware that it is being collected. we need to be aware that we get nothing for free. to get the convenience and

functionality, we have to give something up. the cost of this is our privacy. as long as we are informed consumers and understand that, then i think we can make the decisions. often we don't consider the cost of giving your phone number out to anybody. how do we control it? it is definitely easier on the access side. maybe you don't post everything in a 50 minute increments on social media. throw them off. maybe you throw them off on google with something you are not really interested in. someone throw random search

terms all the time to keep the company's aggregating this information completely confused. it went from zucchini to eggplants to mountain biking to monster truck rallies. that is a pretty broad profile. i put this up not because i believe you can actually do it, but because it is always on the site -- use your cash, not your card. easier said than done. depending upon some cities and countries, they are not looking for your cash. for it is an extra charge if you want to pay with cash. everything they want electronic. something people forget to do is keep anti-nowhere software updated. not just on your computer systems, but only computer system sitting on your hip, your smartphone. this is a rhetorical question. how many people have anti-malware software on your

phone? think about it. that is a powerful little computer. a glut of personal banking information right on your hip. how about the technology side? there is an blocking technology. almost every browser has incognito mode, which allows you to go out and "don't track me" is another term they have built-in. you can use cookie cleaners, proxy routing. technology like tor, which is had a bad reputation. tor was actually created by the u.s. government as a way of securing communications for dissidents and people in the country. it has a bad reputation. but the technology in and of itself is a way of adding layers

to make it difficult to find out where you're coming from and what you are doing. so proxy software. what is coming down the pipe? internet of things. everything highly directed. from door openers to power meters, smart tv's you cannot only talk to, but guess what? it is recording what you are saying. that has happened. it is bad enough that the tv is in your living room. people have had tvs elsewhere. and the company that did this did not tell the consumer's, oh by the way, not only are you talking to it, we are listening all the time. what is interesting with the internet of things is you can

basically have a smart house collecting information on you. you can basically be driving home, and your car notifies your garage door to open, which notifies your thermostat to turn on, which notifies your coffeemaker. all this information is going back somewhere. now your cars know a lot about you. these are all internet of things. location services are built into everything. everybody wants to know your location. every company, every piece of

technology. if you are walking in a shopping mall and connect to the wi-fi, guess what happens when you walk by a store? wait a minute, how does it know i'm standing in front of the store when there is a sale? technology. that is the cost of using their technology. they get to spy on you for lack of a better term. and everything has its. that little device on your hip, your location. the car you are driving, that is the cost of using their geolocation. it is interesting. a friend of mine rented a vehicle to a city he has not been to. he decided to basically purchase the gps system that the rental car company had. his friend was known to have a bit of a heavy foot.

no accidents, everything was fine. pays the fee, finds an additional amount on his bill because he had been speeding, and they were able to tell. hmm, interesting information. increase in data reaches. as more of our data goes into these data aggregators, where do you think the bad guys are going to go after? they are going to go after the crown jewel, which is your data. we are seeing an increase of data breach, both in health care, financial sector, and education. is privacy really dead? do we just get over it? some people think so. i will leave it up to you to decide. your digital footprint is huge. and it is not getting smaller. we are not getting less connected, we are getting more.

everything needs to be connected. it is more than worrying about what you post on facebook and twitter. we have to do a better job with our kids. we have to make them conform -- informed consumers. yes, it can be used for good and evil. we tend to think more on the risk side. can we take steps to control it? yes. are you going to get rid of data collection? absolutely not. what you do need to do, and what is being pushed for is controlling what happens to your information and who uses it after it is collected. other countries have privacy acts. that is the main thrust of this privacy acts. you have to be a good steward of the data.

it must be informed consent as to what you do with that data. we can't influence our data once it is collected. my parting thought his to me, privacy is not dead, it is just sleeping. questions? >> if you would like to ask a question, i would ask you to come down here. we will probably run for another five or 10 minutes. two can plan accordingly. please feel free to come down and ask the question if you've got one. marcus: i think they are all in a state of shock now. >> i will be the victim, since i am used to being a victim in your classes. [laughter] basically it is a people problem

more than a technology problem as far as the use of the data. the checks and balances is that a consumer-based approach doesn't enforce checks and balances, or is it a governmental regulation approach? marcus: the data in and of itself is not a problem, it is how it gets abused. as far as the solution, it is both. if you look at the countries that have passed privacy legislation, and the u.s. does not have one. most of the other countries in the g7 have it. it is both, conformed consumers, a watchdog that makes people play by the rules. and i hate saying it, it is some regulatory bodies that have consequences if you violate it.

we have seen something similar with hipaa. in the consumer model, people are not even aware this is going on. to have a consumer driven approach, everyone would have to be an informed consumer. that is not a reality. so it has to be both. the consumer saying, company a hazard privacy policy and says they are going to do something with it. company a has privacy and security controls, company b doesn't, i am going to get my money to a. there has to be regulation and policy enforcement behind this. there is no incentive for anyone to change right now other than the negative publicity.

when we want convenience, we forget about privacy again. thank you very much. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> here on c-span, "washington journal" is next, followed at 10:00 by "newsmakers" with the theme administrator craig fugate. later, the george w. bush institute had a discussion on u.s. policy toward north korea. >> on today's washington journal, we will take a look at the current state of the u.s. economy and what to expect in the year ahead. correspondental ben game in gives us a preview of the 2017 congressional agenda

as congress lands to meet for the first time this week. michael o'hanlon of the brookings institute talks about security hotspots in the year ahead. ♪ morning on this first day of 2017. happy new year. the week begins with a new congress sworn in on tuesday. we will have live coverage from capitol hill, and preparations for a new president. onald j. trump sworn in january 20. we begin "washington journal" with your thoughts on what is ahead for 2017, and whether you are optimistic, pessimistic, or have mixed thoughts. 202