>> rose: welcome to the broadcast. tonight a conversation about the white house media strategy as the president will be appearing on five sunday shows this weekend. >> i'll give you a strategy in one sentence, charlie, all obama, all the time. the media may do stories about the president being overexposed but nobody is turning down those invitation. it's really striking. he doesn't have to go on five sunday shows. cojust do meet the press or face the nation, and make news with whatever he has to say. but in every opportunity whether it's the four prime time news conferences, the joint address to congress, the address to a joint session of congress in prime time, and now doing the road

blocking thing on sunday morning, this white house and this president seems to delight in cranking up the volume. some would say to ear splitting levels. >> one of the things that we've seen in the polls is that people like barack obama. and so the more he gets out there, smiling, appearing comfortable and at ease while defending his policies, you know, we'll see whether or not he can improve the support for his policies which haven't fared as well as his persona. but i think when you've got this fractured environment, it's difficult to break through, it's difficult to make an impression. you've got to run many more tv ads in a campaign than you used to to break through. they've got a guy who is exceptionally gifted and they're using him as much as possible as the most critical moment of his presidency because he knows if he doesn't get health care in particular, that would be a very, very serious blow to him. >> and i think like the great hollywood stars, obama has this mystique. he withholds a little something of himself at all times. so that when you see him, even though you seem him --

see him a lot. you don't feel like you're getting the entire picture with him and that keeps you wanting to come back more wi him. >> obama would give one speech about, you know, health care at lunchtime and a stimulus, you know, at 3:00 in the afternoonment and urban renewal at 6:00 and israel at 8:00. and what do you do. but here's what i think is dr. ing. again this would have been heresy in the reagan era. you had one message and that was it and you made sure everybody got it and that's not what is happening any more. >> rose: we continue going from the presidency to food. frank bruni, the former restaurant critic for the "new york times" has written about his experiences in a new book called "born round" so they come to you. you have had these varied experience at the "new york times". been to columbia journalism school as well. and they say we want you to be the food critic. and what did you say? >> well, i did whatever the equivalent of a double take is on the telephone. i was sort of surprised. i mean i knew that the times like the way a wrote and trusted me with a wide variety of things but i didn't expect them to come to me with that offer. it was surprising because i

hadn't written a lot about food. but what not all of them knew that i knew is that it was also a really ironic offer because of my long history with food. i'm one who really struggled a lot to forge a healthy relationship. >> so that made it more likely you would accept it or not accept it. >> initially i wasn't sure. ultimately it was one of the things that lead me to accept it. >> rose: the president in the media and the restaurant critic in the restaurants. next. >> funding for charlie rose has been provided by the following: captioning sponsored by

rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. with a look at how the president uses media to get his message across. in his first eight months in office president obama has granted 117 interviews, 66 on television. this week he will be making his case for health-care reform on all the major networks on cnn, and on spanish language uni vision. will not appear on fox. monday night he will be the sole guest on david letterman's late show. the wall to wall coverage has resurrected lock standing questions about the risk of overexposure. also today first lady michelle obama made her first foray into the health care debate speaking at the white house. she called health care a woman's issue. >> i think it's clear that health insurance reform and what it means for our families is very much a women's issue. it is very much a women's

issue. and if we want to achieve true equality for women, if that is our goal f we want to ensure that women have opportunities that they deserve, if that is our goal f we want women to be able to care for their families and pursue things that they could never imagine, then we have to reform the system. we have to reform the system, the status quo is unacceptable. it is holding women and families back. and we know it. >> rose: joining me now jennifer senior of "new york" magazine, she writes about president obama's media strategy in the august issue of that magazine. from washington howard kurtz media critic for "the washington post" and host of cnn's reliable sources. john harwood of cnbc and "the new york times", he's interview thed president twice since he took office, most recently last week. from boston allen schroder, professor of journalism and northeastern university, i

am pleased to have all of them here. let me begin with howard kurtz. tell me what you think the media strategy is, howard. and does it is a a lot about the media or does it is a more about this president? >> i'll give you a strategy in one sentence, all obama, all the time. and look, the media may do stories about the president being overexposed but nobody is turning down those invitations. it's really striking. he doesn't have to go on five sunday shows. cojust do meet the press or face the nation. and make news with whatever he has to say. but in every opportunity whether it's the four prime time news conferences, the joint address to congress, the address to a joint session of congress in prime time, and now doing the road blocking thing on sunday morning, this white house and this president seems to delight in cranking up the volume. some would say to ear splitting levels. >> okay, but is it because he is so good at it or is it because he lives in a new media world that no other president has lived. >> well, he is a very good communicator and he is the salesman and chief

particularly right now for the struggling health care policy. but if you see him on all the sunday shows and on leno and on letterman and doing basketball on espn and everything this side of home shopping network. at some point does that dilute the impact. >> what do you think, john? >> i am not sure that we've gottone that point yet. look, one of the things that we've seen in the polls is that people like barack obama. and so the more he gets out there smiling, appearing comfortable and at ease while defending his policies, you know, we'll see whether or not he can improve the support for his policies which haven't fared as well as his persona. but i think when you've got this fractured environment, it's difficult to break through. it's difficult to make an impression. you've got to run many more tv ads in a campaign than you used to to break through. they've got a guy who is exceptionally gifted and they're using him as much as possible at most critical area of his presidency because he knows if he doesn't get health care in particular, that would be a very, re serious blow to

him. >> rose: can you look at what he's done and make the case that he's made a difference, that it's been a game changer on any particular issue or having to do with the white house credibility? >> well, i do think his speech to congress was successful last week in conveying the impression to a broad audience nationally that he was being reasonable. he cast himself as somebody who was rejecting radical ideas of the right. radical ideas of the left and casting himself in the center, reaching out to republicans. john mccain, judd gregg, chuck grassley, that sort of thing, to make the average person out there at home saying wow t looks like he's being pretty reasonable. on the other hand he had some real partisan rhetoric sort of buried within the speech that he wasn't going to waste time with people trying to kill his bill. and i think that was effective in rallying his base which is the most important thing he's got to do right now to get this thing through. >> rose: when you lack at what he's doing, allen, where is the risk?

>> well, i think the risk is particularly this weekend, all of these unscripted performances, you know. the interview situation is something that he handles pretty well. but you can remember that when he went on the jay leno show back in march he made that little crack about the special olympics that got him into a lot of trouble. so although i think the sunday morning washington shows are going to be fairly predictable in the q & a i think this letterman thing on the other hand could be kind of interesting just to see how he maneuvers through what is a much more risky situation. >> i couldn't agree more. much more,s it is easy to predict the kind of questions on the sunday shows it is much less easy to look at what david might do. >> may i slightly disagree. >> absolutely. >> only in the sense that i don't think that any one news story gets traction now, particularly w whether it is good or bad for very, very long. i mean i think that we are now in this kind of high velocity news cycle were people are constantly hitting the refresh button. the idea that somebody may say something, the special olympics story had ten

minutes of legs in part because he appall gized -- apologized quickly. he made a quick apology. but also because i don't think that the news cycle allows for it. the other thing i would say about this, about debating whether or not he is overexposed and i think is important to remember, is that you know a lot of the journalists who were initially complaining that he was overexpose -- expose product journalists who have a beat, were showing up a lot on television. were bloging, had -- were tweeting, were updating their status on their facebook pages every, you know, hour or two. i mean i think in this particular media climate, peopler on the side of exposing themselves too much. and not too little. i mean the whole point here is that it takes a lot more in such a fractured, diffuse kind of space. or environment to get your message out. >> charlie i don't --. >> rose: go ahead horx ward. >> i don't think the sunday show is necessarily going to be that predictable. when the president is talking about george stephanopoulos and david gregory and john king and

bob schieffer, they may want to talk about things he's not dying to talk about. for example jimmy carter's pungent suggestion about some of the president's critics being associated by race. obama doesn't want to have that discussion. and here's my point about whether or not he's blunting his own impact by being out there too much. president i spoke to steve kroft on "60 minutes" last weekend. and it didn't make anywhere near as much of an impact as his two earlier interviews with steve kroft on "60 minutes" since the election, since he became president. usually when a president of the united tats goes on "60 minutes" that is a major event. it has become more commonplace and i think sometimes can be a little harder to break through if it is just okay, there he goes again. >> rose: you less likely to say i have got to see this because it is so rare. now you think you have seen it because he has been at other places. let me just make one point about that, the predictable of it. i would suggest that the white house will assume there will be all kinds of questions but they will know 90% of the questions that are asked, as well as thought about them, wouldn't you think so, john? >> charlie, i think you're

absolutely right. i agree with jennifer. i think the risks of this are pretty low. i don't think there are too many people in the white house sweating bullets because they think barack obama can't handle himself in front of a camera. yes, the special olympics thing, he was trying to be funny. it actually was kind of funny but it was the kind of thing that he had to take back because you have people aggrieved in certain situations. but i just don't think that barack obama runs too much risk of hurting himself the more he gets out there given how, if you look at the polls, even people who don't approve of his policies fend to find him personally charismatic, appealing, nice guy. all of that stuff i think is a plus for a president. >> rose: should he have omitted fox? >> i would say it is a mistake. now i know that people on the left and democrats say, you know, fox news, particularly the likes of glen beck and sean hannity beat up on the president all the time. but fox news also has a pretty substantial audience in cable terms. and for the president to

just blow off fox, you know, maybe good politics within the democratic party but that's one audience that is to the going to be getting the message on sunday morning and chris wallace is not one of the conservative flame throwers on that network. >> rose: and i thought some -- hillary, for example, did a very good job? an interview with bill o'reilly during the campaign. and i think others have made note of the president's appearance with bill. what do you think, allen. >> it isn't as though obama won't be on the fox network with whatever he says in these interviews. they will use the clips just the same as everybody else. so you know, he will appear on fox, just not in one of their own --. >> rose: but that is the point. he is omitting fox. he's to the going to fox. should very done that? because fox has been, you know, has the sort of posture that it does? >> well, i think -- >> go ahead. >> i think you always get a little credit for going someplace difficult and so in that sense, he may be depriving himself of an opportunity to could be front his critics.

but i don't know. i am not sure what the gain would be for him. >> rose: what is the gain by not going? >> the gain by not going, well, i don't know. maybe as john suggested, it pleases his democratic base. >> charlie, i don't think he's trying to please his base. i will take a guess as to why they are not doing it. the guess would be that they are sitting there saying these people hit us an awful lot. why should we give this to them. and it's sort of a reflection, a little bit, of the polarization of the environment that we are in. he probably thinks that would have about as much effect as winning over fox and the sort of more ardent members of the fox audience and sitting down with mitch mcconnell to do health care right now t will not get there you far. >> rose: john, you have interviewed him. does he say much in interviews or is he just simply good at explaining

his position? i don't see him making that much news. does he? >> well, it depends. i found him a very good interview subject in the first place even though he's the president of the united states, he is somebody who will actually listen and gauge with a question. somebody who will not filibuster and let you have a chance to ask a number of questions. he made news when i talked to him in june about iran when he talked about the -- he minimized the differences teen president ahmadinejad and the opposition candidate at that time and people took note of that. that's right. i thought he made news the other day when we talked about afghanistan and he said afghanistan is no vietnam. you don't step into the same river twice. but said he was thinking long and hard about overreach and the possibility or the danger of going to war without adequate support at home. so i think he was willing to be a little reflective there. and i also thought he made a little bit of news in saying he was strongly inclined against additional economic

stimulus. so i think he is -- i think he does okay. presidents generally speaking try not to make news in their interviews. i remember in the past having --. >> rose: it is not that he doesn't do okay. it's just that is he telling us a lot that we don't know? >> i think that barack obama tends to speak in paragraphs and not sound bites and in a way i kind of admire that in a president. but usually when any politician is going to do these tv interviews he gets with his advisors and they figure what do they want the headline to be, what do they want the phrases to be on the front page of the papers. and o bomb -- obama doesn't do that. he kind of disdains that. i have heard him half a dozen times talk about the 24 hour news cycle and the chatter and the punditry. and he seems to want to communicate at a somewhat higher level which may work for him but also tends to work against paging a lo the -- a lot of news. >> that is an old media strategy. i mean i think that sound bites were a product of scarcity. if you had only three networks and a half dozen or a dozen major papers driving news, you could consolidate, you could make sure that one message happened. if you have like a sound

bite preferably that rhymed or was a literateive. and you said it in a way that was perfectly clear to everybody and they carried it. you don't need to do that any more. you've got blogs galore that can pick up bits and pieces or chunks of your text. you can find everything he ever says on the huffington post in full. and also, i mean es he a guy who understands the power of youtube. he gives a long time. >> the 37 minute speech on race was one of the most watched things. >> i guess 24 hours of its having done it. it was also one of the most watched speeches of his campaign. so i think that when you don't have sound bites to worry about and you speak fairly well, at great length, also you know he is a good explainer which is the other thing. >> that is what the health care speech was about. >> so the fact he is not making news but he is still elucidating and eliminateing difficult concepts for people. >> on the other hand, jennifer, when obama had his fourth prime time news conference and the broadcast networks are not that happy with him because it is costing them tens of

millions of dollars for these preemption, he, the reporters were looking at each other as that thing was winding down. he gave all the same answers on health care he had given for weeks. they were saying what is the lead. then the final question, the one about the henry louis gates. what became the big news because it was -- >> that is my point again about making news. >> except the only thing i would say about that, i pain are you right. the only thing i would say about that is that was reporters. we marinate in this stuff so of course we know when he is given the same answer 19 million times. but for people who want to really understand health care, i think that there is some argument to be said for if you have somebody who can explain it. i mean i'm not -- i sympathize but -- >> the ratings went down. >> very little adheres in this particular news climate. >> there is another possibility do, guys. maybe the questions at the press conferences were lousy. >> exactly. >> rose: exactly. so allen, is his strategy working? i mean is it so -- he may become overexposed at some point but so far it doesn't look like that. >> no, it doesn't look like

that. and i think one of the interesting things about him and i'm always interested in looking at the connections between the presidency and the way hollywood works. and i think like the great hollywood stars, obama has this mystique. he withholds a little something of himself at all times so that when you see him, even though you seem him a lot, you don't feel like you're getting the entire picture with him and that keeps you wanting to come back and hear more from him. >> john, who drives this strategy in the white house. is it the president himself? is it press conference? is it rahm emanuel? who? >> well, i think rahm emanuel drives an awful lot in that white house. obviously david axelrod, anita dunn who is the communications director and gibses who has the final call on a lot of those press questions about what interviews he's going to do and how much press time they're going to put on his schedule. i think they're making those decisions and they've been fairly coheeseive in doing

that. all of them, i think, realize that they've got somebody with a lot of talent and they've got the moment they need that talent right now. and i will say that you know some of the frame of analysis has been that you know the president's health care initiative is in trouble and he's got to save it i think a lot of that has been fundamentally wrong. the president, they're not making it up when they say they're further along on this than anybody has been trying it in the past. you want to look at an unsuccessful legislative look at bill clinton on health care in '93 and '94 and george w. bush on social security a few areas ago, they are likely to get something, ing what the president wants or the principless he wants. obviously a lot of details are yet to be completed. but they're not doing badly at all right now. >> so you are -- you believe that the president's health care strategy in terms of what he has constructed and how he has communicated it, he gets high marks? >> yes, i mean the proof's

going to be in the results at the end but if you look at where we are in the process right now, it looks like he's going to make it to the goal line. he, i interviewed olympia snowe this week and olympia snowe had very positive things to say about barack obama which suggest that she might be there with democrats either on a cloture vote or some other critical vote they need to try to get this through. >> so he will not lose any democrats? >> i think he may lose democrats on the vote on passage for the bill am but he has a better chance of holding democrats on a filibuster vote. that's where snow is so critical. if you decide that reconciliation is too complicated and difficult and you want to survive a filibuster, you need to hold all your 59 democrats and then add one more. and i think there are some signals from olympia snowe. it's not determined yet that she might be willing to cast that 60th vote to get past the filibuster and then if you did that, some of the democrats, nelson and some other more moderate and conservative democrats might actually vote against the bill on final passage but it

wouldn't matter once you got over that filibuster threshold. >> come back to the question of what the president had been talking about. the republicans, how do they view what he is doing because it is said by some republicans it's hard, because he is so ubiquitous, on one issue after another, it's hard to respond because he's already moved on to something else. health care is different because it cuts deep and it is his most profound issue and a lot of his presidency according to many observers hangs on doing it and succeeding at least at having a bill. but he makes it difficult for the republicans because he is a fleeting target. >> but even charlie if republicans want to respond they don't have a lot of telegenic party leaders. you don't see mitch mcconnell or john boehner on tv that much and not the world's most effective communicators. filling that vacuum seems to be people like rush limbaugh and glen beck and sean hannity. now maybe it's unfair for those us of in the media to

put those talk show hosts out because obviously their job is to be provocative, some would say inflammatory. but they seem to be emerging more as spokesman for the conservative movement in this congress and with this president than i've ever seen in the years that i have been following washton. >> rose: and why do you think that is? >> i think they are good copy. they say things that are controversial so journalists like that. and i think they, because the republicans don't run anything here in washington, they don't control either chamber and they don't have a presidential front runner so early in the game this time around, that there is this void that the people like rush and glenn beck are more than happy to fill. >> going to your point about having multiple messages, having line four or five a day, i mean that is the strategy. that was a big piece of the story that i wrote. quoting a lot of --. >> rose: probably where i got the idea. >> didn't want to say anything but yes, there was a republican who was immensely frustrated and said he couldn't lock in on a target and aim.

and what i thought, you know, obama would give one speech about, you know, health care at lunchtime and the stimulus at 3:00 in the afternoon and urban renewal at 6:00 and israel at 8:00. and what do you do. but here is what i think is interesting. again, this would have been heresy in the reagan era, you know, you had one message and that was it. and you made sure everybody got it and that's not what is happening any more. again there are so many different platforms to carry your message now. you can have nine a day t doesn't matter. >> rose: speaking of that, allen, what happened to the restauranted idea that this campaign following the howard dean campaign masterminded new media. they were very smart about it. they used it very well. they raised money. they used all kinds of means to get out their message, both as a candidate and now as president. how, where is that all going? >> well, it's definitely a big piece of what's going on here. all you need to do is go on to white house.gov an will you see links to facebook,

twitter, my space, even itunes, so they are very smart about this. i think jennifer wrote about this in her piece very interesting lee teng-hui, i thought this use of flicker, the photo stream. these white house photos that are released on you know, sort of an endsless basis that is something that hasn't been tried so far and has been very effective, i think, in getting out their message even just visually. >> and actually, to connect to your fascination with managing the presidential image and managing the celebrity image, one of the things that i thought was interesting about the white house flicker stream is the fact that they have so many beautiful polished shots that they've taken themselves and that they've already loaded on-line that they're sitting -- shutting, they famously didn't allow white house or press photographers, you know, mainstream papers and to take pictures in the oval office in the first day of office. because they had their own shots to offer. and they had their own shots on-line. and i was reminded very much of angelina and brad sort of releasing their own photos

of their babys so that they could control this one iconic image. you know, it's a way of preemptively, you know, well, our image is going to be better than theirs, suddenly it drives down the value of any other image out there. >> absolutely it there is also -- >> mgm in the 1930s, the studio photographers doing everything they can to make the star look great. >> that's it. >> rose: there is also this. >> i'm sure glad jennifer took that question because i'm old media. i couldn't find the flicker stream if you made me. >> i am so old media but i'm so flattered that you think i'm not. >> rose: there is this, also, i mean he is as i think rahm emanuel once pointed out, not just a political phenomenon, he is a cultural phenomenon. and he is probably the biggest star in the world. and therefore, he burns brightly and therefore why not take advantage of it while -- while the focus is on you. howard -- >> and on that, i agree with that, charlie. this a world famous cultural figure, obviously

ground-breaker in terms of the history of the united states. but there another star in the white house and he you eluded to her earlier, michelle obama. she starts doing interviews and giving speeches, she did one today about health care. the journalistic appetite to get the interview with michelle is even more intense right now because she has done so few of them. obama, everybody wants the president but he has made the rounds. he is virtually lived in the main treatment media. michelle is a cultural figure in her own right, also a very smart first lady and i think that is a weapon that maybe they've been holding back a little bit that the white house is now going to deploy in this fall campaign especially to win health care. >> rose: john, you have met a lot of politicians. anybody better than he is in an interview? >> well, bill clinton is pretty good at interviews too. and --. >> rose: better, is bill clinton better? >> no, no -- look this is self-referential, right. i have interviewed barack obama more than i interviewed bill clinton or george w. bush. although i knew george w.

bush over a number of years when i was the governor of texas. he could be very charming in private, tended to be most charming in sort of off the record moments. but no, look, barack obama, he is extremely bright. he's very fluid and -- verbally which is something, of course, that the media likes. and he's got star power. so all of those things make him a terrific interview. you know, ronald reagan didn't give a whole lot of one-on-one interviews when he was president. he had some magic too. >> rose: okay, does (kbam -- barack obama enjoy this, is he out there because not only does it serve his political goals but, in fact, he likes it in the same way that some might have suggested president kennedy liked the press conference? anybody? >> that's an interesting question, charlie. i'm not sure we know that. and i'm not sure we can know that just yet. but he certainly doesn't recoil from it. and back to this thing about his interviews. you know, another thing that strikes me is he is really

good in serious interviews, you know straight news interviews like the ones he did with john. but he is also really good in these lighter interviews. he's done a number of them with david letterman. he did one in september of last year during the campaign that was fascinating because it mixed content pretty serious content issues like iraq and afghanistan and 9/11 with very personal regulation -- recollections of growing up and things about his kids. so he, you know, he's able to make that transition quite naturally. >> i also think he's -- i think the law professor in him comes out when he does this. i really think that it does play to his -- to these particular slow media that he does. >> i think the speeches call on the same skill. it's the president as teacher in chief. >> and as reasoner, like supreme court opinions that are very carefully rnd, i think in some way. >> look how he got elected. >> it was by giving speeches and giving --. >> rose: exactly right not president has ever -- no candidate has ever been more defined than he has. i mean and in use of language and all of that. but what you pray, don't you,

harwood, that don't fly shows up. >> that was a great moment, are you kidding me. >> good television. >> sometimes you just get lucky and thats with one of those moments. >> rose: there you go. thank you all, pleasure. >> thank you. we'll be right back. stay with us. >> frank bruni is here in his career as a journalist he has written about everything from politics to religion to the miss america pageant. but up until 2004, he had never written about food. nevertheless, in april of that year he was named restaurant critic for "the new york times". the appointment was made more complicated by his life long struggle with food and weight. love and struggle. he writes about all of these experiences in his new book born round. i am pleased to have frank bruni at this table to talk about this book. welcome. >> thanks for having me. >> rose: you were the rome correspondent. would you cover the bush

campaign and presidency and then you went to rome. >> that's right, for two years. >> rose: are you were there. and that was good duty, was it not. >> it was not a bad job to have, i love italy. >> rose: like going home. >> no, my grandparents on my father's side were from italy so i grew up in that sprawling american family that made italy feel like home. >> rose: and went to school at the university of north carolina where you were a morehead scholar which down there you sort of bow down to morehead scholars. >> it was a nice honor. >> rose: so they come to you. >> uh-huh. >> rose: you have had these varied experience at the "new york times". been to columbia journalism school as well so you had an interesting career developing. and they say we want you to be the food critic. and what did you say? >> well, i did whatever the equivalent of a double take is on the telephone. i was sort of surprised. i mean i knew that the times liked the way i wrote and trusted me with a wide variety of things but i didn't expect them to come to me with that offer. it was surprising because i hadn't written a lot about food. but what not all of them knew that i knew is that it was also a really ironic offer because of my long history with food. i'm someone who really

struggled a lot to forge a healthy relationship. >> rose: so that made it more likely would you accept it or not accept it. >> initially i wasn't sure. ultimately it was one of the things that lead me to accept it because i felt like it was the last act, the last chapter in this complicated narrative of mine with eating and food. >> rose: you have written in here that your life had been defined by that in part. >> i'm one of these people who was always thinking about eating. i was always eating too little or eating too much. you know there are people, and maybe are you one of them, charlie who say at 5:00 p.m. i was so busy today i forgot to eat. >> i'm one of those. >> when someone says that to me, you are a space alien to me. i don't know what you are talking about. if it is 5:00 p.m. and i haven't eaten, i'm well aware of if and i'm counting the minutes to the meal. >> rose: before the meal comes to make up. >> exactly. >> rose: and you might have two serves wants that's right. >> rose: because you are aware you didn't. >> if i have been depriving myself i will reward myself on the tail end. >> rose: let me talk about restaurants for a second. did you love the beat. >> oh, yeah. i mean this is one of those privileged jobs. i mean it a job. you have to go to the restaurants.

it becomes a duty over time but it is an enormous privilege to be able to go night after night to some of the best restaurants in the city and in the world and to be able to share your thoughts about them with people. it's great. >> rose: did you do anything to get -- to prepare? >> you know, as soon as i started thinking about talking the job, i began reading, you know, my night table reading became heavier toward food and food memoirs and everywhere i went to eat i began looking at menus in a new way and continually educating myself. i knew a lot about food already. you know, like anyone who is an eager eater and anyone who has traveled widely as i had, i had a great deal of experience with food. but i hadn't necessarily kind of adopted the formal vocabulary that goes with restaurant. >> rose: would you call yourself a new york term, i'm not sure worldwide, foodie. >> i guess i would have called myself a foodie but not a full-fledged foodie to get very --. >> rose: in the same way johnny apple was a foodie. >> yeah. someone with a great app -- appetite, a great curiosity. >> rose: an connoisseur and new the great restaurants whence i was in rome for two years i traveled a lot in

up. >>. one of the first items on my agenda when i went anywhere new was to figure out where i was going to eat. i never mastered that to the extent johnnie apple company. i don't think anyone could but on a lower junior level, maybe. >> rose: i mean if i was in any city i would want johnny to tell me which should eat. >> you are a wiseman. >> rose: and he would write very interesting reviews in talking about if if he was doing a profile of either the proprietor or in fact the food. >> well, johnny was really good and i learned a lot from that about -- when he wrote about a restaurant, when he wrote about eating not making it just about what was within the boundaries of that place. >> rose: he made it an experienceal thing. >> he understands a restaurant exists in a city, in a moment t is the story of its proprietors that there a bigger story than the halibut. he is a great example to all of us. >> rose: so you went into this deciding you would do it a little different or what. >> yeah, i went into it feeling very strongly that in this day and i believe

especially with the internet the p.m. of people reading that restaurant review to make a distinction -- distinct decision about whether to go to the restaurant that is a small group of your readers, very view readers using the review as a map for the restaurant. more people wanted a vicarious experience, more are going to the review for the literary pleasure of reading it. >> rose: are they really? >> i think so. >> rose: that surprises me you say that. because we hear that restaurant critics like theatre critics are so powerful, if you don't like a restaurant, the restaurant owner is going into a deep depression. >> that is financial --. >> rose: financially and emotionally. >> that true for that number of the people reading the review that are using it as a service piecement but in the internet age when we've got reader approximates in california. we've got readers over in, you know, in serbia, we got readers everywhere. in that day and age you have to write something that has appeal to people who are never going to set foot in that restaurant, at least i think you do. >> rose: what is hard about it? one thing that's clear in

this book is that you do not want them to know that "the new york times" restaurant crit sick there. >> you don't want them to know are you there which is pretty much impossible to control. but what you can control is them knowing whether you are coming. so a lot of my energy was always spent on making sure there was no tell in the way i made a reservation, that it might be for me and that i might be coming through the door. >> and you had a special card at the that the times cooked up, the american express card. >> at any given moment i had about five different fake credit cards and i changed them up every year. and over time i was smart enough to make them gender neutral names so i could pass them under the table to a woman as well as a man. but there is a whole almost kind of covert operation angle to being a restaurant -- >> how often do you think were you successful. most of the time or 50% of the time or -- >> it's probably something like 50/50. it depends entirely on the calibre of the restaurant. if it is a serious restaurant that believes its fortunes will be affected -- affected by a review in its first couple ponts when it is on its most heightened

vigilance for critics, it is really hard to get in the door more than a couple times without being spotted. >> you went to great lengths not to be photographed. >> absolutely. i learned for five and a half years even at family gatherings i would instinctively step outside the frame of the photo it was like it became like a reflex, you know. >> and how would you do it? so you make a reservation. and you go and what are you looking for? how do you go through what is necessary for you to feed the process of writing a review. >> well, i didn't have a checklist of things i was looking forive. really kind of arrived with an open mind and hopefully an empty stomach. sometimes not as hefty -- empty as it should have been. and a rifed to have a good time on that restaurant's terms it. and then from there sometimes disappointment was creep in and a good time wouldn't be had. but i always wanted more than not to have a good time and to let that restaurant please me. because that's the goal, you know. i was looking at everything from service to what the food on the plate was. but i wasn't kind of

assigning percentage of saying you know, -- amount belongs to service, -- to -- >> i got you. >> but you would sleep away sometimes into the bathroom and call home and leave it on your voice-mail or whatever. >> exactly. >> mechanism you had. >> yeah you would write notes. >> i seldom wrote notes because it took too long and you couldn't do it at the table. so my method which you caught on to was i would take my cell phone and go into the bathroom if it had reception and call myself notes to be transcribed the next day wnsd did you always go with somebody or would you go alone. >> i always went with a couple people. usually groups of four. becae you want could conquer as much of the menu as you can. you sit down and say you are doing the salmon, you are doing the rib eyewitnesses you were going to sample all of it. >> yeah, you know rerotate plates and that is attention getting but you have to do it. >> exactly. >> a sure sign. >> and did you ever go like the third time and all of a sudden it was very different, and very good and you were surprised. >> yeah, and then i would often go a fourth time because you would want to know like which of those first three visits was the

exception and which was the evolving rule. >> and what did you generally find. >> you know, you found different things and you ended up having to even it out. if sort of like a professor at the end of a school semester. you take all the exams, add them together, divide by four or five or whatever and figure out what the norm is. >> what are the numbers about the opening an closing of restaurants in this city? >> well, you know, restaurants are still opening at an incredibly brisk rate it is just a different kind of restaurant that is opening. what we have seen is the four-star restaurants. the restaurants with white table cloths and 45 dollar entrees. they are not opening at the same rate. but on the other end. >> are they doing the same business because of the economic crisis. >> i think they are really struggling. where they are really struggling is most of them had a certain amount of private party business. they had kind of rooms and annexs, where business entertaining was done. and not only is the money down for that but it's no longer, it's no longer fashionable for businesses to spend money right now on that sort of thing. >> and what was the range of restaurants you would go to. i mean you would go to -- >> pretty much everything. i wouldn't go to a purely

neighborhood place or a place that just existed for bargain eating because we have other people at the time was do that sort of thing. >> the $25 thing. >> exactly. but in terms of cuisine, you know, the full range, in terms of the city's neighborhoods, i tried to get out of manhattan frequently g to queens, brooklyn. thereological weren't a lot of boundries. >> and what was the reaction after you wrote the review? >> did you always hear from them. >> no, actually you sell dom heard from them. because if they were happy, they didn't want to imply like that you had done them a favor. you don't thank someone for a good review because you earned your good review. if they were unhappy, they figured we don't know how long this guy is going to stick around, we don't know if he will review some other restaurant sow we better stay momentum and you have the exception. >> rose: what was the worst exception. >> the worst exception was a restaurateur who took out a full page ad and paid a premium to put it opposite the review and the ad said this man is horrible. he doesn't deserve his job, he didn't do justice to my restaurant and doesn't know what he is saying. >> rose: what happened to

the restaurant, did it survive. >> it's to the doing well. it's to the doing well. >> rose: so how much power did you have over the succeed -- success of a restaurant? >> you know, i don't know. i tried not to pause and judge that because i didn't want to be thinking about that. judging from the way restaurateurs fussed over me when they knew i was there, judging from the way they tried to figure out if i was coming, i guess i had some power. >> tell the story about umbrellas, you would always get an umbrella if it was raining. >> it was raining and i would come without an umbrella there would be someone waiting at the door who would give me an umbrella which he never took. >> rose: and if you went to a fearby restaurant and got soap on your tie. >> i hit the bathroom soap dispenser too hard and i ended up with a big splotch on my shirt. as i was walking out the door the manager was handing me his card saying if you need that to be dry cleaned or need it to be replaced. i said it's a soap stain. i think it's going to come out, you know. >> rose: but they were very attentive to it.

>> if they knew i was there, they were, they were very, very attentive. but you know sometimes they didn't know i was there and that was just as interesting. >> rose: and so at the end of this tour, how do you decide it's over. did you decide are did "the new york times" decide. >> we decided together. i mean i always assumed it would be about a four-year at most stint. it ended up being more than five. i stayed in it longer than i initially thought i would because it made sense to leave the job as the bock came out. >> rose: and how did things change in terms of your attitude about food, if at all. >> you know, i know even more now than i did before. because hi been exposed to so much. i don't love food any more. or any less. i am not sure that my attitude about it changed but i think my appreciation for the hard work that restaurants do has increased tenfold. it's really, really hard work to run a restaurant and to run it well and to turn a profit and to do that night after night, week after week, month after month. and it's not really the glamorous business we think it is. the profit margins are small. and the hours are really

long. and i have more respect for that than i ever did before. >> rose: what are the ingredients of a successful restaurant. >> passion. i think passion. >> rose: passion to create. >> they have passion to create. they have passion for hospitality. you have got to show up in peak form night after night in the kitchen, in the dining room. and if you are going to be consistent and you are going to be great, everybody in that restaurant has to have a real passion for what is going on. >> rose: some restaurants seem to attract certain crowds which give it a certain buzz. >> uh-huh. >> rose: and some people seem masterful at that idea. >> well, you know, there are -- there are armies of publicists out there that help that happen. that interact with concierges, that make sure the right people know a restaurant is open. an there is a real herd mentality once you get the front wave of people who set the trends, everybody else follows. and then those are the restaurants that we all can't get into annoyingly enough. >> rose: the trend at one time was sushi and other kinds of japanese. i read that the trend today is fried chicken. >> absolutely. >> rose: which thrills me,

thrills me. >> rose: i love fried chicken and i have often had a problem not knowing where to get good fried chicken. >> you do not have that problem any more. >> rose: i know. >> would like fried chicken recommendations. >> rose: yes, indeed. >> blue ribbon columbus circle. i just ate there last night and what did i have, fried chicken. i love fried chicken. >> rose: this is the best news. >> we could go through a whole list am are you not going to find much i don't love. >> rose: let's talk about that. there is love affair with food began early. >> when i was a toddler. you know, i was one of the reasons there are a couple reasons i call the book born round but one reason is because i was born in a met foric sense with this enormous app tied -- appetite. and my parents whenever they talked about my childhood the test thing they ever talked about was how i could eat and eat and eat and eat and they didn't know what to o do with that. >> rose: the grandmother or mother said you don't -- are you not born round and die square. >> well that is the other half of the title. my grandmother believed people couldn't fundamentally change so whenever you asked her to do something that was against her perception of her own nature, she would say born

round, you don't die square. and the book is about my attempt to die like at least oblong, not round. >> rose: but did you develop this great love affair for food. >> it was -- it was largely, i think, an inher tense from my mother and grandmother. they were both inbelieveably proud and loving cooks. the book is in many respects a valentine to these two amazing, strong women in may life. and it is a portrayed of -- pore freight of food within a family. >> when did the struggle of weight come. look at this picture. >> that was me at 7. and that was about the time that classmates and friends began teasing that my initials fb stand for fat boy. in the same way i was born with a big appetite, i was prone to self-consciousness and that phrase fat boy really stuck with me for decades. >> rose: you were occasionally bulimic. >> later on when i wasn't exercising as much, in high school i had been a star athlete, i was a really great swimmer. when i gave that up, i was terrified that i was going to gain a lot of weight and

for a period of time my solution was bulimia. >> rose: there is also this about you as an eater and as a foodie, when you got 9 assignment to go to rome, there were people who were saying if you take this job, you are going to leave -- you are going to gain 15 pounds. >> right, right it was the same prediction they made when i took the restaurant critic job. what people don't understand about italy, what i didn't understand because pie italian american family was an immigrant family, isn't in italy they don't eat as much as we do. they don't have the all you can eat buffet. they don't have supersized meals. >> rose: and food has a certain quality as well there terms of the way it cooked and the way it is -- >> they channel their food obsessions in the direction of quality the same way we in american channel them towards quantity. we have a lot. i learned a lot about a healthy relationship with food from living in italy those years. >> rose: that, i don't know if that is true but it seems that is a singular quality of americans is that we eat too much. >> our portions are ridiculous. >> rose: exactly. >> our portions are just ridiculous. >> rose: they say cut the portions in half.

>> all this conversation right now about childhood obesity. and that conversation needs to begin and end. there is lots in the middle t needs to begin and end with how much we tell kids to eat, how much we give them, how much in our own eating we show them is an appropriate amount of food. we all eat too much. >> but you also when you were in italy began exercise, did you not. >> i began to exercise religiously before italy because i took off about a year before i went to italy i weighed 275 pounds and was wearing size 42 pants. there are some pictures. there is one of me with president bush on air force one and i'm the dead ringer for jabba the hut in that photo. and exercise was the most important thing in getting from there to here. >> rose: and but that's a fundamental message too, isn't it? >> yeah, yeah. >> rose: but people don't get it. >> no. you know, we're very sedentary in this country. i don't know why it is. but when i say exercise, i mean i think we need to understand, if you want to eat as much as i want to eat, and mind you, i still eat a lot.

>> rose: but you look you are in good shape. >> i just put a down payment, exercise is my down payment so i can enjoy my eating. >> rose: you might have a milk shake or -- >> but you run a mile. >> rose: and you know if i want to enjoy this meal i have to run a meal. >> i want two things very badly. i want to enjoy and love my food, but i don't want to be undone by that. i don't want to go back to 275 pounds. and the answer is not -- the answer is to doesn't your portions a little bit and to exercise a lot. >> rose: all right so this is not a self-help book but -- >> no. >> rose: the dedication is to my brothers mark and harry and my sister adele, you three are the luckiest hand i ever drew and my nieces christina and anna bela because you missed out theas time around. here are the chapters. i'm eating as fast as i can. yo-yo-me. ness i had fun with the titles. >> insuranceo fat so,

critical eating. >> you know what those are. >> those are all rejected book titles. those were my runner-up book titles. >> born round try you haved over all those titles. >> yes, so i shuttled them to chapter titles. >> so today you go out to eat how often. >> well, i top doing the restaurant critic job about a month ago. oddly enough i'm still going out to eat about four or five nights a week. it's just in me. it's what i love to do. >> rose: i do it too because it's the nature of new york, it's easy. >> a great way to socialize. >> rose: a great way to socialize and there are a lot of great restaurants in the city. >> we're so lucky. >> rose: what, is it the best restaurant town in the world? >> it is definitely the best restaurant town in this country. i feel qualified to say that. and i feel confident to say that. it may be the best restaurant city in the world. we have an ethnic diversity here. it is what new york is all about. so our benches is when it comes to restaurant. >> people don't recognize that as much as they should. and it's not just manhattan. >> no. >> rose: go out to the flushing session of queens. >> you go to bronx and you

define a section of the bronx where the italian food there is as good as some people have said to me as good as they have eaten in italy. >> this city is amazing that way am you just have to, you are never more than 10 miles from a fantastic meal. >> but and i've never understood this and people have written about there. we don't have that many great chinese restaurants. >> we are lacking in a couple of things. we're lacking in great middle eastern restaurants. we're lacking in truly great chinese restaurants. >> why is that. >> i'm not sure why that is it would be a great article to be written. >> i have been told because i was always asking about that. is it the great chinese chef never came to new york? they stayed on the west coast or they just never came. they never immigrated. >> sometimes immigration pattern and cultural matters like that, actually factor into what our restaurant scene is lick and what we get to eat. so what kind of food do you like? >> other than fried chicken. >> you know, two cuisines i love in particular are italian and japanese. but i'm really, really like an equal opportunity glutton. >> there is an interesting thing. people would say japanese food is good for you, you

would never gain weight if you eat japanesed if because it doesn't have a lot of fat content or protein. >> right. >> it is definitely safer than not. >> and pasta is sort of by definition not supposed to be. >> you know, but pasta isn't, i mean pasta, it fine for you in the right measure. any of these foods can make you fat if you eat them without restraint. and none of these foods will make you fat if you eat them with restraint. we're back to the whole portion thing. >> rose: what about fast food. >> fast food, well fast food is terrible. fast food is almost designed in a way that it is made to make you hungry even as you finish eating it whether you are looking at the sodium, the corn in it. i mean it's a disaster. >> rose: do you have favorite restaurants in new york. >> many of them, yeah. >> rose: give me three or four. >> i love labernaden for a pasta fix. >> rose: you love it because it is the best -- >> it does what it -- it does what it does. which is you know kind of progressive french seafood at a level that is so consistently high it's a maizing that that restaurant, it never falters it,.

>> rose: eric repare has a tv show. >> but what is interesting, he has a tv show now but he hasn't had that much stuff going on. that is one of the reasons why i think it remains so strong. he's not one of these chefs who have expanded and diversified and cloned himself out the w, zoo. >> rose: a restaurant in investigateas. >> he has been very, very focused. >> rose: based on your experience what makes a great chef? which is a question i have asked great chef. >> dedication. >> rose: passion clearly. >> passion is at the top of the list, dedication, intelligence and a measure of humility. because a great chef needs to realize that he is in the business of pleasing people. and he has to have his or her own vision. owe or she has to have her own vision but has to also kind of really look at how people are responding to the food and tailor his or her effort as coringly. >> have you ever eaten at abulu. >> yes, in spain. >> rose: tell me about it. >> i had an amazing night there because i was there as frank bruni, not there anonymously. >> rose: tell us about the

restaurant. >> -- the father of modern molecular gas tron omee, avant-garde cook. the wedding of science fiction and food that produce those things that explode in one bite in your food, liquid ravioli and olives that are essentially kind of all liquid and no casing but they somehow hang together. you pet them in their mouth and the flavor explodes, that kind of his signature. >> rose: he is considered, david change, people like that said to me an others have said he is the best chef in the world. >> he has -- he has moved cooking forward the most. and he's done the most sort of daredevil things. >> rose: which is an interesting definition of what makes greatness. >> he is a visionary. we assign greatness to those people who take us in directions we never imagined we could go and that is what he has done on the culinary front. >> what are the new food centers in america that are gaining in terms of reputation and quality? >> well, you know, two portlands, portland oregon and portland maine right now

are both hot restaurant cities. you know, i hi there is always interesting sthuf in los angeles but for some of the same reasons as new york because it such a multiethnic place. >> rose: and around the world. >> one of the problems -- one of the constraints of the dining job is to visit enough new york restaurants often enough to do reviews the way we do them at the times which is three, four, or five visits per review. i actually didn't get to travel much. so it's my hope now that i will get to see some of the different places of the world that i never had the time to go to as restaurant critic in new york. >> rose: how confident are you that you've overcome the yo-yo effect? >> moderately confident. but i -- i say that in part because i think if i -- why do you say -- >> i think overconfidence is the path, you know, toward renewed ruin or something. i mean i think that if you become too confident, you lose your waffleful -- watchfulness and i feel like this is something my need to be disciplined around food is something i work on every

single day still. >> do you cook? >> i haven't been cook much over the last five and a half years. i haven't had much need. >> if you did, you lost some of them. >> i will make a renewed effort in that direction just now. >> is your mothary live. >> no, no. >> she didn't get a chance to. >> no. >> to see what her son did in terms it of his foray into food. >> i hope, i think and i hope she would have enjoyed that book greatly. i'm sorry i never got to take her on my restaurant adventures over the last five and a half years, she would have had a ball. >> born round, the secret history of a full-time eater, frank bruni, thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for joining us. see you next time. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org