we want to present. something real. tonight on our t.v. saying no to the n.b.a. and you are of course blocks key parts of the national defense authorization act activists are touting it as a battle blood but there's still a long way to go tell you all about it. plus the obama administration is cracking down on hydraulic fracturing but it still isn't drilling into the heart of the issue so what's with the blade and oversight we'll explore. i'm just a guy here and. i'm sorry i'm just a guy who cures an awful lot about my country. but it's no laughing matter major media outlets are taking a major hit in the ratings this despite paying their personalities bloated salaries

of the average viewer isn't impressed so does this mean the days of overpaid media stars coming to an end. it's thursday may seventeenth a.t.m. here in washington d.c. i'm liz wahl and you're watching our t.v. . well a victory for opponents of the n.c.a.a. a federal judge has ruled that provisions in a controversial law may violate our constitutional rights president obama signed the national defense authorization act back in december the move has outraged activists that say the law is so vague it allows u.s. citizens to be indefinitely detained by the military and without due process but a group of activists sued president obama and yesterday the federal judge took their side here as part of

a court order issued by judge katherine forest it reads quote this court is acutely aware of the preliminarily and joining an act of congress must be done with great caution however it is the responsibility of our judicial system to protect the public from acts of congress which infringe upon constitutional rights so the law has been blocked at least for now the time to talk more about the case and the implications of it tangerine bolen executive director at revolution truth welcome to the show to injury and so i know that you are a major critic of the n.c.a.a. and were instrumental in helping to bring this case to court so a huge victory for you your reaction to the judge's ruling i don't know i'm asking you rule and quite grateful for her ruling yesterday a huge boon to both tournaments and activism around the world so i'm thrilled. and i can tell you're you're elated there the court said provisions of the bill

could be unconstitutional talk about what constitutional rights you say this law violates. so our challenge the challenge we brought forth was primarily based on first amendment rights and secondly on fifth amendment rights first amendment free speech and free association activities and due process and judge ruled strongly on both counts in our favor should be unconstitutional which means on its face this provision in the law is not constitutional that meets not only our seventh meeting but anyone anywhere that we consider. you know perhaps in danger of this law could bring a case forward it's a strong ruling it's always doing anytime anywhere couldn't get. in what makes the n.b.a. so controversial is how vague it is and it's begun as critics like you say opens up all kinds of scary a possibility as we had one of the plaintiffs in this case on chris hedges not too long ago here's what he had to say about this it removes due

process for anybody who is deemed not much else to terrorist but to have contact with these associated forces that's not a term that's defined it's nebulous it's quite a frightening piece of legislation. so plaintive sphere that even reporting terrorists could be considered grounds for being detained under this law and the judge acknowledged the danger of some of that language can you talk about the dangers of this kind of vague language in the legislation. definitely you know one of the things people try to do when they try to. basically say that we were wrong to bring this to the poor that have no merits is say that the n.c.a.a. is just an extension of the a you a map in some respects it's not and judge forest made it quite clear yesterday that that's not the case this section a section ten twenty one goes much farther than they ever did it clues such vague

and such for ongoing bridge that it didn't seem dangerous to me that's why i wrote this approach chris hedges and his lawyers and ask that we amend this to be more to point to suit but it also seemed dangerous to judge forrest and i have to say she asked the government attorneys five times in court why they couldn't say this you know this is an essentially this isn't a danger to these people and they couldn't or wouldn't so it really affirms for us that you know this is not a frivolous thing whatsoever to any of us our journalists and activists around the world we're really grateful today for this ruling so and so the judge this ruling as a preliminary injunction it's only temporary how do you hope this plays out when are you confident that it will play out in your favor and ultimately that you and the plaintiffs will provide prevail in this case yes so i am confident i think we have a really strong team i think we have a really good case i think judge for us definitely affirmed that fact yesterday how

i'd like to see it play out well there are a few options you ways that this could go obviously i think our attorneys to speak to this a little bit better on the legal but you know maybe the judge will decide the government will not try to appeal that would be unlikely but the judge the judge's ruling was so strong that there is some reason to think the government may not appeal if they do appeal however we will bring forward a very strong case and that will happen in a number of ways what you are keep a small number of plaintiffs or because you are all this especially unconstitutional we have the right to bring a lot of people forward and also some new developments today in an amendment to the n.c.a.a. was presented on the house floor to get rid of that provision that allows for indefinite detention on u.s. soil. a very timely what do you make of this timing. well it's great timing and i wholeheartedly support just congressman amash amendment the one thing that i'm

concerned about though is that it actually rolls as back from where we stand as of today because of the judge's ruling yesterday our law lawsuit doesn't want anyone anywhere around the world to be indefinitely detained by the u.s. government no evidence ammash is ruling only applies to us citizens we just like to see the fundamental rights and liberties of people everywhere be protected so you're saying that they results of this preliminary injunction are more favorable than the amendment that was presented on the floor today you know they are and as long as we can make it a current injunction we'll be in great shape i yesterday's ruling was amazing we're so grateful for it it's it's the best thing i think that's have been ten years as far as ruling in favor of people and against a government i would say has gone way too far in its attacks on our civil liberties and so for you know what is next in this fight well next stocks we're going to wait to see the government's decision on whether they appeal and we're going to create some contingency plans in the meantime we've got

a lot of people in the wings who really want to be plaintiffs journalists filmmakers muslim citizens in america who unnecessarily harassed and harms all kinds of people so i'll be working on that and keeping up my work my relations ruth and all the good stuff that we do so there is never there's no end to things that need to be done and this is unfortunately but so yesterday was a boon to us so it's nice people all over the world of thank us for that as tangerine thank you very much for coming on the show definitely achieved what many thought wasn't possible so a great day for you and a lot of critics of the n.d.a. that was tangerine bowl and the executive director at revolution truth. thank you. all so i had an r.t.a. drill baby drill just so just so long as you disclose the chemicals you use first the obama administration has a new set of rules for hydraulic fracturing companies but they still missed the heart of the controversy the controversy behind the practice i'll tell you how next

. r t is the state run english speaking russian channel it's kind of like. russia today has an extremely confrontational stance when it comes to us. of american power continues. things in our country. might actually be time for a revolution. and it turns out that a killer drink at starbucks has a surprising him greedier. we

just put a picture of me when i was like nine years old when she told the truth. i'm a contestant i'm a total get of friends that i love driving hip hop music and for. that he was kind of yesterday. i'm very proud of the world with its place. new rules over the controversial practice of fracking but are they enough last week president obama proposed national guidelines on fracking the technique extracts

that natural gas from the earth by injecting fluid deep into the ground the liquid mixture sometimes includes toxic chemicals that make its way into water wells so the obama administration's rules require drilling companies to disclose what chemicals they're using and test wells to make sure they're not prone to leaking now fracking companies say the rules are to restrictive fracking critics say they don't go far enough in fact they say it only applies to a very small percentage of natural gas supply in the nation so is drinking water still on the verge of becoming hazardous as a result of fracking talk about what the frack is going on i was joined by michael leunig is a reporter for truthout dot org we first discussed president obama's proposed guidelines take a listen well these new rules coming in ministration only cover. the group when management and tribal lands and that is where the federal government

has jurisdiction but only covers about eleven percent of our known gas reserves so you know most of the fracking operations in the country really won't be covered by these rules so what needs to happen now do they need to be expanded to cover some of the this other land or how do they fix this. well there is a patchwork of regulations state by state and actually the industry prefers that they don't want the federal government stepping in to make new regulations so they might have to follow rules that might overlap but. we're waiting on federal regulation to go beyond that and the e.p.a. has been doing a study but that would be the end of the year so in the cases where the regulations do apply but it seems like as you just said they don't apply to a majority of fracking sites here in the u.s. what is the likelihood that even in these scenarios they'll be enforced i think

that the federal government can be enforcing these but as far as we know one of the big provisions of these rules is disclosure of the chemicals that the companies bring to the ground back industry has been trying to keep those chemicals some of them trade secrets for years but they won't have to disclose these chemicals until after they're done drilling and that's one big hole in that in this rule that you know people who want to test their water before the drilling you get a baseline are nice of what was there before the drilling won't be able to do that so it sounds like it'll be too late the damage will be already done by the time people know what's what kind of chemicals are in the water the damage could already be done by then to be harder to hold companies accountable if you don't have baseline data on what was in your water before they start drilling now on the other side there the drilling companies say the rules go too far and that natural gas it's touted as a great alternative to coal which comes with its own environmental problems so what do you say to that argument. natural gas can be cleaner than call but coal is also

been regulated much more extensively than natural gas and also fallen ministration has actually been working pretty closely with the industry their new interagency working group to come out with these rules got praise after praise from the industry for doing that so actually courts are going to say they don't want to be regulated but so far i think they're pretty happy. many people are concerned about fracking including their breweries and here's one of the headlines that says fracking could poison your next to be here that's what it rains the founder of the brooklyn brewery fears toxic chemicals are making their way into beverages so if the possibility of poisoned water is enough to scare you could avid beer drinkers push this fight over the edge was a digicam i saw i hope that i don't take any for the bear but i think it might. take a bit more on the environmental movement than just microbes and. anybody to stand

by because so what are you hoping happens next what needs to be done in order to strengthen these rules that you say right now are inadequate as they stand the e.p.a. has been conducting a study on fracking for the past about two years and that will be done the end of the year and they have been commissioned by congress to do that and the hope is that after they're done the come out their own regulations that process is taking a very long time and i think the for activists it's time to look at the state level states have a lot more power regulating fracking at this point in time to push your local and state legislators to the clash. thank you very much for coming on the show that was michael leunig thanks she's a reporter for truthout dot org. well it's no secret that america is battling an obesity problem but until recently no one really understood how far reaching or how serious the problem is new numbers suggest that one in three americans are

overweight twenty six million americans have type two diabetes and additional seventy nine million more are pre diabetic disturbing facts that a new h.b.o. documentary called the weight of the nation is attempting to shed light on here's a peek. i'm five foot ten and two hundred forty two pounds i always say this is the biggest i'm ever going to be and i said that twenty pounds ago third of americans are obese another third is overweight obesity is the biggest threat to the health welfare and future of this country i've always been overweight i've got diabetes sleep apnea heart disease everything is hurting now. so we know there's a problem and a very serious one at that and yet people are not getting upset about the statistics but the stigma around the word obese so is this sensitivity a way for americans to avoid talking about the real issues laurie harshness with

their resident nat went to the streets of the big apple to take a bite out of the issue. the u.k.'s national institute for health and clinical excellence if you die suggesting that the word o.b. might be too upsetting and derogatory to use is this a case of political correctness gone mad this week let's talk about that last forty pounds if you were still happy and someone called you opie with that about and you . i've been called worse to know what's worth calling someone obese or calling someone fat. how they believe the same thing over there for their fat asses be so for that so should we not address the fact because it has a little vessel that's just a vase a toilet that's just the spread of things we don't but it's bad for people like hot leads to heart trouble and i carried over to iraq coverage august albeit not as we only live in charge of deciding when a word is playing and when and where it is the proper term will i mean you that you

don't really want the government to be in charge of that that's for sure of anything yeah i mean the government shouldn't be in the in the in the game of policing what you say certainly of what you think you know what if someone calls you whitey somebody called me why do you say the property accurate but. you would you be offended no so why do people take offense to some words and not other words . probably because they care about what other people think it's an insecurity so we should just stop caring about what other people think and then the whole thing will go away it's not like you should stop caring what other people think you should start caring more about what you think they get matters in the context that it's used like if you look at somebody and say damn they're obese in that context i think it's derogatory i think to say the word obese or say obesity in general when you talk about a condition. would not be derogatory just a statement of of

a problem in a society maybe if we ever get this word to people would feel oh ok maybe oh it would be good. regular people so there's no problem and what if you want about what to take exactly like what are we afraid to call it drug user or drug user exactly you know this is. where we should escape from the pros for the problem. whether or not you think the word obese is derogatory the bottom line is it's also a medical condition and simply avoiding the word is not going to make the issue go away. a rough week for c.n.n. the network's primetime show slumped in ratings the lowest c.n.n. has seen and fifteen years on tuesday piers morgan tonight drew only thirty nine thousand viewers that's a best small compared to the host who slot he took over larry king's viewership

stood strong for years but pierce isn't the only one despite being paid millions and millions of dollars many news stars are losing their ratings and their viewers so what's going on we explored you know if you buy ten million dollars chandelier. you should have a house to put it in fired from current t.v. keith olbermann compares himself to a multimillion dollar households makes sure you're the chandelier i look a little commentator now suing the sinking network for a reported fifty million dollars blaming them for shoddy production and from liberal to conservative slanted media not too long ago fox said goodbye to their top political pundit captivating america with his conspiracy theory is here you have the secret you're the answer emotional outbreaks i am not a journalist i'm just a guy who cares. i'm sorry i'm just

a guy who cares an awful lot about my country even fox had enough of the antics and oprah considered to be the most influential woman in the world. with the highest rated talk show for decades her own network isn't quite living up to the hype it was the usa today headline that was so oprah not quite standing on her own and it just did. the network reportedly lost three hundred thirty million dollars since it started airing last year former morning show darling katie couric rakes in fifteen million annually that's a page from my notebook on katie couric c.b.s. news today she's not doing it in ratings secrecy b.s. in the evening and c.n.n.'s prime time silver fox once always found on the front line and scene of the crime.

can now be found here i know all the real housewives of beverly hills despite millions in compensation why are stars in news who are losing their shyness because it's big corporate they're going to dumb it down to the least common denominator and of course it will be almost like entertainment meanwhile recent statistics show you are leaving the mainstream networks and drove from march of last year to march of this year c.n.n. lost a staggering fifty percent of its viewers fox lost seventeen percent imus n.b.c. fared well in comparison with a three percent rise in viewers so where are they turning to instead social media and online outlets are giving the mainstream a run for their money and whenever you have that huge gap between what you're reading online on facebook and twitter and what the evening news is showing you that some people choose alternative outlets well times have changed and viewers now have the luxury of options so if they don't like what they're seeing they simply stop tuning in. or if they don't like what they're reading. i guess one click away

from many outlets that will report on the news they find him and washington less well artsy. so what's going on here and is there any way it's reverse this trend to answer all that and more earlier i was joined by christopher chambers journalism professor for georgetown university he explained the massive drop of viewership among the mainstream news outlets take a listen well you have to understand it. in terms of three when you call it factors or obstacles because basically saturation segmentation and sociology and the this can jump around among all these three but basically when you have somebody like oprah the saturation point is incredible when she's on once a day and doing her thing everybody wants to see your butt entire network that doesn't even have daytime original programming that was you know that was tanking

and sociology aspect to a lot of younger women didn't find her relevant anymore and they didn't like the the the celebrity worship so you know you know there's gone to social media same thing with katie couric a lot of younger women don't find her a lot of them don't even know she is and then the segmentation thing might help people like bill o'reilly and sean hannity and people like that but you don't see them going off to start their own network which is which is what glenn beck did with g.b. t.v. now the segmentation health because his audience of lunatics followed him but it's not on prime time you have to order it you have to watch it on you tube so you know so there is some savvy there so i mean when you look at that interplay among those three factors it explains a hell of a lot of what's going on i was so i like piers morgan i mean larry king was larry king it was an icon a lot of people like that a lot of people older people like me like tuning in but then when he was gone. and

we basically went with them and now where did we go i mean some people went to fox some people are watching you know animals kill each other on animal planet but they're not watching piers morgan because there's just something you know not very genuine about him and b. and he's still trying to do the celebrity get for the latest murderer scandal and it really is wearing thin but these networks are banking and that they've always kind of banked on their star isn't and best millions and you know there's many examples that we could point to. i guess they've they've the big salary doesn't necessarily translate to big ratings no i mean it doesn't it you know for certain like when you talk about segmentation it helps certainly when you're talking about rush limbaugh you know why he's making the big bucks why bill o'reilly is making the big bucks because of that maniacal following and because you know unlike certain shows i mean like maybe jon stewart jon stewart's not dealing in fear and

suddenly you know that appealing to their dad and he said attaining but he's also analyzing he's not appealing to the reptilian brain the medulla back there that always thinks about you know killing people and what somebody is trying to do to me which is what the other guys are doing so that does help but still you don't see them going off to start their own network rush limbaugh is not that stupid so there's that aspect of keeping that market and being renumerated being paid for it to deliver what they need to deliver to the sponsors but they're not going to overstep and overreach and i think that's what katie couric oprah has certainly done it c.n.n. has done it by putting their trust in piers morgan but making a reasonable bet with say soledad o'brien in the morning which is a reasonable alternative to the morning shows where you see the big seller it's especially on n.b.c. with matt lauer but at least met lauer is he's going to keep it in his comfort zone he might not be worth it in terms of. the news and entertainment product but he's

worth it to them in terms of delivering to their sponsors and also on that story there we showed it to six c.n.n. lost half of their viewers last seventeen percent. so it's kind of happening across the spectrum here is this a trend to. signify a big shift in where people are turning to the olympics i think so i mean you do have people scaping to social media now again the material in social media is to come from somewhere somebody's got to be doing the original reporting the original regional digging the original analysis some people are leaving because of that segmentation factor and they want to see the raw meat if they're right wingers i want to see all this stuff that nobody wants to cover you know obama was born on mars or something like that so there are going to be a lot of people are leaving to get the news that they can pick and choose what news and when to look at it and they don't have to deal with these overblown stars i

mean when you look at somebody like jon stewart and stephen colbert there or even rachel maddow there's something understated about them as opposed to keith olbermann there's something original and interesting in the product as are to be or if you were to look at current was saying congar and the young turks i mean there's a certain continuity there with some of these bigger than life balloons. i think it turns a lot of people off even in my generation so we're looking at news and other sources but we we still demand that the news on social media come from a reputable source and they're in there in is the problem we are seeing the facts i guess the social media and i guess this well that no because they have some media. thank you very much for chambers journalism professor at georgetown university. but as a for now but for more of the stories we covered you can go to our you tube channel at youtube dot com slash r t america they will find a bunch of stories we didn't have time to get to on the show today and track. web

team wrote an interesting article about a proposal by senators charles schumer and bob casey to tax americans who renounce their citizenship that's right they want to make you pay for not wanting to be an american any longer that's an all they're suggesting the deal also wants to ban these people from ever setting foot on american soil again it's being dubbed the x. patriot act and it could have huge consequences on all americans so check out the in-depth article on r.t. dot com slash usa and that's going to wrap it up for tonight i'll see you back here tomorrow and what drives the world the fear mongering used by politicians who makes decisions to break through it's already been made who can you trust no one who is you in view with the global machinery see where are we heading state controlled capitalism is called session.