>> charlie: welcome to our program. tonight everything you've wanted to know about the bbc and more with mark thompson, the director general. >> it has been a great addition to the family of broadcasting. they were innovative, they brought sports that people couldn't get before. sky is a success story which i think has improved british television. i don't think what they do right now is a problem. i think there are questions for the government and for the regulators to look at when you have so much power vested, i

mean sky, in terms of its revenue is already bigger than bbc and will get much much bigger because of the way in which paid tv is moving in that country. >> charlie: mark thompson for the hour, next. or maybe you want to help when the unexpected happens. whatever you want to do, members project from american express can help you take the first step. funding provided by the following:

captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> charlie: mark thompson is here. he is director general and editor-in-chief of the british broadcasting corporation known as the bbc. it is the largest broadcasting organization in the world. it provides news and sports and entertainment via television and radio and the internet. it has about 240 million viewers globally and broadcasts in 33 languages. its news operation comprises 72 bureaus employing 250 correspondence and 2000 local freelancers. here's a look at some of what they do. >> some of the most power nations believe iran is building nuclear message and outrageous

words were indeed betraying the people. >> i don't take war lightly. if they take those constructive steps and serious negotiations, then not only should there not be a threat of war, but there also won't be the sanctions that are currently in place. >> a passing priest stopped to administer the last rites. then as the crowd watched, a man came to identify the victim. the his grandson just seven years old. >> with the cooperation of guatemala authorities, american government scientists came here to the country's biggest prison and mental asylum and deliberately infected nearly 700 inmates and patients with syphilis and gonorrhea. >> today they're learning how to deliver a baby safely. 18 year old is her the mother of

two sons. she's here because her village chose her, her family gave permission. in this conservative culture this is as close as they get to the delivery room. >> charlie: they're well-known for their drama and entertainment wings. here's a look at some of those productions. >> i should have known nothing about worlds with no morals and no responsibilities and not just glimpse. you took my faith with your hands and pushed it up against the window. >> we should have pushed it through. [laughter] >> and then reclines. >> can you just say what's on your mind and i'm getting it down >> are you sure you're getting it down, it's not going to be pretty. >> statistics, field tests, photographs. he invented them. >> invented them.

>> yes, a few months ago. >> maybe he should listen. >> sshh. >> charlie: at the helm since 2004 she's seen a dramatic down sizing. at the same time the company expanded and launched media adventures. i'm pleased to have him here at this table for the first time. welcome. >> hi. >> charlie: why are you in the united states. >> i gave a talk yesterday about public broadcasting to in a sense kind of symposium of -- >> charlie: broadly speaking as what. >> i was talking about the bbc but talking in the context about national public radio and pbs in this country and the

direction of travel. >> charlie: in which way. >> it could be more united, could get more resource and could do more and other ways they could potentially learn from the model of the bbc. one of the basic points is the bbc arrived at a moment in time in the united kingdom, it's a different country, different traditions. and it's very hard to replicate this model i think in the united states. >> charlie: came in 1922. >> what happened is as part of history there was a giant venture of wireless manufacturers who realized they needed some programs if they were going to sell wireless sets. a few years layer, this is the big idea, it was decided by the government that actually broadcasting could be a great force for social and cultural good and the british broadcasting company became the british broadcasting corporation with the royal charter and a middle and very very high values, enlightenment values about what should be happening. the idea is that everyone who

wanted broadcasting would pool together money, be a compulsory charge, the money would be pooled and high quality programs would then be available for everyone no matter how rich or poor. >> charlie: and paid for by a license two by everybody who had a television set. >> sure. >> charlie: that's been standard in the history of the bbc. >> that's been the core, that's been the core funding of the bbc right along. it surprises me, well two surprises. firstly british public continues to be very supportive. nobody loves taxes but support for the license fee, this compulsory charge for having now a television set. >> charlie: how do they measure how much you pay. does everybody pay the same. >> everyone pays the same thing. if you're 75 years old or older, the government pays for it. so from the age 75 above. every other household, each household pays for it and in return for that, the average person in britain is across tv and radio and the web is

continuing more than 19 hours a week of bbc programming, 19 hours a week. >> charlie: what is the cost per year in terms of american dollars. >> about $230 a year. >> charlie: $230 a year, commercial free. >> yes. and obviously it's also enabled the bbc to be a not for profit organization in a way can put its values. we can concentrate on making news, for example, which is unashamedly serious. and because if you like the spread of our programs and the fact we haven't been as well as news, 80% of the uk population are reached by bbc news every week. and with serious stuff. the night over our recent election when there was a night of high drama when the new coalition government was being formed, bbc won our main tv network something like 11 or 12 million people. more than, you know, probably more than half of the available television viewing audience were

with us on bbc one as we had a camera on downing street. microphone comes out in the street, gordon brown comes out, dana cameron is stuck in traffic somewhere. you go to the palace or the prime minister. this drama unfolded and we had a large part of the country with us. and that sense of an entire country connected and sharing the same experience is i still think a magical thing. it's still in some ways in a digital age, it feels even more precious than maybe it did in the 1920's. >> charlie: you have an interesting background coming out of oxford married an american. at the bbc, you came up primarily through the news end. >> yes. >> charlie: you were producer and editor of some of the major broadcasts. >> yes. >> charlie: do you think you look at the job differently than someone who might have come up from the business side? >> our tradition is that we have people with creative background. >> charlie: who run the bbc.

>> who run the bbc. one of the things that gives some of my colleagues in a sense the authority is we've done all the jobs. i mean the kids who see this studio with the clipboard, i've done those jobs. i've been the director, i've been the film director, i've run news programs and actually subsequently got involved in many other kinds of programs. in a way, we all, we're a bit like an academic institution, more like a university which feels most comfortable when, you know, the president or the dean and someone who is an act digit rather than someone with a distant background. >> charlie: you are here to make a speech. are you also selling the bb. are you looking for partnerships. >> of course. we have many many business contacts. one of the things the bbc does at home we're broadcasting in this environment which is paid for by the licensee and which people receive without adverse

or sponsorship. but internationally one of our jobs is to make sure that these programs which have already been made for the british audience potentially if we could get money by selling to other broadcasters or come up with the right partnerships, that's money we can also apply. >> charlie: a more revenue source makes more programs. >> we have a commercial arm which has got a turnover of one and-a-half billion dollars a year. i say make the contacts and have the conversations which are about furthering our business interests. >> charlie: how does bbc america fit into this. >> well bbc america is the first chance we've had really in our history to get our program directly under our own brand to the american public. >> charlie: so they were run previously on either commercial networks. >> they might or for pbs. sometimes they'll run a first run on bbc america. we hope over time that cable channel well get more and more original high quality programs that haven't been seen anywhere

else. we have like any broadcaster, we think hard about what's the best way of getting the most value out of this intellectual property and sometimes it's production sometimes it's selling to a big network and sometimes it's running our own radio station. >> charlie: and sometimes repurposing as people do all the time. but there is this question. why can't we see more bbc stuff? for example a lot of your really wonderful doubt -- documentary programs we can't access here. >> there are often problems. but i think it's true that also the american cable market is a market where we would love to launch more cable channels in this country for a variety of reasons, that's typical for us to do. one of the things we hope to do, we've launched a very successful web-based product which is called the bbci class. it's a way on the web and mobile

phones and devices, ipads and so forth. you can catch up with the broadcasts within seven days and instantly start listening to them. we want the international version. >> charlie: when will that be. will it be a digital box. >> it will be an application on the web, it will be an application on an ipad. it will be something we hope we can provide for mobile phones and we'll launch it next year, 2011. >> charlie: the world in the future in terms of digital is the question is applications. it's social networks and applications, yes? >> i think browsers and search engines like google are going to go and play a very important role as well but certainly for a tv-like experience where in the same way you press one button and you get a tv channel, you get bloomberg, bam there you are. aps have this magical quality

that you press one button and you have this entire thing opens up. >> charlie: you don't have to go searching for it, there it is. how is that going to dominate. >> i think it will dominate for certain kinds of behavior. back at home you want to relax. the simpler you can make the way of getting what you want -- >> charlie: if i want to watch the bbc, say, i more likely want to go to an application than i wanted to go to my, to my pc, say, or my computer and access it that way. >> think about college students in this country who is interested in a international story, what's happening inside china and wants to use the bbc website to as a resource. i think they'll use it as much -- >> charlie: will that be an application or will that be ... >> i think it will still be the use of browsers. that's the kind of lean forward

and use the keyboard. i think the way of trying to think through this very bewildering digital revolution is human behaviors, how the people use small devices, what are they good for and how do they use devices like laptops where there's a lot of inputting. what is the experience the entertainment experience of sitting at home with a big screen, high quality pictures, high definition 3-d surround sound. and in these mood states is a way of putting it, what's the easiest way of accessing what you want. in a way quite a lot of economics, what feels right and what feels easy and convenient. >> charlie: that is your challenge today, isn't it. >> it's the challenge of everyone in our business. and we've been, i mean bbc is big enough that we have scientists, we have engineers, behavioral scientists and we can try and think through these.

but i mean your point perhaps the core of it must be right which is public at large in the uk but around the world they want simple clear, effective, reliable way of getting the cunt tent -- content that they want. like the iplayer, there was a series of if you literally prestlessed the picture of the program within two or three seconds you were watching that program. no complexity, just press it and it stops playing and you're enjoying yourself. >> charlie: the story of technology is to find some need often that people didn't know that they even wanted, add to their life, enhance their life, give them options they did it ao access as possible. >> the really big thing which i think the whole world media is still grappling with is there's an extraordinary unfolding story about social activity on digital media. mobile phones, the wait they

took off. >> charlie: personal communication and sharing and everything else. >> i mean all of that. the social media networks like facebook, i mean the extra way in which mobile devices are changing people's lives. and of course when people use these devices, what they talk about often is about television and other forms of media. and we're playing with this consent with social discovery of media. i mean how, how people will be using facebook and those networks to exchange, share, recommend and engage with media. any media company thinking about what's the best way of letting people use those, not just the application but how do you make sure that this show is, it's got a life in all this. it's already on twitter and facebook and so forth. people on in digital thought it was going to be an isolating thin, the people would be on their own. >> charlie: rather than going out and sitting in front of a

screen. >> it's a party, it's kind of a noisy party. >> charlie: also come to grips with the consequences of it in terms of what it does in terms of invasion of privacy, what it does in terms of tragedy too where someone is seen in a way that causes them great pain. all of those kind of things in technology opening up to new kinds of things that we never projected. >> the virtual world sometimes has very real consequences. things that happen here because of information and about people can have very powerful consequences. >> charlie: the news today in britain, the news today in the united states is a budgetary questions, looking at huge debt and looking at deficits and looking at new government which is talking about an austerity budget. >> yes, very different approach in the uk from the administration here in the u.s. where fear of upsetting this

rather fragile recovery means that u.s. government is not addressing the deficit at the moment and there's a big debate about who is right. but in the uk the assumption by the new coalition government is that steps need to be taken now to get public spending down, under control and balancing the public books. >> charlie: how successful do you believe as someone with i don't remember kind of journalistic experience in explaining that. he clearly knows there's going to be protests as there are about pension reform and everything else and welfare benefits. >> yes. >> charlie: and he clearly knows that but i guess his bet is what that if you talk common sense to the british people? >> i have to be a little bit careful here but it seems to me -- >> charlie: why do you have to be careful. >> because i as the editor and chief of the bbc have to think very carefully about the exact way and everybody else in my organization talks about politics. but it seems to me what we're seeing in the uk is the coalition government which is

exactly the tactical approach of trying to in a sense draw the public into a kind of common sensical what they would take to be a common sensical conversation about the national household and what needs to be done to balance the books. and a call from mr. calendar today what you can do for your country in a sense that everyone may have to make a sacrifice but if we pull together we can get through this. it's rather as if we have a coalition government which is a government of, you know, proposed national unity during a kind of economic emergency. what remains to be seen is whether that, that approach will continue to earn the support of the public when individual unpalatable decisions start being made and people start looking at individual benefits. there was a big fuss this week

about child benefits. about 60 or $70,000 -- >> charlie: with the benefits. >> the benefits they've been getting. this is the british middle class has some potentially unpleasant truths about the kind of benefits they have. now we don't know and i'm certainly not in the business of physical kind of toothsaying whether or not this government will continue to win that argument when the reality was what's happening. but i have to say we're in that early stage of the government's life where my sense is although there's a grown debate, there's the leader of the labor party and i think we'll see our position parties taking the fight to the government strongly. there's an element of a honeymoon period. crucially george os borne has yet to stand up. he's standing up in a few days. >> charlie: making a speech. >> to make a speech saying what's going to be cut and that is an absolutely, it's going to be a critical day for the

government. >> charlie: we interviewed him and he said that's going to be when the rubber meets the ground when i have to tell them exactly where it's going to come. there is this too that sort of creates a little bit of a flare. bbc representative perhaps including you, you know, with a commitment to impartiality met with mr. osborne, was it, to look at the kinds of government -- >> well, there was a lot of misreporting. i went to see some officials in number 10 which is the residents and office of the prime minister. i have to say i go and see every prime minister and every prime minister's officials and the leader of the opposition and leaders of the parties as well and all i would say is that we talked to politicians, we sometimes listen to concerns about our coverage. that doesn't, we don't do what televisions say. the bbc i think has got as good

a record about being impartial and independent of government as any broadcaster or any newspaper i know anywhere in the world and we're very very focused on maintaining that reputation. our trust, we get very high rankingses. our trust is based on the fact that audiences around a around the world believe we are independent and we are. >> charlie: in the context of both the entertainment business and being in the news business and being in the business of public service, which you've all set, is the balance going to shift because of the economic crunch. >> we're in the broadcasting business and the role of the bbc has always been seen literally has been to inform, educate and entertain. entertainment has always been part of the mix but have i to say it's always been a smaller part of the mix. it would have been on commercial

tv in this country. over time the proportionment thing has reduced the news and public affairs programming has increased and we've reduced the numbers of for example dramas we bought from hollywood and increased the numbers of dramas and comedies we make ourselves where there's more of a market failure. there is progressively a reshaping of the bbc around the things that we do best. great program. british programs for children for british children shown without for example is one of the things the bbc really concentrates on. we know parents love that. they love the absence -- they love that the child has something alongside those cartoons which are educational and valuable. so yes, there is a shift towards a more distinctive offering if i can use that word, something which feels more different from the rest of the market. but i have to say it's also a way in which the bbc plays to its strength. this is giving the public what they say they most want from the

bbc which is quality and something, things, programs, ideas, talent, they couldn't encounter anywhere else. >> charlie: but john simpson for example, take one example, he worries the bbc is getting out of the habit of documentaries. >> well, i mean john's worked with in the square, i've stood in tiennamen square with him covering events there. john is actually entitled to worry. we are a colossal supporter of documentary. we're not a british documentary, we have a strong story though which puts money into documentary, american documentary, documentaries from around the world. and the amount of for example arts and music we put on our television, the hours have massively increased over the five or ten years. with our digital channels in the uk we can do much more justice to the whole world of documentary, arts and music. and of course there will always be people who want more.

but we have a very -- >> charlie: you're saying i think the balance is right and i think we're doing as much news programming and as much documentaries and as much public surveys. >> nobody says we're not doing enough news. we're doing more news than we have in any point of our history. >> charlie: are you doing too much. >> there are certainly people in the uk who worry about the strength and scale and popularity of our website. i would say that the bbc -- >> charlie: websites. >> they do say this too much. my view is the public wants news and a modern public doesn't want news on one medium or news at one part of the day. they want access to news at any time that they have the fancy to catch up with it or when an event is happening and they want to deliver in whatever is the most convenient way. and bbc news in the uk and as far as possible around the world is something we try and offer on multiple devices, radio, tv, the

web, phones, ipads and so forth. and try to make it relevant in parts of the uk and suited to the way the website is presented. we are trying to use the website in this country and trying to make sure that the website that they access really works for them. >> charlie: are you cutting back on the website at all because of economic considerations or are there protest considerations. >> economic but also a sense that after a period of growth, our website is an enormous website. i don't think anyone knows how many millions of pages there are. >> charlie: and popular in terms of news. >> it's very popular but also actually for information and sort of culture and so forth. there is a strong case of

focusing it, news is example, our coverage of sports for example, our coverage of history and science where we really can do something which is world class exceptional. so we're going to try and trim and focus the website, not to make it less popular. in a way it's a more focused proposition. i think it's actually more popularity. there's nothing i would want to say to anyone using the bbc website but a sense on strengthening it and making it better actually. >> charlie: as you travel around the globe as i have the great fortune to do and you follow what people are saying and doing and you follow even the lecture. >> yes. >> charlie: it looks like the bbc and the person of you and the person of james murdock are sort of warily watching each other and you say about them my god if they own all of the big sky b, the murdock course, news

corp. which they're trying to do, plus all the newspapers, there's a dominant force in britain like nobody's ever been. that's what you say. >> as a matter of being true, charlie, as well and it's a concentration that wouldn't be allowed i believe in this country. >> charlie: the bbc is too strong, they're too powerful, they're too arrogant, whatever he says, right? >> that's a fair reflection. >> charlie: in fact, that's pretty much where it is, right? what do you think you worry about with respect to mr. murdock. >> well firstly, if you, i'm sure you did read it -- i would say that big sky b which is significantly owned and perhaps one day will be fully owned by news corporation. this is a big payoff in the uk. a satellite director home satellite, sky has been a great addition to the family of british broadcasting and they're innovative, they brought quality to bear, they brought sports that people couldn't get before.

sky is a success story which i think has improved british television. so i don't think scig big sky b does right now is a problem. i think there are questions for government and for the regulators to look at when you have so much power vested. i mean sky in terms of its revenue is already bigger than bbc and will get much much bigger because of the way in which paid tv is moving in that country. you have a company which owns that also has a straightforwardly dominant position in terms of national newspapers in the country and by one of british's biggest publishers, harpercollins. there are questions about how you insure plurality. it's not saying that the question can't be satisfactorily answered and it's not saying that big successful companies should be punished. on the contrary but i would say the thing like the bbc, it's a public institution which is in all sorts of ways held to

account and where -- >> charlie: how is it held to account. >> well, there's a governing body. >> charlie: that you report to. >> which i report to. by the way all of the director generals get fired. this is not very solid. they changed the management over the history of the bbc. >> charlie: mostly over controversy or not. >> mostly over controversy, that's true. but there is regular scrutiny of whether the bbc is living up to its public purposes, about the quality of it. >> charlie: are you saying there's no scrutiny of big sky b in all the newspapers that murdock owns, there's no constitute knee or questioning of that because -- scrutiny or questioning of that because they

question -- >> the accountability that the bbc is subject to is, as it were, we can be told to do things by our government body. we can be told to stop services, we can be told to change our direction of travel. so if a complaint is made for example from a member of the public about a particular news item which we've got wrong or which this person claims and the bbc trusts the governing body believes that that complaint is justified, we have to change our journalism, you know, except that we made a mistake. >> charlie: the governing body could say whoever they are could say we've gotten some political pressure here, we're concerned about the way you're doing this and they could say stop covering those stories the way you're covering them. you are on the wrong track and we don't approve of it so stop it. >> the process, this process -- but the process of considering the program itself happens as it were in public. there are opportunities that give evidence, the findings are

published. there's a complete system in place so that, you know, if the bbc wants to launch a new service, there's a process to decide and an external regulator equivalent of the fcc has to look at the potential market impact of this service. there's a whole process for working out whether anything the bbc does might damage plurality. >> charlie: have you seen evidences that the news corp. for example jims murdock and his son is abusing their power. >> the debate in the uk at the moment is simply a debate whether the government should begin a process of looking at the question -- >> charlie: i know what the debate is, i'm asking as you look as the head of the bbc, do you see such abuse of power that it worries you and you want to bring it to the public's attention. >> more specifically what i was

saying in edin borough was that i certainly think the proposal to take a hundred percent ownership of b sky b for the reasons we already talked about raises questions which should be looked at. now the right thing to say is, when the competent authorities look at it, they can gather the evidence, they can look at whether there isn't a problem or there was a problem. >> charlie: what is exhibit a that you want them to look at. >> we should look at whether the combination, the loss of independent directors on b sky b the connection between the editorial -- >> charlie: i have a share of it so -- >> currently there are independent directors and the editorial direction of big sky b and news is separate from the management and direction of travel of their newspapers and so forth. if the two were combined, there might be a loss, a significance loss of plurality in our media

market. now in the end, for cable, the relevant minister decides whether he wants to refer this and then there's a process which again will be an open process, probably of the fcc equivalent looking at the evidence and deciding whether or not it was a problem. so i think what we're saying is we're not saying there's been a crime committed here. what we're saying is given the scale of the potential ownership in the uk media, there's a strong case for looking at it systematically and deciding whether or not anything needs to be done to address. >> charlie: can i repeat what i think i hear you saying. it's not that they've done anything wrong, it's just that there's a potential of an abuse of power. we do not believe or say they abuse the power. >> i think that's a good way of 3509ing it. >> charlie: fair enough. look here, this is where they -- >> i think that's a good point. >> charlie: -- not acted in the public interest. >> i would not want to see anything done which would stop the continued potential of b sky

b to go on to add to british television. what i said however and it was actually the principal point i made in my speech was that i would like to see b sky b spending more money on british content. at the moment a is he very small protorture of the small revenues they get goes into british talent, ideas and programs. >> charlie: is he saying that because he just wants to jab them or does he really care whether they create british content or not. is it a debating point or is it something that in the end he would -- >> what happens is britain has had an outstanding television tradition of real quality and not just bbc, itv and channel 4. >> charlie: some people -- it used to be channel 4 by the way. >> i was. >> charlie: some people have argued that there was at different times an independent television more clever, better programming coming out of those places than the bbc.

the bbc lost its edge at times and maybe that's -- >> i would agree with that. i would agree with that, i would agree that the creative competition is good for audiences and it's good for the bbc to have other people out there and i think some of the best programming we ever made quite often it must be the american audiences see who is made by the bbc and made by others. >> charlie: if it comes from britain we think it's bbc. what do we know. >> it's not such a bad thing architecturally. but what's happened is because of the mobile of the funded broadcast is not unlike the u.s. networks has become compromised and difficult. the amount of money that companies like i the. v and channel 4 can put into programs has diminished. now all the while sky's revenues have been growing and growing and growing. they haven't been putting as much money in. so although -- >> charlie: what are they doing with the money as their revenues grow rather than putting it back in programming they're doing what, to expand. >> and i mean, you know, sky,

itv is the principal commercial broadcast in the uk. sky we think spends more on its marketing budget than itv can now spend making programs in the market. so i'm not suggesting that sky's business model on its head -- >> charlie: it's a private enterprise. you want to dictate how much money they spend, you want the government to say we want you to spend 40% of every dollar you make profit, profit on public service programming. would you like to see that. >> we already have in the uk for some of the other commercial broadcasters, itv is a good example, they have to spend 35% of their money on production. so there will be another revolution in this country as was suggested heres not completely unknown in the uk. >> charlie: you think it's a good idea. it would be a good idea to apply

the same thing you apply to itv. >> it's by far the best route if sky simply as itv did over the years decided that in the end it made sense to play a significant role in our own creative industries in the country rather than relying on imported programs and on premier exclusive spowrts rides to spend some money on british drama and comedy. by far the best thing would be if they did it in a sense because that's part of what it is to be a great british broadcast. >> charlie: why don't they do it do you think. >> i think in the end, you ask the question you should probably put it to my colleagues at b sky b. i'm not convinced it's the wrong thing to do, they will be very successful at it. >> charlie: mr. murdock said about you and bbc, he said your ambitions were chilling and that your on-line ambitions had to be dealt with. >> i mean, i think -- >> charlie: are you saying the government -- >> our sin here is we have a

website which people really like to use. bbc news -- >> charlie: you think he's just jealous. >> it's not a new thing it started in 1920's, it has a global reputation, it has a very big reputation in the uk. each period of the british public are using it. and not surprisingly nowadays they want to get access to it on the web as well. although i accept that, particularly on the web, we think hard about what it is we do. what's the offer from the bbc and why is the bbc doing it and how does it live up to our values. by inform and educate particularly part of the equation. so i think it's fair to say let's make sure what we do on the web really feels like it should be the bbc doing it. but i think it would be madness for the bbc to say do you know what we're not going to have a website or we're not going to have news on our website. >> charlie: it would be mad, i'm here to tell you. here's something, i want to just throw this right down the middle

because it's of interest to me. this is a quote from you. if you do my job, you're always looking at the heavenly city of the bbc as it could be, should be and the whole time you're wrestling the realities of a big noisy complex hetero generous complex to a city of god. now there's a man with the command of the language. give me the spirit of what you meant by that. because i'm -- >> if you look at the royal charter which sets out the scene. the public person of the bbc they read like the declaration of independences. we fill the public space with programs which enrich individual's lives, educate people bring them together inform the national debate so we have a more perfect dempsey, give them skills and give them the kind of entertainment which

is wholesome and brings communities together. it's a rather naive but wonderful set of ambition which i completely believe in. and of course that's what you aim for, and by the way, all of these ambitions i think still make more senses in a complex digital world than they did in the world we inhabit it 25 years ago. getting there of course with real human beings and the whole discomputation world of creative talents, that's quite a challenge. >> charlie: is it under siege because of the current economic circumstances. >> well, you show me an organization which at some level isn't under siege in the current economic circumstances. in other words, many people, many of my colleagues -- >> charlie: under siege is a powerful thing. that's not a question of having to make hard decisions. under siege is more than a hard decision. >> sure. >> charlie: you've laid off 25% of your staff. >> sure. >> charlie: you cut your own