>> charlie: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with health care. joining me ed o'keefe of "the washington post" and sarah kliff. >> there's talk the senate may start its own bill from scratch. it's one victory in an ongoing fight and our focus now turns to the senate and what they'll do with the legislation the house has sent them. >> charlie: we continue with a conversation about the media company vice. we talk to shane smith and josh tyrangiel. >> one thing i have learned is people don't mind feeling something while they're learning something, if you can show them a great character or move them that's ok. so a lot of our audience may not

be expecting it but if they're careful watchers they'll remember someone. >> charlie: and photographer tabitha soaren and it's called "fantasy life: baseball and the american dream." >> once i got very successful in television i felt like the work i was doing was getting more and more mainstream. the higher i rose the more watered down it got and the less agency i had over the creative process. so for me art was a solution to that. i feel like i can get to a truth in the work but it's less of a who, what, when, where and why and more of an emotional truth. >> charlie: health care, vice media and tabitha soaren. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following:

>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> charlie: the house of representatives approved the health care act this afternoon and they plan to repeal and replace key parts of the obama care. it's marks a significant victory for president trump and house republican leaders their earlier efforts failed to unite in the gop and most republicans have not yet read the legislation which passed without an

assessment. joining us from washington is ed o'keefe of "the washington post" and sarah kliff. tell me what happened. the trump administration and president and other key leaders said they had the votes. in fact they did. was it difficult to pull this off? >> absolutely. they've been trying for weeks, charlie and they did it today by the skin of their teeth, 217 to 213. that was more more than needed. there's a few vacancies to the magic number was to get it over 216 and they called the vote shortly thereafter. no democrats voted for this. 20 republicans also voted no. a mix of members from swing districts who will face difficult re-election fights next year and face questions about health care and ardent conservatives who don't think the bill went far enough. when they figured out wednesday

they had the votes and decide to do out thursday and they did it and it's a significant achievement whether you're a fan of this president and republicans right now or not there's no denying the house pulled off something many thought they could not do. this is the first major legislative achievement for house speaker paul ryan who's been on the job a little over 18 months and the signature achievement for property and if you thought the house was difficult let me introduce you to the upper chamber. >> charlie: sarah, pick it up there. >> ed is right. the senate will be a struggle. you had two republican centers who came out and said they don't support the bill. some are concerned about medicaid. it's the cut a lot from medicate and we don't have the cbo score but probably in the neighborhood of $800 billion or so which is a

huge concern to the senators in states that expanded medicaid. it's a big victory for republicans but now the senate has to go through a lot of the fights the house already did. there's discussion the senate might start its own bill from scratch. this is one victory in an ongoing fight and now our focus turns to the senate and what they'll do with the legislation the house has sent them. >> charlie: there's been much discussion including with my colleague john dickerson as to what was in the bill and not in the bill. give us a sense of the key aspects of that conversation in which has been part of the debate the last three or four days what's in the bill and not in the bill? >> the program suggested it's a bill that protects people with pre-existing conditions and he wants to sign a bill to protect everybody with a pre-existing condition. the problem is there's provisions that are not good for

someone who has a pre-existing condition. one of the ways that the conservative members of the house caucus was brought on board is letting some insurance companies that seek a waiver charge sick people a higher premium. this was a non-negotiable for the freedom caucus. if this bill the house passed goes through and signed into law by president trump we will once again have an individual market where sick people can face higher premiums because they're expected to have higher medical bills. >> charlie: and sometimes high deductions too. >> very high deductibles. >> charlie: ed, when you look at this bill and look at who gave up what, who made the toughest compromise? >> i think it's more mainstream moderate republicans who had to go along to get the concessions sarah was just talking about.

these write themselves. democrats are in fantastic political position they believe because they now get to run campaign ads against republicans saying they'll cut hundreds of billions from medicaid. if have you cancer you'll have to pay more for your health care. if your mother's sick you'll have to pay for your health care plus your own. there's ways to spin this. we hat an interview at the "post" with nancy pelosi and said it's easier to talk about things when they're going to be taken away from americans as oppose to what you'll do to change a big law that's becoming a settled issue for many americans even if they have general concerns with it. i would say it's people who face difficult re-elections next year in the suburbs, certainly in the northeast and some florida congressional district and a handful in california who will face a difficult time explaining

what they did especially the non-partisan been counters claim tens of millions can lose their coverage and the bill could cost billions to the federal government. that was a big risk they took today in having the vote not knowing exactly the potential cost and in many cases members conceding they hadn't read the thing. >> charlie: why did the president feel he had to do this now rather than go directly to tax reform. >> you need a lot of the savings the republicans hope to generate from health care in order to help pay for and figure out tax reform. that's the basic policy answer. he also knows if you can't get health care it may be impossible to get tax reform. it may be very difficult to do eded to get to a point where they got a win and house republicans felt look, we can governor and come together on something as difficult as this with us and he needed a big

policy achievement. this is only step one of probably three or four but it was a big step. he rightfully today wanted to celebrate that with house republicans and the latest trip to new york to see the australian prime minister in order to do so because to date really the only big thing that congress has given him is neil gore -- gorsuch. >> charlie: they'll will help him? >> they got a sense of how the house can work together and depending on what a final health care bill looks like and sarah's really the in-house expert at least in this conversation on what it will do to save money or move money around, it would make doing tax reform easier from a policy suspect as well, yeah. >> charlie: sarah? >> i think it's a step forward but health care is becoming this all-consuming task. remember back to january

president trump had said he wants to sign an obama care repeal bill in his first day in office and we're now 100 days away from the first day in office and it's hard to see a time line where the republicans are both able to finish health care this year and go to tax reform given all the work that has to be done. the senate is talking about writing its own bill and start from scratch and merging those together. when you look at the legislative calendar it seems hard but not impossible to reform health care and tax reform in the same year. >> there was a moment today at the white house at the rose garden event where the president was talking about the fact, people have been telling me maybe you should get rid of paul ryan. the president didn't deny he talked about it and did nothing to suggest he wants ryan to stay put and happy with the work he's

done. clearly that relationship has been strained. it would have been far worse if this had not happened for ryan and trump and their relationship. if they're not able to work together the republican party and their ability to governor would be seriously jeopardized. >> charlie: paul ryan has consistently said ever since obama care was act the affordable health care act was passed republican said they had to do something about it and tried to change it include court challenge. here it is, finally having a republican president not to have acted on this, according to paul ryan, would have been a defying of their own constituency. >> it would have been an existential crisis and he said there are people in the chamber now who are here because they vowed to take this vote. if we don't take this vote their entire political existence is alled into question. i think that remained the

motivating factor for many of these republican members and probably will for the senators as well. they understand much of their political success in recent years has been to rail against legislation like this and they need to demonstrate they at least tried hard to get it done. >> one of the interesting dynamics we've seen develop is it seems like no one wants to be blamed for stopping this. so you see in the first round of negotiations the freedom caucus had the finger pointed at them for the road block and then the moderates were in the hot seat and it's a hot potato no one wants to drop though they don't like the final product. we'll see that dynamic played not senate. there's hurdles towards passing legislation but one of the things i learn from the health care process is that nobody at the end of the day wants to be the one with the finger pointed at them saying you're the one standing in the way of this

campaign promise we've made for seven years. i think it will be a motivating factor in the senate to pass something. >> charlie: when you look at this bill which many people haven't as you pointed out, how rare is that people are asked to vote on something you don't know what's in it? >> incredibly rare. and republicans demanded you needed a cbo score and democrats have chastised republicans but we could see a cbo score showing millions losing coverage. the vote has been taken. you can't take back the fact you voted for it. it seems quite a risk

republicans are taking to vote for a health care bill when they don't know how many people it covers or costs. >> charlie: can they go to their constituents and say we did it. we said we'd repeal and replace obama care and we did it, thank you very much. >> we don't know they have. first of all, the way it's written now it's not a wholesale replacement of the affordable care act. it's a rewrite so if you wanted it wiped clean you won't be happy. the other risk if members go home tonight for a weeklong recess for some reason they're take break in the middle of may i'm calling it the mother's day recess if they are asked what's in it and struggle to answer i think even republican supporters

will wonder was that the best thing to do. it shows they were willing to put it all at risk and put out to vote because they understand the consequence of dragging it out longer and fumbling the ball yet again was worse than taking the vote now and starting the process and kicking it over to the senate. >> charlie: so is it greater than 50/50 the republicans won't be able to create a bill signed by the president that will be a republican act of health care? >> i think it is certainly an uphill battle but the desire to pass something is very strong. as ed was about to say, given that republicans control the senate, the white house is going to be hard to go back to the voters and say we weren't able to get this done and it weighs heavily on republican legislators. >> and there's at least a 52%

chance they can do it. the question will be whether they get 51% because there's no democrat who plans to vote with them. it was described to me by democratic aides said they're sitting on their hands. >> charlie: thank you. we'll be right back. stay with us. 23 years ago three self-described hipsters created a free montreal-based magazine which quickly developed a reputation for bold, provocative reporting. it's called "vice." it's now becomes a multi-platform corporation valued at $5 billion. along the way they've avoided the trapping of traditional view media and doing instead immersive journalism and has been characterized as hard news with an edge.

"vice news" tonight was launched and hbos first nightly news program. we have shane smith the founder and ceo of vice media and the executive director of "vice news tonight" and host of the weekly documentary series and josh tyrangiel. i'm please to have them both back on this program. >> thank you. >> charlie: welcome back. >> thank you. >> charlie: tell me what vice media is as if i don't know. >> we started the magazine in montreal then we came down here as the first dot-com revolution which went bust and then we moved to brooklyn and started being a digital company so online. we were the first to do online video and native advertising and all that good stuff and got bigger and bigger and grew internationally and we have online and mobile and magazines and agencies, we have record

label. it's a media company. >> charlie: valued at about $5 billion is that about right? >> well, that was last year. >> charlie: david carr said it's hell-bent libertarianism and colorful literacy. >> i was lucky i got to spend time with david. >> charlie: you loved him on the show. >> we met when he was shooting page one and butted heads and became good friends and we were in dublin and they called and said if we get shane will you come to dublin and we said sure. we both went and it was a love fest and we went away and we got this place and set up all these irish musicians and david and i just danced around this crazy

castle together. we was one of the best and called it right. we are no rules, nonparademic. >> charlie: is it news? >> it's entertaining news. i think one of the things to speak of reviews or critiques the first review of vice news by "the new york times" said it's hipsters in skinny jeans and tattoos high-fiving in war zones. everyone was bombed and i said it's perfect because they're not getting us on the facts or dinging us on the story and they're not saying it's not great but they're saying we look different and if we look different guess what, that's our audience. those are the millennials. so you can have the older generation. we'll take the younger generation and if you're making

fun of how we dress which is how they dress, it's a win. >> charlie: so you come up with a nightly presence. did you say let's get the guy who knows how to do a taped show or magazine and he'll tell us what to do. he said it was his idea and knew what he wanted to do. >> he loves the news we create for hbo and we love being on hbo. it's a great platform for us. when he came to us and said look, we want to do this not weekly. we want to do it all the time and nightly it was a big conundrum. we didn't want a voice of god. we didn't want hosts. we didn't want it to look like

other news because it could be derivativ derivativ derivative and i got sick of beating by this guy at the awards shows every year at bloomberg. >> charlie: in the magazine business. >> yes, he'd always be up for best magazine and would always win. when we wanted someone with a creative vision to reinvent news which is hard to do because it has to be recognizable to call it news but different enough so we're not derivative. >> charlie: you had been at "time magazine" and other places and bloomberg. you had no trepidation about this. when you were leaving a tons of people wanted you to come do a variety of things. why was this right for you? >> it was a combination of things. i like solving problems and the naugh naughtier the problem the more interested i am and i've been

blessed with having good patron. you need support because you won't get it right first time out but ten when you take on a big media problem like how to get people to watch something they haven't watched in 60 years. on one hand, shane has a record of being the right kind of media rogue and said we'll do it and figure it out. and hbo was expressing the kind of commitment you need and insistence on quality. so i felt safe which say weird thing to say because jumping into the most competitive landscape which is just delivering news over the air is not a safe thing. i felt like of all the things i could potentially do and was interested in you can have impact, you can be smart, you can have permission to experiment and that's a dream. that's what you want to be able to do. >> charlie: beyond that what are the elements of it, the nightly show? >> when shane and i first spoke about this and i think i said this to him and richard, you

know, nobody needs this, right? the media's changed so much. if you're an engaged news consumer you're getting it all day, on your phone, over the radio, tv. so nobody needs it to just tell you what happened. what happened is pretty obvious. to do this you have to make people want it by seducing them. you have to give them something a little bit familiar. we're unconventional in many ways. the thing we're very conventional about is you watch the show and you'll hear a lot of about what happened in the world today and understand it better. from there that's the basic value proposition but we looked at what conventional news delivers and saw it's the only news product where it's on at the same time, it has the same format which is one person behind the desk. often they're doing the same kinds of stories like you with the morning show. let's start over, let's make the thing we want to make and the visual inspiration in some ways was saturday night live on the one hand and sesame street on

the other. not because we wanted to be funny or childish but both those things know their audience. gou to saturday night live to laugh and go to sesame street to educate your kids. >> charlie: and 60 minutes for great story telling. >> but each has moves. no matter the problem they're trying to solve is they have moves. saturday night live are trying to to make you laugh with monologue jokes and spoofs and they have ways to package ideas. sesame street sometimes it's simple like number two and sometimes it's an ethical and they have character moves and we need data that moves on screen. we need animation. because one of the reasons i think people have fallen out of faith with tv news is they don't have footage, you don't have a

story. we very early on said it's a lot of things that happen in the world without a camera -- >> charlie: it's interesting you say that the three network news i'll add fox to it, they all reach somewhere between 3 million, 4 million to 5 million and 6 million people a night. >> we have the youngest audience according to nielsen of any news show cable or networks. there's some consistency obviously. >> charlie: like 13 million? >> i'm sure hbo would be thrilled. there has to be originality in the presentation. >> charlie: what is the originality. i know it's not a voiceover. >> it's a mix of format and belief you don't need to t everything up with an introduction. your audience is tracking stories outside your news

program. they're bringing context to it and they're going to put up with longer form story telling. we do package are sometimes four to twelve minutes. it's a faith if we deliver on that they'll come back again. >> i think also if you look at the numbers if you want to bring up numbers you say ok, hbo's in 30 million homes the network is 100 million full discretiotribu. the fact ware doing 500,000 off the bat and we're number one in digital for hbo is fantastic, a. b, if you combine the nightly and weekly we're doing somewhere around north of 5 million ourselves. now, it's video on demand and bespoke and cumed.

>> charlie: and what's the difference between what your doing and he's doing. >> he does the work and they wheel me out to lunch and i wave. i do longer stuff. i do more interviews. i like to get in the field and shoot but now because i dont have a lot of time they send me in for interviews. >> charlie: your time demand is from being an executive as well as being on air. >> the weekly is my baby and josh is on weekly for special and nightly. >> charlie: when is that show on, vice? >> friday nights. >> charlie: this is a clip from season high from february 2017 featuring you reporting from the north sea on the cost of climate change. here it is.

[♪] >> i'm on an oil and gas platform one of the biggest in the world and we came here to talk to a company for more than 20 years admitted climate change is reel -- real and supported the kyoto protocol and look at how big oil and gas can do something to reduce emission. >> charlie: what i see there is reporting, i see a lot of video, well done, i hear a lot of music -- [laughter] >> that story is actually about there's a lawsuit against exxon that's being put forth by a number of attorneys general in america saying they knew about climate change yet spent billions to say it wasn't happening and question the science. the same scientist did that job

for big tobacco did the same job for big oil. basically we're talking to a lot of lawyers about a lawsuit which isn't great tv. so we went and said, ok. norway is interesting because they're a progressive company and one of the largest natural oil and gas producer and say, climate change is happening. it's happening because of oil and gas and we're doing carbon capture and all those rigs are actually the energy comes from hydro. to have an oil company tell the truth was fantastic. and they own these platforms and back in the '80s they elevated the platforms by eight to twelve feet which cost millions of millions and said they we had to get them insured for 100 years and the outside of climate change sea level rise is eight

feet and now it comes about that's the level of sea level rise. it was a gotcha moment. >> charlie: you shoot and broadcast the same night in do you have to or package stuff you can decie when to do it? >> we have longer lead stuff we invest time in. last week we did a piece we started shooting really in december about gang violence in chicago. it takes a long time. but we are often times really just cutting in the control room and go live two or three nights a week meaning we feed live to hbo and what you're seeing is being dispatched. we need time to get up to date stuff in the show and we also know planning, preparation and long-term story telling is our hallmark. >> charlie: you said story selection is about asking whether we can add value. we don't just want to do another story then another.

>> look, i'm cognizant ase= avid news consumer. i'm tracking a lot of stuff all day. if you're going to tell somebody something and i can find that information out in different places you haven't distinguished yourself at all. one of the ways this has come up for us is the election of territory -- president trump like a volcano and there's lava everyone. and for the first week or so we were tearing up lineups all day long. there was so much going on. we discovered we were for that period doing things not as value-added as we ought to be doing and if we know he tweeted media is the enemy of all people what can we do. if we overlap with somebody else

we better overlap we better have something different and additive. there's so many choices. we're new. we look different. use that. >> charlie: what's the profile of the people who watch your show or all your shows? >> young, affluent, diverse -- >> charlie: have they been news watchers? have they been news watchers or simply turned off by news because they were tired of it and thought it was boring and don't believe in appointment television. >> we have both. we have a little from column a and column b. we make this nightly show and slave away and push it out to 7:30 and we heard from hbo people would binge watch which is an interesting behavior for a news show. not one we heard about before. >> charlie: it happens all the time on this show. people say i devote saturday

morning to watching your show. i take five hours and go through it and what i like i watch. what i don't like i skip through. >> it gives you more liberty. it gives you the extra day of consideration to do something you may not have been able to do if you're just responding to dead lines. our users want us in the presence tense. they don't want us if the future and don't necessarily demand we're up to date as long as we provide value. >> when talk about millennials, 18 to 34. 18 is much different than 34. we have people who have been disenfranchised by mainstream media -- >> charlie: meaning what? >> they don't feel like it speaks to them or that there's been scandals. and so basically they're saying well i'm going to these guys over here. then we have other younger kids who have come up saying because their older brothers or sisters or whatever were

watching "vice" they've been reared on "vice" news and we're their go-to and there's people who compare us to the other mainstream media and say they do stuff not on the news cycle. they go behind it. >> charlie: during when john stewart was at the helm for -- jon stewart was at the helm for the daily show they said this is not good. it's about satire but the story you always heard is it good or bad so many young people this is the only way they get news. they watch the daily show. >> i think it's good. >> charlie: you think it's good? >> yeah. it's good because they're getting news. >> charlie: and jon's show wasn't much news -- >> well, it's issues. he was talking about issues. he was popularizing it. >> but you also can't enjoy it

unless you know the news. all the references pass you. that was a -- i believe an underestimation of that audience where i think our audience is underestimated too. you can't enjoy a 12 minute piece about gang violence in chicago unless you come to it prepared and have a little bit of knowledge. >> charlie: you said "vice" doesn't assume young people don't care about news. they assume they do. it's how it's presented in a way that is part of who they are and their own sort of lifestyle dna. >> look, one of the things in business news where i was for six years you forget is people want to feel something. you mention the music under shane's piece. one of the things that i have learned in part from shane and from spike jonze and others is people don't mind learning

something while they're feeling something and some of our audience may not be expecting it but that's the reward they'll have season they'll remember and attach to the issue. >> charlie: where's it going? where's the trajectory? >> for news or the company? >> charlie: for both. start with the company. >> we started when i first came to talk to you. we were one of ten and then we were one of four and now we're one of one so the largest new media company in the world and the want to take them out. >> charlie: i heard everybody was running out to brooklyn i thought i better find out what's going on. >> everything's going on out there. that's the hub. >> charlie: the trajectory is what though?

>> for the next two years it's boring. for the next two years we go into a country and launch the network and push it to mobile. we launch our studios and go to 's just bang, bang, bang, bang launching all of our platforms in other countries, 80 countries. the big question in the next two years is expand and what do we do after that because you have vice on hbo, you have "vice" on sky and times of india and at some point you'll have to go direct to consumer. you'll have to go and i think that's where everything's going. >> charlie: when? >> now. >> charlie: when will it be pre dominant? >> now, netflix, the success and apple will enter into the fray, hulu, it's going to be and as that's happening your having skinny bundle and going bespoke. you'll have 30 things you paid for and some over the top and some old school tv but it's

happening today. the fact at&t is buying time warner is because of that. they have to drive data which is video and stop exclusivity. >> charlie: and whatever they can find. >> rumors are apple is looking to buy what's out there. >> charlie: they have $250 billion in cash. >> that's a fact. >> charlie: he said those guys out there have so much money. go ahead. >> well, if trump can say we're going to make jobs in america you can repatriate the cash and they'll buy up everything. why not. >> charlie: is this the end of networks? everybody's been predicting the end of networks a long time. >> we got into tv at the end of networks. have you five years because of the way contracts work because of status quo as it shrinks. i always tell my guys we have to be in the top 30 networks

because all those other 170 will go away. i think you're seeing the beginning of the end of the traditional network. >> charlie: but staying for a long time though? >> five years and then it will be an ip game. everybody will say who has the most ip and amazon or apple or netflix they'll try to accumulate as much as content as they can to have a better more robust direct to consumer offering. >> charlie: good luck. back in a moment. stay with us. in 2002 tabitha soren began photographing a group of minor league draft pick for the oakland as and watched players of looking to make it to the big show and those that never made it. the stories and photos are captured in her new book called "fantasy life: baseball and the american dream." and has a new project opening

this month in san francisco. i'm please to have her back at the table. welcome. >> thank you. >> charlie: where have you been? >> i have been following some baseball players but in that 15 years i already had three children, got married and sort of -- >> charlie: they stop by to talk about his wanted to continue to hang out with billy bean and dragged me to spring training in 2003 you know how you make compromises in relationships and when i got there i was really happy i went because i went 21 guys from the 2002 draft class at their very first spring training and a felt as an artist like how often do you get to meet a whole group of

people embarking on the same journey at the exact same time and their faces were so full of hopefulness and purpose i had a hard time figuring out how fast to get started. when i met these players i assumed they were just on their way to the major leagues. it was inevitable they would get there and i had to learn through hanging out with them through a long period of time that really only 6% of them get there. i actually figured out eventually i assumed i would fall in love with baseball like all the fanatics in the stands and it never really happened. but what the project turned into was much more about resilience and striving and what baseball says about american culture because these guys know only 6% of them get there but they're pushing, pushing anyway and i felt it's not just professional

athletes driving themselves at that speed and with that endurance and risking injuries and leaving college, i feel like a lot of americans push themselves that hard. >> charlie: there's stories. >> we're both from the bay area and he's a very generous soul as i'm sure you must know. when he found out i was doing this he asked if he could help. i said why don't you write one of those art essays and he said tabitha nobody reads those stupid things. i don't want to write what nobody's going to read and wrote a short story which i never would have asked him to write a short story but he did and he's incredibly prolific. >> charlie: is it the circle? >> yes, you can't keep up with him and his wife is no slouch either. >> charlie: let's talk about the pictures and come back and find out whatever happened to you. >> i'm still here. >> charlie: yes, you are. so the first one. tell me what the photographer

saw here. >> that's the stockton port dugout and they're a minor league affiliate of the oakland as. i felt like that picture encapsulated the daily routine. the groundhog day-like grind of people being bored and upset. aperture publishing helped me take 15 years of work and pare it down to this visual alternate reality the long bus rides, cramped hotel rooms, injuries, friendships -- >> charlie: all built around hope. >> you have to believe you're going to make it or you won't. we can't all be derek jeter. i think they know that logically at some point. but if you don't believe you're going to be, if you don't believe you're the person to win the game, get the oscar go from

mail room to boardroom as americans we're wrapped up in what i believe is a false premise if you have a dream and work hard success is within anyone's reach. i think that's not logical. most people know it's not logical but in this case and in a lot of cases where you're trying to be the exception and trying to be number one it's the dream that matters. >> charlie: let's look at the second picture. >> it's fritz in the pool during spring training and it's hot as you know and they'd cool off in the pool and reason i like it is that's what you see on the surface but what it means to me is that you can take the personal and go universal with this. we're all trying to stay afloat. can't tell whether he's sinking or floating and looks like an underwater super hero and he showed up at spring training and everybody assumed he'd make it and injured and had a surgery

and another surgery and kept going and pushing and i thought that's what we all do and learn resilience. >> charlie: the next slide. >> that's derek jeter at his last home game. he's the exception to the rule. >> charlie: because of supreme talent or because of something else? >> i think all of it. i think lack of injuries -- the injuries play a huge part in derailing these people. >> charlie: look at the next slide. >> this is clinton, iowa. it's so hot there that they have showers attached to the outside. so probably most the photographers were inside the stadium taking pictures of the game and a got bored and wandered outside and caught this young man who probably plays little league and idolizes the people on the field taking a break. >> charlie: what am i looking at? >> this is oakland coliseum. they have an annual night where they not only explode fireworks but also let fans on the field.

this is a case where i feel like art is really an anecdote to the busy overscheduled lives we all lead. in this case i wasn't interested in the fireworks, i was interested in what happened after. just like the name these guys are making for themselves within baseball it's less interesting to me than how they rebuild their identity afterwards. >> charlie: they call it the night of the dream. this is rain? >> it was torrential downpour when arrived to shoot a player in the now independent league and he was released. it was so stormy outside i didn't feel safe carrying my equipment i stayed and my breath fogged up the window. >> charlie: tell me about surface tension. >> it's a harbinger of the next because the aesthetic of the stadium shot in the rain relates

to this new work. i'm letting people use my ipad and i'm using the ipad and let the dirt and the grime and fingerprints "á9l into the history and grab a link i had looked at and pull it up and then i shoot it with age 8 x 10 film camera and i'm using an analog process to shoot a digital project. it's something that i think speaks to the struggle of forces within our heads while we're trying to deal with e-mail and text and various screens in our lives. i feel like technology has creating a lot of tension and distraction in our heads and this visually gets at that. >> charlie: when does you decide you wanted to be a photographer?

>> well, i have always taken pictures. my dad was in the military so i took pictures all the time as a memory bank. they were not interesting pictures. it was a catalog basically. my dad, the rug, the desk because we moved so often i'd forget. once i got successful in television i felt like the work i was doing was getting more and more mainstream. the higher i rose the more watered down it got and the less agency i had over the creative process. for me art was a solution to that. i feel like i can get to a truth in the work it's less of a who, what, when, where and why and more of an emotional truth and more room for subtle and nuanced which is what i was alonging f r i was looking for.

>> charlie: you couldn't have the creative thrill you have now? >> it wasn't as focussed as that. the other thing is i have kind of a dark side. nobody ever tells me to smile in the art world. if i want to explore panic and dread and anxiety and the complex of mental turbulence i feel in managing all my devices then they're interested. >> charlie: do you miss it at all? >> no, not really. the only thing i miss is being at the center of politics or current events. >> charlie: that's the point of it all. >> there's other work you have to do in addition. i've done tons of stories that weren't that important because it was my job. it's nice to be able to explore things that occur to me in a way that's never been done. so these images are very much talking about how the world is getting more visual than verbal

and as a verbal person i think it's interesting lol is a funny laugh and my daughter sent me an jpeg air kiss to and didn't think to call me. it's a funny kind of kiss. we're substituting a lot of intimacy with these devices and i don't think we really know what affect they're fon us. i can think of a ton of benefits with the technology and history and gps and everything but i don't think we're very good at anticipating the effect of technology on us even -- >> charlie: robbing us of some kind of intimacy and personal communication -- >> well, in addition i think we

don't anticipate the affectful have on us even if it it's not just screens. can you think of anything more pathological than a nuclear weapon. that's a technology too. we didn't anticipate the problems that would occur with building something like that. >> charlie: an interesting thing about technology is it's not just in the hands of good people but in the hands of bad people too. >> sure. i would also say you have this grind, this residue and when we space out on your computer, how many times have you been managing your windows and phones and all of a sudden it's time to go whatever the deadline is and have you no idea what you've been doing the last three hours. the fingerprints and grime are a map of what you've been up to. i love the idea that photography can show you what would

otherwise be invisible. >> charlie: that's julian, right? julian julian assange. >> when you deal with it you have privacy and surveillance and i needed to have each one of the pictures connect to some deal of the internet and he belongs there. >> charlie: the next one is your daughter sending a virtual good night kiss. that's what you were referring to. she didn't call you up and say mom i love you, i want to say goodnight. she sent you this. >> the visual substrate is obvious because the negative is so large and i think the world is become being more visual. she transacts by sending

manipulated pictures back and forth. very rarely do they call or text. >> charlie: what do you think it's doing to her? >> i think i'd sound old. >> charlie: i want to know. >> there's a lack of social development. >> charlie: how old is your daughter? >> this one is 15. i have two. >> charlie: how many children do you have? >> three children. >> charlie: and michael is crazy for baseball and coaches little league and obsessed by that too. >> yep, they make art with me so a lot of these fingerprints are my 10-year-old son playing video games and his fans are fantastic because they sweat so they leave heavy duty drips and easy things to focus on. >> charlie: the next slide. >> one thing i'm trying to get the project to address is us confusing the perfection of the devices with the perfection of

ourselves. i feel the apple designers or any designer has made this screen to be perfectly minimal, it's meant to resist oil and reminding viewers with our hairiness and saliva and oil that our humanity is very messy and i don't think we should feel physically inferior or deny that part of ourselves as we're dealing with this technology. kind of beautiful in the end. >> charlie: "fantasy life was published april 1. >> yes. and the next project moves to los angeles in june. >> charlie: congratulations. >> thank you. >> charlie: thank you for joining us. see you next time.

captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> you're watching pbs.