>> charlie: welcome to the broadcast. tonight. mark pincus. >> i think there is a social media revolution going on right now. and i think that we are changing our media consumption habits at a rate that we haven't done even with the advent of the internet. i think it's going on right now. i think the people regularly are consuming media while they're at work and while they're doing other activities in a tab in their browser or on their smart phone. and i think media will change in order to thrive i think media will figure out how to entertain me in several minute bites and ways that are more social. >> charlie: we continue with michael specter the author of

"denialism." >> everyone knows what denial is, you're so depressed that you can't really face the facts. you hide, you pretend things aren't true. that happens to everyone. it's normal. may even be healthy for a little while. when society does it, i don't think it ever is healthy. i think there are number of issues now, particularly in scientific life where we are in denial as a culture. >> we conclude this evening with the architect annabelle sell cover. >> you start with listening very carefully to what the mandate is. unlike some architects, ours is not an architecture of grand gestures or monumental statements. but rather sort of of subtle interventions. >> charlie: next. ♪

if you've had a coke in the last 20 years, ( screams ) you've had a hand in giving college scholarships... and support to thousands of our nation's... most promising students. ♪ ( coca-cola 5-note mnemonic ) captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> charlie: mark pincus is here, the social gaming company zynga, behind some of the popular happens for games. among them is farmful allows to

manage a virtual farm. 66 million monthly active useers withuseers with farms that is more than the total number of farms in the united states. zynga's games are part of growing world of apps available on smart phones and social networking sites like facebook. analysts say the apps' economy is worth $1 billion today. and could be headed to four billion by 2012. i am pleased to have mark pincus at the table for the first time. one point, personal interest, i have small investment in a firm that invested in his company. so i'm pleased to talk to mark pincus about what's going on in the world of apps are welcome. >> thank you. >> tell me what do you.it's reao the kinds of board games that we all grew up playing with our friends and families where the game was really just a context for us to be social. that's really what's going on on

social networks and smart phones today. that we are all getting connected and it's like a cocktail party which really started with friendster which is the first time we all got together online. if you remember, people complained there's nothing to d. now that we're all together on this social network and so facebook was one of the first to start to add more dimension to that experience with fees and pictures. when they opened up their platform and then others like od up, it gave independent third party game developers a chance, like us, a chance to build games that their users could use to interact. >> charlie: you decided to start this company. you saw what opportunity? >> well, for me, i had started social network, actually before facebook called tribe.net which failed. what i saw during that time was that people did need something

to do with each other. once facebook opened up their platform to third parties, i immediately thought the opportunity i was most excited about was to provide a chance for people to play games together. >> charlie: and did you have any idea of the potential of it all? >> i'd say, at first we didn't realize how big social gaming could be. but once we launched our first game and we saw how viral it could be, how many people would want to come and play games together, we started to see how big the audience could get. >> charlie: those people who correspond in face groups, how much time do they play games versus what arrack itself. >> hi don't have any particular data i think only the networks have that. we've heard that people in aggregate may be spending as much as half of the time on these networks playing games.

>> charlie: tell me about mafia world. >> sure, mafia wars is a game where you form a mafia with your friends and you -- it's kind of like a game like world of war craft but it happens in text and pictures instead of immersive environment. the key difference is that you are relying on your friends. collaborating together throughout the game. there's features like declare war where if somebody attacks you, you can declare war on them and tells all your friends to come help you. people have taken it to this much more extreme place where they have actually created whole clans that can have thousands of members to them. a game like cafe world. we actually created one for you -- >> charlie: great. >> this is charlie's cafe. and if you look, you're the cook, i'm a waiter, hillary clinton is a waiter and obama is a waiter. so, you are virtually playing

with all of us. and you can hire us to work in your restaurant, you can come to our cafes, you can gift dishes to each other. everybody is building out their restaurants, sometimes in competition, often in collaborations. >> charlie: talk about virtual gifts. >> sure. gifting was early on when facebook opened, the platform, gifting became a very popular activity. if you think about what is going on in social network, i like to say that you're in a game of building your social capital. so, if you're playing the game of facebook or myspace you're building out your network and you're actually doing things that elevate your status with all of these other people. and gifts is a terrific way to build your social capital with people. virtual gifts are much easier and quick tore give people than ups-based gifts. >> charlie: right.

for your company you look ahead. is games between social network members the principle source of revenue or do you see this having some potential that you -- hasn't fully developed yet. >> you may see something i don't but we are excited about the future of social games and virtual goods as a revenue model within social games. so, what iean by that is, our users, these are free games. and one to two percent of the users will spend money in the games. and they can spend themon virtual goods, virtual gifts we just started selling. and that has been a revenue model that has enabled our company to be profitable for eight straight quarters. and we are very bullish on the growth that have business. and we're not really looking for other business. >> charlie: tend to your ow knitting as someone just said. what's the size of the app market today? >> there are different ways to

think about it. there is really three ways. you can think about it in terms of the number of apps tt have been downloaded. and there's lots of estimates, i think it's probably sometng in the range of four billion apps have been downloaded. >> charlie: that's a business that was not in existence how many years ago? >> three years ago. >> charlie: three years ago. totally new business. >> yeah. >> charlie: go ahead. >> second is you can look at it byumbers of users. again, there's all kinds of estimates. but people think out of the 400 million users on facebook more than half of hem regularly use apps and probably two-thirds have participated. 80% of iphone users download games and apps. so i think they're supposed to grow to 50 million users. i think there are several hundred million users interacting with apps today. third, you can think of it in terms of the revenues, which is good way to think about businesses. and from a revenue perspective, i think people are estimating

more than two billion in revenues next year. >> charl: what's the prospect say for five years out? >> well, you can look to the asian market where it's not so much apps as it is free games with virtual goods. that's already several billion dollars. i think most analysts predict that the worldwide market will grow to north of eight bill join revenues in the next couple of years. and i think we'll see, i think it could grow to 15 billion in the next five years. >> charlie: you have no particular interest in games but just looking for entrepreneurial opportunities? >> i saw that social games looked like a perfect opportunity that could be launched because of social networks. >> charlie: how much of it is played by smart phones, on smart phones? >> it's actually a smaller percentage. it's maybe -- i'd guess five or six million people a day that might be playing games on smartphones. >> charlie: how many on

computers? >> i'd say that's probably in the range ever 60-70 million a day. >> charlie: will that equation change over the next five years? >> yeah. it's changing rapidly. with the i known and ipod touch -- iphone, that market is growing incredibly quickly. i expect that the rest of the phone market will catch up. >> charlie: the droid and everybody else will be in there with apps and competing, right? >> yeah. >> charlie: the penetration of smartphones will change the world that we know in what way? >> i think that the penetration of the blackberry has already changed our world in a way that we're not even completely aware of yet. i was walking around central park this weekend and literally i'd say seven out of ten people were on their blackberries. and -- >> charlie: blackberries, specific, not iphones but blackberries? >> mostly blackberries but also iphones. and i believe that it's not all

bad. i believe that what's happened because of these smart devices, we can be productive all the time now. and so we can be on e-mail, we can be doing business, we can be social, playing games in all the nooks and crannies of our time. and it actually raises our opportunity cost of doing other activities. it's hard now to sit on our airplane read a book when you can be on the accident. >> charlie: how is the world changing? who factors beyond that are at play that we ought to understand because it's your business to understand those factors? >> well, i think there is a social media revolution going on right now. and i think that we are changing our media consumption habits at a rate that we haven't done even with the advent of the internet. and i think it's going on right now. i think that people regularly

are consuming media while they're at work and while they're doing other activities in a tab in their browser or on their smartphone. and i think media will change in order to thrive i think media will figure out how to entertain me in several minute bites and in ways th are more social. so, more that my friend is talking about a charlie rose show, and i might trip over what i call a social bread crumb. i might be more likely to find your show in my news feed on facebook or twitter because a friend is talking about it. than going back to your website. >> charlie: exactly. that's one phenomenon happening. give me some others of how the landscape is changing. >> well, i think that morend more people are starting their web experience because of an sms message or something they saw on

a twitter home page or facebook home page not necessarily starting at google or yahoo! >> charlie: that's a huge thing. to say that is a huge thing. >> i hope i'm right. >> charlie: but it's amazing to me, rather than googling for something or finding it on google because of twitter, because of facebook, because somebody mention something and that's within your world of interest and friendship. you are going to go look at it. >> yeah. i think you may get to a public web and social web and you'll use both. they will interact with each other. >> charlie: define how the two would be different. >> the public web experience is what you have today. it is going to a destination like google or ebay or amazon. you don't have to be logged in. and you're just going to book an air flight or whatever. and the social web experience is a logged in experience where the website that you are going to

knows something about you. >> charlie: with are we in terms of the digital revolution? >> we're very early, 10% in. when i started this company i woke up in 2007 and i was amazed that i could count the number of major consumer net, internet brands on one hand. and they were a search engine, a garage sale site with ebay. classified listings, a portal. itfuls amazing to me that there was only five or six. exrr and today? >> charlie: and today? >> seven. >> if you are starting out today. if you were looking for other things that you thought were exciting and had a huge future, give us some indication wherever they are. >> sure. i'm turned on by all of the things that we do in high volume on the internet today that could be recreated in social context. my wife has launched a private

sale site for home decor items, which i won't plug. but -- exrr a private sale -- >> in other words. you championship her site. every day they show you deals that are limited time offers -- >> charlie: right. >> it's an alternative way to shop. now, e-commerce could happen through a social lens. i could go to either facebook or a site that is socially enabled and i could find deals on black friday or whatever through what my friends have done. i could find my travel through a social lens. it's not always obvious where it will be better, that's the opportunity for entrepreneurs. but i think there's a shift in people's habits, they're spending time on socially enabled sites. looking for much quicker short

form and sometimes mobile option for entertainment. i think that they're going to have new web services. there's an oppornity to be my travel site. >> charlie: are you in it for the money? are you in it because of some other reason? >> that's a great question. i'm interested in creating what both of our friend bing gordon calls internet treasure. i think that we will be remembered in this point in history for the great consumer branded internet services that were created that enhance people's lives, can lime action son, like gobble, like facebook. as an entrepreneur, that is the opportunity to potentially create one of those branded services is what turns me on and what i hope to one day do. my friends who have had big financial pay outs where they

sold their company or were no longer at a successful company, they find themselves kind of bored and lost and they have to go through these kind of mid life crises every time. and i think so many of us are really searching for our 20-year career. people said to me, pincus, you're an entrepreneur, you just love starting company. i say, no, i don't. it's really hard. and i would love to find a company i can be at for 20 years. >> charlie: a, congratulations. b, it's fascinating to learn about this. ben gordon did me a favor by telling me about you what is going on with zynga and like to keep in touch. >> thanks for everything me. >> charlie: thank you. >> charlie: michael specter is here. he writes about science, technology, global public health for the americaer -- "the

new yorker" magazine. the it's called, denialism, rachial thinking hundreders scientific. i am pleased to have him here at this table. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> charlie: where did this begin for you? >> first let's talk about what denialism is, people ask. everyone knows what denial is. sometimes you are so depressed about something that you can't really face the facts. so you hide, you pretend things aren't true. that happens to everyone. it's normal. may even be healthy for a little while. when society does it, i don't think it ever is healthy. i think there are a number of issues now, particularly in scientific life where we are in denial as a culture. it's very painful. this started for me awhile ago when i wrote something about vaccines about a decade ago. i was just so flabbergasted by the opposition to vaccines, which are after all the most successful public health adventure in the hisry of the world except for one. >> charlie: one of the more effective tools of public health. >> so, what sit about vaccines

that created this backlash? >> the thing that created the backlash was purported link between autism and measles, mumps and rubella. that was understandable. because kids develop autism at about the same time that they get lots of vaccines between the first and second year of life. people are desperate to understand what happened, they look around, they see a proximate cause they add two and two. the problem is they add two and two often they get six. because we are now done any number of studies on this issue. and everyone, involving millions of children, by the way. the rates of people who develop autism and rates of people who don't are the same. whether you're vaccinated or not, there's no difference. so there's no correlation between everything a vaccine or not having a vaccine and developing autism. >> charlie: tell me who you think holds these views because my impression is, that it's not just people who might otherwise

be available to conspiracy theories, that kind of thing. >> it totally isn't just conspecie theories. lots of people hold these views, h1n1, the flu, 40% say they n't want to have this vaccine. this has been given 60 million times in the world and 12 million times in our country. it has produced zero identifiable deaths, which doesn't mean it hasn't killed anyone or it hasn't caused harm. it has done amazing job of protecting people and thousands have died of this virus and thousands more will. so the idea that people won't take a vaccine that is helpful and benign, it's very disconcerting. >> charlie: you also believe it's a sign of our times in terms of the pervasive impact of the internet and talk radio and things like that. >> sure. that's we don't trust authority. there are often some good reasons for that. when we're told, take a vaccine, take a pill, do this, do that, our initial response is to say,

no. that's actually probably a really excellent response to have. skepticism is required. but we don't go further. we don't look at the data. we don't add it up. we go on to the internet where we can find support for anything we want in the world no matter what it is. >> charlie: you believe that it's growing. >> it's clearly growing. this is a problem if you look at certain elements, this is about critical thought and rational thinking. not about vaccinesful it's not about genetics which i write about or vitamins or food. it's abut our approach to understanding these issues. when you look at them individually it's very powerful. food is clear example. >> charlie: explain food. >> there is argument going on in this country that getting louder between those who support organic farming and those who believe genetically engineered food has an important place in the future of health of the world. it is argument that is ridiculous. it is ideological argument. biotechnology can and should co-exist.

people throw up opposition and the opposition is always -- there's too much pesticide, too much monoculture, there are giant corporations involved in this. often those things are true. but that's not about science. science is not a company, it's a country, it's a method of doing something. the science of genetically engineered food is remarkable and can be even more remarkable. we got a billion people who go to bed hungry every night. it doesn't happen here. we can eat organic food. i eat organic food, i think it tastes better. in africa, asia, parts of this world people subsist on next to nothing. we need to try to help them. that's not going to happen with organic food, it's going to happen with science. key can't oppose that. >> charlie: who is making decisions about modified food. >> decisions are often made by the people who scream the loudest. so what we have in this country is a lot of modified food. it tends to go to corn crops and company bean crops to feed

cattle, often in very unpleasant ways so they can be killed in unpleasant ways and we can eat them from factory farms. that's not a good thing. but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't take the science. finns, casaba is product you'll find in africa, hundreds ever millions ever people subsist on. bunch of calories. it doesn't have nutrients or protein, scientists are engineering those things in to it. you'll be able to eat casaba and won't go blind. wall have protein. not greatest food. not eating at the french restaurant. that is what we're supposed to want to do. >> charlie: you make the point, too, that every food has been modified in some way. >> i don't call it genetically modified food. i call it genetically engineered. because there's nothing we he'd that hasn't been mod fight. we didn't have tangerine in the garden of eden or corn or rice or cantaloupes. these things are over thousands ever years have been modified through breeding. this is a different way of doing that. it's a more specific way. it has greater theoretical benefits and it should be said,

greater theoretical harm. we need to talk about all of that, not some of it. >> charlie: what is your difference with andrew wile. >> andrew wile, very sophisticated and smart man -- >> charlie: who sells lots of books and almost a gur to, a certain -- >> i would take the word "almost" right out. he is a guru. my problem is him i was looking at the vitamin industry trying to understand why so many people embrace vitamins. >> charlie: i would embrace vitamins if i thought they were going to be good for me. in fact a lot of people that i respect, a lot of people i respect believe in vitamins. vitamin b12, whatever the b is, every day of their life. >> show me the data. >> charlie: are you saying it's not vitamins are not supplements are not good for you this they add nothing to you or don't add as much as some might believe? >> i would say that about 95% of them are not good for you. some of them are down right dangerous for you. and some really are necessary and helpful. there's no question. but if you go in to a vitamin

store you look at these elixirs and potions and things, put them in a bag, take them in the sea, thw them out. because they're useless. they're useless. they dark dark enyour urine. >> charlie: or examine them. >> tons of studies have shown this. the more times studies come out that say vitamin c not useful, vitamin e, the more people run in to their local vitamin store and buy the stuff. it's remarkable. >> charlie: is it about hope? people somehow -- >> yes.charlie: people in the perfume business, jewelry business are selling hope. >> these things are totally understandable. i'm not saying that they're not. yeah, it's about hope and about another thing. healthcare system sucks, drugs cost too much. they don't work, we've been over promised things from the medical institutions in our life. and so people can look at vitamins they seem natural and real and hopeful. and, sure, i understand that. but if you look at the

information that's available to us, you'll find -- >> charlie: why is the medical community not up in arms? >> they are. >> charlie: are they? i don't see a lot of stories on the front page of either major stories by "the new yorker" magazine or the "new york times" or other publications saying, doctors proclaim danger of vitamin supplements. >> there have been lots of studies that have been on the front page that say, this study shows that this is no good for you. that study shows this is -- >> charlie: is that just truth in advertising or something deeper and different? >> i don't know how to answer except to take that hundreds of thousands of people have been compared everything taken all these supplements in different ways and those that have not. there's never an improvement. >> charlie: we continue to have this idea because it's based on something. >> sure. >> charlie: the idea that natural is better. >> based on something. >> charlie: what is it based on? >> based on a kind of yearning for simplerime. something that makes sense to us. and i understand that, it would

be nice. when natural is invoked as better i want to ask people, what is natural. what does that word mean? because legally, in real terms in this country, natural kind of means nothing. >> charlie: the larger issue for you, which denialism is about, is the notion that there's an anti-scientific -- >> yes. >> >> charlie:. >> charlie: current in the atmosphere. >> yes. there's anti-scientific current -- >> charlie: don't believe in science. >> and we believe that somehow the simpler way is better than the scientific way. >> charlie: or that science has been corrupted. or that science has within it certain things that are scary or threatening. >> it does. it does have within it certain things that are scary and threatening. but that doesn't mean that we need to throw it all out. if technology is used the wrong way, it doesn't mean we walk away from the technology. it means we make it better.

these technologies -- everything we do has harm built in, risk built in. if everyone took aspirin in this country right now, four hours later 500 people woul be dead. does that mean we shouldn't have aspirin? no. 19 billion tablets were swallowed. >> charlie: a lot of cardiologist say you take half an aspirin every day of your life. >> the data supports them. i'm not suggestingsuggesting we shouldn't do that. i'm saying that everything including things we rely on has risk. if we regulated driving in a car the way we regulate drugs no one would be allowed to enter one in this country. >> charlie: on the idea of anti-science, it also got involved in stem cell debate as well. that was not -- nothing to do with science as much as it had to do with -- >> morality, religion. >> charlie: exactly. is that part of science, gotten a buzz saw coming from religion? >> i think that's part of it. but i don't think it's that much of it.

because i don't believe that you can't be religious and also believe in science. i think there's so much evidence that those things can exist together. they can't if you're going to believe in fundamentalism. but there's also a fundamentalism at work here which is fundamentalism of fear. that is governing our reaction to so much of what we do now, it's it's causing us great harm. there are really significant consequences, not just to ourselves, when we decide that vitamins are just as useful as tried and tested drugs, we see a continuum that ends up in south africa, with the former president saying, you know what, we're not going to use anti-viral drugs for people with hiv. we're not going to use western mid is in. we're going to give our people lemon oil and garlic. let's kill 400,000 of them because that's literally what he did. >> charlie: the new president of south africa change that. >> he stood up and said the word, denial. that we have to stop it. we need to use drugs. it was magical day a lot of aids

activists in south africa literally ran out in the streets. sorry i it had to happen 15 or 15 years after. >> charlie: has he ever changed -- >> not to my knowledge. he is firm in this. a western plot. got a lot of plots here. >> charlie: what happens? who are the champions on the other side? >> the champions on the other side -- >> charlie: wils, on one issue. >> the progressives. i don't know when progressives became reactionary. >> charlie: what are they? the people who are -- >> people who think that genetically engineered food is bad because it's controlled by big companies. that -- >> charlie: go ahead. >> big pharma is back. let's separate institutions from the deck know logical talents and skills. >> charlie: let me just say. this i don't think this is relevant. but i'll say it anyway. alice waters, for one.

all these chefs will say, what's the number one requirement to cook as well as you do and they will say, choose fresh and local ingredients. >> couldn't agree more. i love to do it. i go to the union square market, people in berkeley should go to their markets, in geneva, i'm not talking -- they don't have those markets in africa. if you can eat local food and you can afford local food. it tastes better. by the way, no greater nutritional content whatsoever. but it tastes better and she's right, but that's as far as it goes. she's not right about -- in 35 years we're going to have to produce 70% more food on this planet than we do today. 're not going to do that in alice's way. we're just not going to serve everybody one swiss chard from the back yard, we're not. >> charlie: that's true. synthetic biology, what is that? >> it's basically making new organisms from constituent parts of life.

>> charlie: what do you mean, new organisms? >> for instance, i'll give you an example. a drug used in malaria, it's most important drug, it's a difficult drug to cultivate, farmers in africa and asia grow it. if you don't get it out of the ground rapidly it can degrade. if you don't process it properly it turns to cyanide. it's very difficult to grow and harvest. jake, at the university of california berkeley at livermore lab said, you know what, i want to just make this, just from scratch. just as you'd bake a cake from the first ingredient. he made this drug out of constituent parts. just like make a computer out of parts. he put the parts together, in the next couple of years we're going to be able to make all the ardima, is that is needed in the world in a vat that is probably not lot wider than this table. we're going to be able to control the quality of it. and the price. that is miraculous -- >> charlie: what will we be aible do to do about malaria. >> treat it much better.

get the millions of people who can't afford this drug, this drug will go to them because keasling, university of california and the gates foundation have said already, made sure that this patent would be free and available to whoever needs it. this is something that we really can do with food, we can do it with energy. and we need to start thinking about using these technologies. but they are also brand new and scary: i have to say. >> charlie: why are theyary. >> when you make new life, all this frankenstein stuff that you hear all the time. it's kind of true. craig ventor says, we're going to boot up new life forms. they could do great things like power automobiles without giving off greenhouse emissions. that is wonderful. but new life forms is scary as hell. >> charlie: take it to its logical extension. >> a new life form. a life form that we don't control in the proper way. let's say it escapes from the environment we put it in and it

becomes a virus and infects us. this sun likely, it's not impossible. did you ever see the movie "i am legend" it was will smith. the whole theory they took the measles virus th harnessedharnessed it in such a way to cure cancer. it was fantastic until it wiped out the world. now this might seem like signs fiction except that there are pele using the piece else virus right now and altering to treat cancer. now they know what they're doing. they're doing it well. when life imitates art in that way, it makes you tremble a little. >> charlie: can it be controlled? >> sure. it can be controlled. the way all technology can be controlled. but my concern is that we don't talk about it. we don't have the conversations we need. so i don't want to have happen with synthetic biology what happened with genetically engineered food which is just, let's have a bunch of scientists loose on the world, it's out there, people get upset because

they feel it was forced upon them. let's have the conversation. >> charlie: lot of people that i respect and you respect like bill joy, very smart guy. >> yep. we don't see eye to eye. this knowledge is so -- >> charlie: science. >> how could that happen, charlie? let's say we even thought bill was right about this. how could that happen? you think we're going to be able to shut off knowledge to the world? because i don't think so. i'd rather harness knowledge and open it up to more people. not a few people. >> charlie: people at home, what is he talking about, how is this different? you can talk constituent parts put together a human species? >> eventually that's humanly possible but that's not what we're talking about. i don't think there's -- >> charlie: you don't like to raise that issue because it detax from the question that you're asking? >> no. we can raise the issue. but the problem is, every time you talk about these issues people go to def-con four.

what i'm talking about is, not cloning people but maybe grow some liver cells so if you get cancer you can use those cells. maybe you want to grow something so that a heart -- >> charlie: that' what stem cells about. >> but other ways to do it. in synthetic biology is a way. synthetic is way to create energy sources without everything to burn greenhouse gasses. there's almost nothing in our history that we need more desperately than that. >> charlie: here -- number of questions that can be raised from the potential of synthetic biology, what are the risks, who would pay for it. how much would it cost? will there be genetic have and have nots, how safe to manipulate life in this way. how likely to have accidents that would unleash organisms to a world that is not prepared for them, it would be easier technology for people bent on destruction to acquire. >> all these questions are totally valid and need to be discussed. destruction issue is interesting to me. there's so many ways to destroy the universe right now. you can do it cheaply.

you can fly planes in to buildings. you don't need to acquire synthetic chemicals, make them in laboratory -- >> charlie: this is potential that goes beyond 3,000 people as deadly and awful as that was. >> we can make the polio virus. we can totally make smallpox. we have that ability already. that's out there. people are capable of doing that. i don't think if someone -- >> charlie: is it postulated as weapon of great destruction? >> smallpox? >> charlie: that's my point. people who wish us -- don't wish us well think about these kinds of things. >> i understand that. i think you ought to think about these things. i just think we ought to put them in perspective there. is always a down ride and it's real. nuclear energy is something that could have been used properly, nuclear weapons turned -- >> charlie: it was used properly. >> it's true. it could be used pron early again. the truth is there are questions we never asked. i think we need to ask questions about synthetic biology right now. all this stuff is real.

but why do we never talk about these things? the president of the united states should talk about these things. she talk about them in a digital forum with our nation. i really believe that. because isn't this more important than even the economic crisis? >> charlie: where is it being talked about? >> it's being talked about in the energy department. on a lot of universities, have some foundation. >> charlie: people in big pharma in every major pharmaceutical company have some division, some where that's looking in to this? >> to the degree that they think they can make money, sure. >> charlie: or that it may be the future. >> yeah. but the problem with this is, this is another reason we should all be talking about it this shouldn't be patented, it should be available to all of us. we should be in control of whether we use organism not whether merck decides it's the right thing for us. i think that's what's happened in the past. we need to break that. >> charlie: who is drew ende of stanford. >> a synthetic biologist, he's a civil engineer, that o that's

how he was trained. a brilliant man who believes we can put together different parts of chemical constituents. and make all sorts of important new chemicals that can be drugs, that can be energy sources. he's doing that with his classes. >> charlie: the book is called "denialism. michael specter. >> thanks for having me. >> charlie: my pleasure. >> charlie: annabelle selldorf is here. principle of a firm she founded in 1990 with long time love for art. she collaborated with a late philip johnson on the urban glass house, condominium, most recently she designed 211th avenue high-rise apartment building in chelsea that features a car publish add monof her firm's work, i am pleased to

to have her here at this table for the first time, welcome. >> thank you. >> charlie: tell me about why you became an architect. >> i grew ip in an architect's household. my father is an architect still practicing. as i neared the age of 18, anything i would have done i wanted to be a journalist, i wanted to be a diplomat. i wanted to be -- >> charlie: film maker, whatever it might b >> whatever. but an architect because that seemed like an awful lot of work. >> charlie: did he want you to be an architect? >> he stayed away from the topic. eventually my best friend said, why don't we become interior decorators. at which moment he turned around said, no, no, no. if you're going to do something you study architecture because you can always do interiors but you can't build buildings. if i were you -- >> charlie: is there a guiding philosophy for you? >> i think that you start with

listening very carefullyo what the mandate is. unlike some architects, ours is not an architecture of grand gestures or monumental statements. but rather sort of subtle interventions. part also has to do with the fact that we started with very small projects. and so listening very carefully to what is required and then finding a mode of making something that has integrity and clarity. i think is usually the operative. >> charlie: here is what you said once. the goal is to stay close to the bone, to find a narrow path to a poetic resolution amid precise argument. that's really sounds good. >> took me a long time come up with that. >> charlie: it sounds great. i. >> i think it means that do you two things at the same time. which is rational responsible

consideration. but has entirely to do with the intellect. and a degree of intuition and and such of beauty. >>charlie: have you found joy in architecture. >> it's an awful lot of work, that's for sure. but i think what happens is really that in the -- it's part of the process that you see things, that you recognize things, that you interact with people. there's tremendous joy in that. i also find that there is humor in working with people and when i say people, it's really all kinds ever people, right. it's the people who build things. the people who help you, the consultants, structural engineers, mechanical engineers, whoever they may be. ultimately the clients. who contribute so much you can't

really do a good project without a good client. >> charlie: you were born in germany. >> that's right. >> charlie: think about going back to germany to do architecture since berlin is one ever the sort of remarkable cities in the world today? >> i'm always happy to visit. and i'm happy to do projects there. but new rk's been my home for a long time. >> charlie: let's take a look at some of this. first is interior staircase. >> what you should notice is the sort of clarity of the line ever the staircase. it's a very impressive staircase. none of which i had anything to do with. but the juxtaposition of the very, very elegant, simple, minimalist blackstone reception counter is sort of nice juxtaposition in my mind. >> charlie: next is furniture at the gallery. >> this of course is one of -- >> charlie: modernism, would you say? >> it was opening exhibition

when we aimed to show austrian art on the second floor and german art on the third floor. this being temporary exhibition shows off a wonderful collection of the furniture. i think it's marvelous to see these extraordinary pieces of furniture in a 19th century building. >> charlie: exhibition space at the michael warner gallery. >> that was my first gallery project. and very exciting one one at that. because working with michael warner was terribly interesting being that he had so much experience. and made such a difference in the contemporary german art world. and he basically left it to me by way of being the harshest critic. and it was the first important

project for me and i loved it because i knew every square inch of it. >> charlie: next space is david zwarer gallery. >> another art dealer gal wrist whose important to people you know very well we worked together ever since we both started our respective businesses. accompanying his growth and collaboration between the two of us has been very special. >> charlie: next is the exterior of abercrombie and fitch store here in new york. the exterior here is something that people going along 5th avenue and see every day of their life. >> they can, without -- >> charlie: with a bunch of teenagers waiting to get in. >> without being able to walk in to the building. i'm proud of the -- i'm proud of this project inasmuch as i think

that we managed to make a beautiful facade coming back down to 5th avenue. we looked at old pictures from the '50s. there used to be a haberdasher there. and fendi had a very grand facade that made no sense of fifth avenue. i think this is both quite elegant but also returns the building to the city. >> charlie: the next is interior of the same. >> which of course is very dramatic space. but the staircase as it winds in the building is beautiful object. >> charlie: let's go to residential urban residential this is 211th avenue downtown. showing elevator garage. >> the reason people think is exciting is different from why i think it's exciting is the fact that you can bring your vehicle to your floor, if you are lucky enough to liver in this building.

but it's significant because it's a very tall, skinny building with wonderful views ever the river. and in this particular location we aimed to make these very tall loft-like spaces that are at once contained but also have a sort of openness and transparency. >> charlie: this is 11th avenue and what? >> and 24th street. >> charlie: the next one is interior of a living room in a london townhouse. >> well, it's always nice for me to see this in -- just because it was a complicated renovation job. not so large in scale. but we designed every last thing down to furniture and rugs and tables, what have you. again, this is an art collector who entrusted his townhouse to us. >> charlie: in talking about the galleries i think that something like it's a kind of gentle modernism with perfect proportions, is it a genital

modernism a part of what you do. >> it takes out as compliment, it's not necessarily how i -- -- there is a tremendous amount of sort of rigorous thinking. and arguing that goes on. so if it's gentle then perhaps -- >> charlie: you and i have said, you can sometimes look at interior design as kind of preciseness, as kind of clarity, as kind of -- then you agree with that. >> yeah. >> charlie: as grand gesture. >> that's right. i think there is overriding gesture. there's a desire to make space dollars and perhaps not for everybody but for me there's a desire to have crity. >> charlie: i'm asking, that it's almost like you want it to

project the idea ha somebody thought about this. >> yeah. yes. you absolutely that you don't want that to be intimidating impression. at the end of the day you want things to be, as they were meant to be. and i think that's actually when things are most successful is when they seem completely self evident. yet strong and powerful. >> charlie: just to show that you don't just work in cities. here is a house in colorado. >> it's a wonderful house. it's remarkable because it's five stories tall. >> charlie: we're looking at the fifth story? >> we're looking at the fifth story. i duped it the sequin building in colorado. and it was a very interesting project because again there is issues of modernist language to the vernacular that is available locally in a surrounding of log

cabins. >> charlie: next is he can tearier of a house on long island. >> this is one of the first houses i did. for a couple who started an organic farm, are now very successful. it's a very simple 2500 square foot house. and the idea of it was, again, involved around proportions and creating some sort of relationship to wonderful long island landscape. >> charlie: what's different about your practice today than five years ago? >> every year i think the practice changes. but i think that we have evolved from being a small studio to a studio that's equipped to do larger work. and consequently is organized in a different way. perhaps because i'm german, but i'm always pleased when i can

sort of have systems installed that work in a profound way both being supportive of other people who work there. and find interesting and new work. >> charlie: a couple more things. this is exterior of the house that we were talking about. a different side where you get more light coming in. >> that's right. >> charlie: which i was worried about. >> plenty of light in there. this is facing the southwest direction. and what i'm still pleased with that there are interesting things of the windows on the upper floor not aligning with the doors on the lower floor. perhaps games to play. but i think they need to a harmonious -- >> charlie: the fact this they do not align? >> you know. they relate to each other in different ways. sort of your eye is arreed by the fact that -- >> charlie: from architectural standpoint, what is the thing on the right?

>> the pergula. >> charlie: just breaks up the outside line? >> it's the idea is really that it's a usable exterior space. now it's covered with vines and wonderful place to sit. it creates sort of interesting shadow, interesting light condition on the inside. >> charlie: you've said, i believe women are trained to be more conciliating consequently they're design attitude is perhaps less aggressively contrarian which is a man's which does not menta woman's point of view is not equally as distinct there. may be different sensitivity to matter of scale and proportion. can be found in the opposite argument. >> well, yes. last thing is -- >> the house we completed last year in long island. >> charlie: what's it called? >> a private residence.

one that is fairly prominent because it has large concrete wall facing the road. and so for awhile people refer to it as the great wall of china. when in fact i thought of it as a beautiful garden wall. it turns out to be a beautiful garden wall. >> charlie: what will be the dream project for you? >> at this point i'd love to do new construction. >> charlie: commercial, residential, public? >> public. there is a particular reward in doing things that are public, semi public, whether they're museums, libraries or projects of this nature because in part i think it's really about doing something -- where you take responsibility for a degree of permanence that also something that is -- that's rewarding for

people. there is an inherent wanting to do something good and something, giving something back. >> charlie: thank you. >> thank you. >> charlie: great to see you. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

♪ if you've had a coke in the last 20 years, ( screams ) you've had a hand in giving college scholarships... and support to thousands of our nation's... most promising students. ♪ ( coca-cola 5-note mnemonic )