. >> ordinarily, i would not take time out from the important work at hand to answer murrow. however, in this case, i feel justified in doing so because murrow is a symbol, the leader, and the cleverest of the jackal pack which is always found at the throat of anyone who dares to expose individual communists and traitors. >> before "see it now" exposed the tactics of senator mccarthy, the press had been largely compliant and even inadequate. oh, there was plenty of reporting that he had made his charges, but very little work done to check whether those charges were valid. by the end of the year, mccarthy would be censured by the senate, effectively ending his time as a political force. to you both, does the press have the strength and the clout to take on government abuse and this kind of demagoguery, really, if it were to happen again? >> i can envision a future in which an ed murrow of the future takes on a demagogue or exposes--"harvest of shame," "hunger in america." but right now, i think where we are, the old order is basically gone. the new order is not yet in place. >

murrow used said. [applause] >> now we have two microphones, one there and one there. you can get to the microphone and ask your question. i'm going to insist that it is a question and not a speech. [laughter] and now will probably cut you off it is -- if it is a speech. >> i'm from the george washington university and a cut to the school of media and public sector. you offered pointed criticisms of our role in iraq and afghanistan. i am curious how you feel about our involvement in libya. >> libya is interesting. the only reason we went after them because we knew we could get away with a politically. it does not mean that what he was doing was wrong. in the real question for me is what we doing about syria. we have a different relationship much more interwoven and complicated. libya was easier in terms of our war or to our friends in the war and terror. of course there was some hypocrisy in libya. not surprising. we've been waiting for a chance to get rid of him. the real tragedy of the middle east is the fact that so many people are dying in syria. so little has been

ed murrow, what see all of that. i suppose then, they began to form, would like to do that. thing about television, network television in those days , real meritocracy. they reached across the country to the corresponding quarter. time magazine and the new york times, the other great institutions, they had to come from harvard or yale, a different pedigree. television telling it was an open field. i often described as the obama land rush. rushing across the landscape. start in armonk. when i was there, the station had a very good gravitation. we would often these stories and and one of the officers of nbc came out. fifteen minutes to half an hour. they were worried it would not be able to fill the half-hour, so there were asking the affiliate's to keep your eye on stories. the first time i appeared one of them fell off at the circus in omaha and died. the photographer had a picture, and i was on the air with it. >> with so many networks available and so many different ways of getting information, does that work still feel relevant? >> well, what i think now, walk-in last nig

i think we're motivated by the same thing that murrow was motivated by. being an observer. witness to history. one of the most fundamental tenants to any democracy. you to first witness it and then decide where you stand. >> you feel that you're there as a -- to these people of the united states in this case? >> if you imagine there are things that happen out there, if there is no one there to witness it, they never happened. i would spend time with people in the war in angola. no one cared about that war. who was recording what was being done to those people if we were not there? people were being tortured and mass considered and slaughter -- massacred and slaughtered. i didn't do it because it was going to make me famous. i did it because i believed in it. >> was there anyone you looked up to as a war correspondent? >> there were so many people that i respected but i never wanted to be somebody else. i always wanted to be my own person. and i didn't grow up within -- in the arms of the american media. i respected what christiana did. i think the people that i really respe

murrow the first to bring us -- bring it was like at the last 20 years we've seen technology advancedso fast where everything is so instantaneous. with 24 hour news cycle, the internet, twitter, facebook are all these different technologies. you can see how it may assist what you do. have you found it to be a hindrance in any way? do you think it becomes harder for people to really connect with your story when there's so much information at any given point? >> you know, cnn doesn't play to my strength. being an instant expert rushing here and everywhere was in a place that i was very accountable. i followed northern ireland, for example. i knew what happened there, but northern ireland is a minefield when you say, you call summary with one name enemies something on one side of the board and something else. it has huge implications excited and feel comfortable on reporting on something like that. and just reading off the wires the moment something hit. i think that there's, there's a huge downside to the technology in the sense that it doesn't give you, even a day disappears very fast

murrow that brought to us live. we have seen everything happened so fast that it is instantaneous. with the internet and all of these different technologies, you can see how it assists what you do. at the found to be a hindrance in anyway? does it become harder for people to connect with your story when there is so much information brought to them at any given point? >> cnn doesn't play to my strength, being an instant expert. i've followed the northern island, i knew what happened there. it is a minefield. you call someone a name and it means something on the other side of the border. i did not feel -- i think there is a huge downside to the technology. at the same time, there is something great -- they have changed national security policy, they have changed the strategic relationships. the power of this is undeniable. you can't go backwards. this event is sponsored by the ethics and standards committee. where were they for twitter, facebook? they don't exist. that is egregious. you can start a blog and put any rumor you like out there. people think that the mainstream media is c