he owns the "wall street journal." bloomberg sprung from nowhere to create progress of journalism online. i will respectfully disagree on that. >> thinking about california watch, we feature them regularly, and they are doing excellent investigative work. is anyone familiar with those, and can you talk about the success and where you see that going? do you think that we will see more of these kinds of outlets? >> i think that paying for news journalism and especially for news journalism with a variety of political agendas, historically in san francisco, was paid for by real estate and automotive and help-wanted advertising. it was not paid for by the circulation nichols of the subscribers. if you think about government- boned journalism compared to the rich, benevolent owner boulders of journalism or the public opening of journalism, i think there is a time now where you do not need quite as much funding as ever, but some of the people who today are seen as barron's -- barons started off with a pretty defined journalis

that journalism mint be the best major to get into for journalism. host: why not? guest: i don't know. i have heard that three or four times from different speakers. i didn't really detail it. i don't know. host: well, this is all about journalism as you can see up there, the washington journalism media conference. but i'm anxious to find out from others about journalism and if you have an attitude about it. something here that i will get you involved in but we have so many hands up. this lady has something to say. where are you from? guest: cartersville, georgia. what he said about us being told that journalism may not be the best major to have, that was elaborate the edd it is better a major about something you are passionate about so that you can specialize in that and you can really become known for knowing your details and knowing what you are talking about. because anybody -- anybody can come up to you sand say what is your name and put to the in a paper. but for you to be able, if you major in history to write about a certain event in another

of journalism.here do you believe or disagree? this was written back in the 1900's. think of it. no television. certainly no iphone or facebook. i believed in journalism. walter williams was his name. he is deceased. i believe that the public journal is a public trust that all connected with it are to the full measure of responsibility, trustees for the public comment that all acceptance of lesser service than the public service is a betrayal of that trust. i believe a journalist should write only a right what he holds in his heart to be true. that is a start. there is more. tell us all what you think. >> i am from portland, maine. i think most of those ideals still uphold. hold. they were saying that the duty procedures to the people. -- i can't think of the word. >> they're trying to get their opinions told? it has been taken to more. >> are you sure it is more? >> i am not sure. i did not read the newspapers back then. >> there is a story about the spanish-american war and now a newspaper man got

to do with journalism? >> i am from virginia. i would like to impact people. >> how do you know what is the truth? >> you should be able to trustor journalists. if i believe what i am reading is the truth and later i hear it is not the truth, i lose all respect for that reporter. a person's integrity in journalism is the most important aspect of their career. >> a number of places have become very opinionated. you know they will have people from other sides. everybody gets upset when it tried to categorize them. is that good or bad? >> i do not think it is a good thing. opinion is good only when it is strictly written as opinion. it is interesting to read editorials. the importance of journalism is to hear what is happening in the world and the truth. there's no other place that people will get that information besides from journalist here that is our responsibility. >> the most successful network in the united states makes more money than anyone else and has a small and opinionated base to its spiri. most

quality journalism is there. the new part of the media is not a new types of stories being told, but how they are being told, short for nurses long form, and how they are distributed on your one newspaper or magazine or one website, versus to run the mobile universe, or threat the internet universe, portals. do you want to give 30% of revenue to apple in order to distribute it? lots of publishers are making that decision. it is the distribution from free tv to pay tv and the change from the free online destination media to mobile everywhere media and the creation of brands there. along with the business model, that is what we are working on. >> the want to go to the next question. we have to get to everybody. >> my name is peter bergen. i am an investigative reporter. i do not write content, i do not right product. i do news reporting. i do not write material to put ads around. there are some assumptions coming from this gathering that i find troubling. many years ago, upton sinclair wrote a classical study of jo

the community journalism.ng models to use the out there, the behavior cc up there have changed within the journalism profession. whichever. >> all the different functions the contacts between that checking, coming three databases, trying to not just go out and find the news stories, but to call together collections of data it and anecdotes that tell a larger story. helps to fill in some of the gaps. actually on the university of chicago at the same time. trying to make up my own discipline. a multi disciplinary program. i think i have a certain faith in innovation and piecing together the old and the new. seeing a lot of that. also part of the deeper history of what we now think of as this public broadcasting. just a bunch of amateurs, small educational stations, people trying to do something good for the public that got rolled up into a larger entity. that same thing needs to happen now. take a critical look and sometimes a very critical look at what these new technologies can do for journalism and rewarding

simply as a longer format journalism. yes, i think that that makes a lot of sense in terms of what the audience wants, and it is probably what is also defined as for aggressive journalism. i think we should probably define our terms. what does that really mean? how is bloomberg doing progress of journalism? we may be thinking about different definitions of what that is. i'm not sure if the segue from that into investigative journalism made a lot of sense to most people's thinking in terms of how that is defined. >> have another question? >> i am a local free-lance journalist here. a couple of years ago, i had a friend. we were trying to figure out the feasibility of starting a nonprofit journalism in denver, and i remember coming across this corporate structure that i believe vermont, maybe one other state, uses in the country, but it is called a low profit limited liability company, and it is a structure that is meant to allow for profit but also to allow for tax-exempt status for donations. i found it really interesting

phil said that the times' practices, journalism of verification and i say it practices a journalism that values protection and bias, there's no other word for it created a journalism at odds with its historical mission of reppedderring the news impartially without fear or favor. it's also created journalism at odds with the liberal democratic values it's long stood for so even if you do support a more partisan times, and there are those that do believe news organizations should take up ideological codulls like that do in europe, but even if you support a more partisan times and the ideologically committed journalists in the room who do so, there's still cause for concern because of the law of unintended consequences, the liberal values that these progressives generally stand for are often very ill-served by the very paper that embodies them or said to embody them. john duey, the great professor, educator, and my philosopher is credited for finding the vital hates of the democracy -- the ability to follow an argument, grasp the point of view of another, grasp the values of understanding,

local journalism. more than $15 in demand media. i just wonder if anyone has anything to say? i will say, the q&a section. the lady at the back. yes. >> my name is susan kim, a reporter in d.c. my question, a lot of discussion about funding the media. i want to turn the focus to the politics of the media. the fact that there has been a big rise in organization, media outlets. they're not just producing commentary which would traditionally consider blocking. even folks like the new york times. the following. the daily. all these folks. you know, but at the same time along with this development, increasing public distrust in media. where this news is coming from. based on the original reporting. this overlaps with the fact that politics are involved and it is political. my question is, what is a place for disinterest business? who should be promoting that? was its public funded not, someone should be trying to sustain the midst of all these developments in this. >> and not going to answer that begins hav

observational community-oriented journalism. things that might have been restricted to an e-mail newsletter or in the distant past, some kind of mimeograph letter. those are positive changes to journalism, and they are happening at the local level. >> speaking of local, how many here have heard up hatch -- heard of patch.com? interesting. i love my local pact, not because they are here, but i follow it. it tells me what is going on in the schools, and it tells me what is going on down the street. but not many people know about it. i'm wondering why you think that is, or are you targeting certain communities that are covered by patch? >> and can you describe it for those of us that are not familiar with it? >> it is a hub for news and information for local communities, simply put. it goes beyond this, and we can get into that, but that is something it leads with. we hire full-time professional journalist who lives and works locally in that community that it is serving. so it is a uniform platform so the technology is shared, so w

>> i did not go two journalism school but a history school that fell apart even before journalism. when they were cranking out historians like mad in the 1990's. people with ph.d. san english, there are more of them. we went out on the job market. there should have been a content though. and some of the still cannot get tenure and rear in our forties. i could make more money for the alternative newsweeklies in the chicago. i did. that was the end of that. and academia. what do you say? >> [laughter] >> i thought about this the model for the future is the model content bill. that is one system that works and people are paid. but let me take a step back. reason i wrote about it is that to the face we have in the markets and they will speak with our voice anti-democratic to deliver the wondrous results. the way the of american dogma fails and fails and fails, what you say with journalism is the most spectacular failure. but what model? what will take its place? hamsters getting paid $15 per storey o.r. the public subsidy ever and i know that is how it works in the scandinavia where th

asked about journalism school, i actually went to journalism school, and they very unsuccessfully beatall these opinions that didn't work with me, but others who were told you can't be involved in politics, you probably shouldn't even vote if you're a journalist, and you know, because of good reasons of being objective or fair, i don't believe in octoberivity, but being fair in your reporting, but the bosses never play by those rules and spent 30 years at the fcc consolidating and concentrating and becoming so big when they toppled over, they took the rest of us with them, and i think though that again out of crisis comes opportunity, and we are at one of those moments of opportunity, but it's going to be a fleeting moment, so if we don't, you know, activate now, if we don't get out there and actually engage the public in this discussion, begin to reintroduce them to these crazy ideas contained in this wonderful book, you know, we really don't stand a chance. >> so before we engage the public in the room and online, i'm going to give the last questions to nikk, and jessica. you're sort

"wall street journal" is now horribly bias. we kind of adjust our lenses here when you read online and you do not know the person is, it is difficult to know whether it is legitimate or not. newspapers eventually disappear and are no longer published in print, so they are just competing with everyone else. how do we establish -- how do we know -- how to newspapers establish credibility? i saw this news reporter who put a piece on youtube about gavin newsom just walking away. so how did these organizations establish credibility? how are people able to see the problems with bias that will never come up? there is also a problem with advertisers, backers. a millionaire putting $500,000 or $1 million into a newspaper, and he will expect something in return. he may not want his coverage to be negative. so there are all these things. i wondered if anybody had any general comments about those. >> that is a really difficult problem. if we think about the way we understand journalism today, it really is an historical aberration. that is

what kind of journalism deck's a journalism -- journalism? a journalist is not allowed to speak without orders that that is an interesting kind of journalism. you are just a mouthpiece. that is not me. quite as things change, here is a blogging. anyone can find these guys. they are on television. is that better bad? >> it is fine. there are more opinions in the news universe than ever. i do not think that is a bad thing. you have to be a very alert news consumer in this environment. would i grant them credibility as a revival news source facts do i believe they talk like people like me before they make comments? i do not think that. they can say outrageous things and get more of an audience or cater to people who have one set of beliefs. >> apply that to npr which you said is elitist and liberal. why should anybody pay attention to them if they are looking at the world their liberal allies or vice versa? >> you should be aware of them. in both places, you can find examples of good journalism. it represents point of view. there is a big differ

that is what journalism is. journalism should be a first draft of history. that is the best we can do on a daily basis. give the consumer a sense of what is taking place in our society, the laws, the policies. >> when you were at npr, did you feel they were doing it? >> yes. i said i never had anybody tell me what to say. npr's journalism is more of a constructs. at one point ellen weiss said there so many conservatives over there. i said, there are so many liberals over here. we added it over here to hide in debates. we get it take over here at npr to heighten the debate. there's not very different. i did not understand her on this issue at all. >> here is what you write in the first chapter. what is wrong with that? >> people believed a compromise. the definition of politics is the art of compromise. you cannot sit here to principles in say that i am standing here on my principal and i will not compromise. that is not politics. that might be campaigning. >> nowhere did they show a genuine interest in bringing americans together. where is a written that any