Skip to main content

tv   Newsmakers  CSPAN  December 29, 2013 6:00pm-7:01pm EST

6:00 pm
followed by a roundtable discussion with journalists discussing news from the past year. then, women entrepreneurs talk about networking and their careers during politico's women rule summit. >> this week on "newsmakers," we are joined by randi weingarten, president of the american federation of teachers. here in studio in d.c., allison klein, staff writer for "education week." and, kaitlyn who covers questions for "politico." >> 46 states and the district of columbia have adopted new college and career ready standards in reading and math. this has been somewhat of a bumpy rollout. you said that the rollout of common core has been worse after the affordable care act. can you talk about what you meant there?
6:01 pm
>> let me just say that we at the a.f.t. are big supporters of the common core not to be implemented in a straitjacket kind of way, but we are more aligned to critical thinking and applying knowledge, which is what kids need to do and know how to do for the middle class jobs of this century and the next -- well i will not talking about the next center, but the rest of the century. we became a big believer and how
6:02 pm
you have these have these kinds of standards. this is why the is such a bumpy rollout. you cannot just get on a podium and say that out shall have standards. -- thou shalt have standards. or get on a podium and do with the government did, and spend on testing solutions, and yet there was no attempt to figure out how to create an appropriation for the building of professional development and curriculum and the things that are absolutely essential to do this transition. so that is why there has been such a bumpy road because there has been this race to a standard rather than a publication -- thoughtful implementation. people are surprised by this, the fact that john engler and myself wrote a letter in november to every single
6:03 pm
governor who was adopting the common core, and saying it is important, but we're to do it right. we should trust stages, give them the time in the professional development and the curriculum support to do this right before you do this kind of testing. when you have the head of the is business roundtable and the head of the national union saying stop, do this right because really knew -- we really get it, i would hope that some people would listen and stop with the race to announce and actually do a reflective and limitations so that we actually implement it with fidelity to give kids the skills and knowledge they need. >> randi, i'm sure, as you know, it is toxic in states all across the country. and what is it going to implement the standards effectively? and can you assess whether or not they're going to work?
6:04 pm
>> number one, i think we need de-link the testing from these standards. let's look at the countries that outcompete us. none of them test every kid every year. they do not do that. they do not lead with a testing fixation, they lead with a whole child and learning fixation. before we even get into that debate what i mean by the moratorium, or the pause on testing or the fixation on testing is that if you think they are really important, you have to give teachers the time to actually lament them to try them -- actually give teachers the time to implement them, to try them, to work with them. help parents understand that this is not an attempt to hurt kids as some parents really
6:05 pm
think right now, but it is an attempt to actually transition our education system to one that is more robust for all kids. to transition our public systems to what the private schools all the time, experiential learning and project-based instruction. the moment you de-link this standardized testing from the rollout of common core, you immediately stop the anxiety about what is going to be on the test, and you actually shift all of that energy to how do we actually do this right? that is why i am very -- i put california in very high esteem, and i'm very disappointed in my own state commissioner because what california did was understood this and passed a law that said we are going to dealing -- de-link the test, and
6:06 pm
give an appropriation for implementing this. then we're going to field test, and see if the whole system works before we create consequences. that is what other states should do, but new york got it dreadfully wrong, as those of the that should be a really important good thing that evil should be incited about that -- that people should be excited about is now something that is hugely controversial. >> following on caitlin's question to you caused a moratorium, attaching consequences to standardized testing while, gore gets up and running. what would be a timetable that you would be held to the standing? -- standards? >> it is not so much an actual timetable, because some places
6:07 pm
you can see the transition taking a year, and some places where it will take 10 years. my point is, the moment that you start this transition in a thoughtful way, kids will succeed. i'm not suggesting that we do not have accountability, but think about the performance based assessment but think about portfolio scores. when you see kids actually being able to thoughtfully describe what they are doing, that is real education. you cannot tell me in the 21st century we cannot come up with a more complex or a more thoughtful accountability system around the kind of schools that you want kids to -- skills that you want kids to know i didn't understand -- to know and understand. going back to things like peer
6:08 pm
intervention. this is not an either/or issue, this is having full-blown mentation -- having a thoughtful implementation and thinking about other ways of measuring school success. >> you, yourself, say that we need to have the standards, and that something needs to change. we saw this recently this week, looking at testing data, showing small but steady gains. the urban school district data this week showed that there has been problem -- some progress but it is still wildly uneven gains and huge achievement gaps. the education secretary said it painted a picture of stagnation. what are these results say about the state of education right now?
6:09 pm
does it look bleak to you, or are you optimistic? >> what all of this is saying is that the dominant strategy that we have used for decades is not the strategy that is going to kick the door open to help all children succeed. it is just like the strategies that we used in the 1970's and 1980's. in the 1960's you actually saw a hugely bigger gain than the 1970's on the 1980's and the 1990's. giving the kids the more level playing field.
6:10 pm
in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's, and now, we did not -- first we did a bunch of nice programs, which helped some and not all kids. in the last 10 years, with no child left behind, what we have done is we have said that testing is going to be the dominant strategy. the countries that outcompete us do not use that. what they do instead is that they actually focus on ensuring that kids get really good teachers and really good teaching, and have a real focus on equity as well. the reason i say i'm optimistic it's because i think there is a growing recognition that you cannot test your way to tremendous gains in public education in the united states. you cannot sanction your way to tremendous gains in united
6:11 pm
states. you have to actually do what massachusetts has done in the united states, what the performance consortium schools in new york city have done, what the schools in connecticut but i just spent the week looking at have done. what finland, germany, and others have done is following the teachers we're giving them the time and the tools to do the crap that we have asked them to do. supporting them through that, and also supporting -- the craft we have asked them to do. tutoring, and remediation and enrichment, and things like are in an music -- art and music. when things like that are
6:12 pm
wrapped up with the core, standard, you see these huge progression like you saw in germany and finland, and even estonia and latvia, vietnam, singapore. that is why i am optimistic. there is a blueprint here. we just have to decide that that blueprint is more important than still thinking that market strategies are going to work when they actually haven't. >> following up on that, d.c. was one of the first to shining stars on this years's national assessment on education progress the nation's report card. a few years ago, ec was 20 and severest -- washington d.c. was putting in some new reforms, and they clash over teacher of automation. i would wonder how you would
6:13 pm
view d.c.'s reforms in terms of their recent progress? >> this is what -- when you asked the question like that, and the dominant d.c. reform for fourth-graders is not what happened with a valuation or with any of the things that we did. the dominant piece was what the mayor himself did when he was 80 council president -- city council president which was that this was the first group of fourth-graders that actually had prekindergarten. it is one of the most important investments you can make if you want to see progress for all kids. it is what i take from the d.c. example. there are a lot of other states and cities that did exactly what
6:14 pm
michelle was suggesting in terms of the evaluation that did not do very well. when you look at the other pieces in terms of d.c., what you're seeing is that the northwest quadrant of d.c., they are doing well. the fact that d.c. is becoming more and more middle class for you're seeing that reflected. what i see in the statistics is that you actually do have to do more to mitigate hoppity, and not less democracy. >> we have 10 minutes left, go- ahead kaitlyn. >> i would ask about you and you as a union leader. people who follow you on twitter know that you are prolific and social media, you enjoyed engaging your critics and talking with people. if you enjoy engaging with people who follow you, in general. how do you see the role of the
6:15 pm
union leader evolving in the 21st century? what are your most effective tactics? >> someone else will judge tactics, but the most important thing we can do is reclaim our values as americans. both economically, in terms of the american dream, and in in terms of public education reclaim the public -- reclaim the promise of public education. even though we are doing better than we have ever done about a -- unless we help all kids fulfill their potential, we are never going to be satisfied. not as it was today, not as it was 150 years ago, but as it means for us to fulfill our collective responsibility for individual opportunity for kids. so if you see the world like i do, which is that we have to really re-create paths for the
6:16 pm
middle class to get to great jobs and great housing and retirement, the people who actually work -- teachers, paraprofessionals, nurses, you see a clear road for the union. the union is about chanting those values of economic opportunity, of educational opportunity. making sure that the work we do is the best he can be, great solutions i can make that work better. that we join with communities, parents, clergy, small businesses want to actually create credibility for public schools. we are championing great neighborhood public schools, communities that have great job opportunities about we are
6:17 pm
actually making sure that the jobs of today and tomorrow are filled by people in communities. you have clear career ladders so that people can become assistant teachers and then climbed to regular teacher. i see the union being solution driven, i see the solution -- the union as engaging our members in this quest to make the school the communities better, and that we cannot do it alone. we have to work with parents, we have to work with communities, and so that is really important as well. that is why it is pretty democratized, and so you have to engage, and i love the engagement to custody engagement means that people have have -- people feel like they have power. even if there are critics, i want their voices to be heard. we have to be a big tent.
6:18 pm
that's why i do that kind of engagement. i was in connecticut for a full day, being with almost every single educator in the district, and talking to kids and parents and really seeing what they were doing. what they're doing together collaboratively is not just changing societies, they are changing societies, they are changing the future for the kids. kids love school. they are going. they have enrichment, art, music, and they're doing better as a school district, working together. >> i have another question about leadership. >> let me also say, on december 9, the day where we reclaim the -- reclaim to the promise of public education, i do not think
6:19 pm
that people have ever seen a day where there were 100 events coordinated to be a problem location day. that is what i mean by bringing communities together. actually really focusing on a vision of helping all kids get a great education. sorry. >> no problem. this is a question about the deputy's leadership. he had a lot of leverage in the beginning, with billions of dollars and now that that has
6:20 pm
gone, has sort of the shine coming off of the secretary? >> i'm not going to grade the secretary of education, because that -- what i will do the i like him, i think his heart is in the right place. i think that the strategy of the administration from the beginning was wrong. i was very, very, very grateful that they understood that the stimulus was absolutely essential in order to back fill for the huge budget cuts that were happening while we were in the woods -- worst recession since the great depression. we lost over 10% of the education force -- 300,000 teachers, that were laid off, or lost during the recession. we needed to have that kind of back stock because you do not want to lose a generation of children because of the recession, and because of a result, education was not a priority. but that race to the top, and to tell the world that within three and a half nanoseconds every
6:21 pm
thing was going to change in terms of the american education, that was the mistake. because the countries of the world that outcompete us, they know it takes time to actually make this work so that we are helping all kids succeed. finland did not do it in three minutes, singapore did not do in three minutes, shanghai do not do in three minutes, so that when you suggest to the countries that all you need to do is change a couple of laws in a state capital of a or just announced that you are adopting a new system people of expectation that in this -- if it is not done into nanoseconds, it is failing. instead of figuring out how to have an enriched
6:22 pm
curriculum, have art and music, how do have experiential learning, i think that has been the problem for the administration right now, because the expectation and what has happened in fact do not meet up with each other. >> one more question. >> you are in new york right now, they are in the midst of picking a new schools chancellor. what candidate do you like? >> the bottom line is that that we need a chancellor that bill de blasio is comfortable with. that knows education class that knows new york and the politics of new york, and most important can repair a school system that has huge assets, but has been totally and completely demolished because of the fixation on testing and sanctions and data as opposed to a fixation on how we help all kids achieve. valuing the educators who are trained to do that. so it is going to be a big job
6:23 pm
but i have a lot of faith in him, since he knows the city, and he ran as a parent who has been committed to public schooling, and someone who can take one of the jewels of the united states, the new york city public education system, and really bring it into the next century in a way that will really help all kids succeed. >> you do not have a particular name you want to throughout there? >> if i threw out a name, then it would be a shoo-in that that
6:24 pm
person would never be chancellor. >> let me sneak this question in, we have talked about the administration, but let's talk about, congress, and look forward to the deck and ha -- to the second half of this congress. what tops your agenda? >> i think what patty murray did with paul ryan to actually help us stop lurching from crisis to crisis was really important, and i think they should both get props for that. it was not a perfect deal, but that budget deal is really important to mitigate some of the pain of the sequester that actually has heard -- hurt the ability to do pre-k education. i thought that was a really good first step. trying to do some work on career tech ed because that is something you can see some common ground from the real focus on the ptech school in new york city.
6:25 pm
what ibm, and what the city college of new york are doing, you see those kind of career and places -- ed places. there will be an attempt to did the renewal of the -- not sure what will happen with that. let's think about a new direction in the public education that is missing on how -- that is focusing on how to kid succeed. how to become critical thinkers and innovators. if we can actually direct and come up with that new direction in education, the skills like it needs -- that kids needs, so that we are helping in the areas of those with the least, we can
6:26 pm
then look back at this time, even the 2014 congress, and say we did something to help the world. >> randi weingarten, thank you for being our "newsmaker." a little round up conversation. common core -- where does it stand? >> right now, every state has adopted the common core standards except for just four of them. a number of states are starting to waver in different ways on their commitment to those standards. we have not seen anybody un-
6:27 pm
adopt the standards, but a number of them are sort of slowing down implementation of them, or changing the environment -- their involvement in these contortions that are crafting assessments to go with the standards. and it's been a very bumpy rollout, and ms. weingarten has said we should not have standard tests until we really know we're doing with the standards. a number of critics say that that all undermines the effort. >> is the administration feeling the pressure from the union on this? >> i would think so, but i would also think that they are feeling a lot of pressure from everywhere on the common core standards very as we talked about, it has become very toxic. we have governors all across the country that are seeing this as a federal intrusion into state education matters.
6:28 pm
they were founded by states, they are led by states, but there is still the perception out there that because the administration wants it, the they are somehow driving it. a lot of governors are saying we just don't want a part in it. a lot of states have renamed the common core standards to reflect the bear their own standards. as the, labeled -- it has become a label, a byproduct of the administration that people are cautious about. >> is their federal money tied to it? >> about $360 million to develop the assessments, to go along with the standards, state and other folks are kicking in money on that effort, too. it is not so much that the standards were developed by the feds, the federal government
6:29 pm
made adoption of higher college and career standards a decision of the states. critics who say they were coerced into adopting these standards have an argument. >> she was complimentary of the budget deal that was passed. what did educators get out of it? >> i think it kind of remains to be seen. with the sequester there is some relief there, a lot of education groups feel good, they feel confident that maybe they are not going to see the drastic cuts that they saw the last couple of years going forward area they will not hurt anymore,
6:30 pm
but the process still needs to happen. education department, just the other day, i was on the call them and they are still waiting to see how that is going to play out. right now they have a lot of priorities, for example, race to the top, next year they were looking at a competition aid in higher education, something they have been wanting to do for a long time. the money has not been there. they have a lot of things they want to get done, the sequester something they want to get off their back or not, it is a burden. they want to see how the money is going to play out. thank you very much in the both of you for being on "newsmakers." >> thank you for having us. next, journalists discuss politics and news from the past year old by women on the
6:31 pm
networking. hugh hewq and a with itt. >> up next, journalists covering washington discussed challenges reporting on the white house as part of a book of breakfast series. speakers include peter baker, leivoo'donnell, and mark vitch. this is over an hour. >> the politico playbook
6:32 pm
breakfast. appreciate you coming out early. very excited to have some of washington's most fascinating and most respected correspondent here who will talk about what we just saw and will give us a preview of what we are about to see. and we will have them come on. we would like to thank bank of america for making this possible. we would love to get your questions and rebuttals for the panelists as we go. #playbookbreakfast. this will pop up here. we would like to welcome all of you in live stream land and hoping you will tweak -- tweet along with it. now i would like to welcome the panel. come on up. [applause] >> how are you? >> thank you very much.
6:33 pm
we have jake tapper who started the lead on cnn and author of the "outpost," an amazing story that is now available in paperback on amazon. we have kelly o'donnell, has covered news and l.a. in new york. mark leibovitz had a book this year. a new york times bestseller and peter baker, chief white house correspondent, a friend since the washington post days. i was with the "richmond times dispatch." peter's amazing book about the bush administration, seven years of work went into this book.
6:34 pm
this weekend it was picked as one of the five best non-fiction books of the year. to kick things off, if you could interview anyone in 2014, who would it be? >> first can i say how i met you? we were at the reform party convention. in dearborn, michigan. you were with the "new york times." darting around. pretty exciting. that is when jesse ventura was talking about taking over the
6:35 pm
party. good times. >> i thought he was the pick for your interview? >> he is not. if it is anyone in the world? i guess edward snowden, i would love to interview him. not just his life, but why he did it. a very close second would be pope francis. i do not know which one is less likely to happen. i am willing to travel to russia, brazil, russia, hong kong, or the vatican for any of the interviews. >> so edward snowden, if you're watching -- what would you like to ask him that you do not know now? >> his holiness, i would like to know what he makes of the talk and commentary about how different he is from his predecessors? i wonder how much he feels he is. and how intentional versus how
6:36 pm
much is media jumping on comments. when you read the comments he has made, it does not seem accidental. does not seem as though the media is jumping on this to drive a wedge between him and predecessors. in terms of snowden, you would want to do an actual program by program take down on what he objects to and why. i think psychologically you would want to know what made him snap? what made him decide to do this incredibly bold and risky act? what drove it psychologically for him? it is not like you go to the national security agency thinking you are not going to be conducting surveillance and there are not going to be questionable practices, or at least ones on the edge. what was the moment? >> kelly o'donnell, you are on capitol hill for this amazing year.
6:37 pm
last week on the day that paul ryan and patty murray made the deal, reuters did a story, u.s. budget deal could usher in new era of operation. -- cooperation. what are the chances? >> i think there is a moment for modest cooperation, a certain buzz that is getting along is a worthwhile thing. we have seen that before. i think there is a certain premium that is given to encourage them to get along. i think the institutional forces make that difficult, but if they get enough crazy and feel a -- praise and feel a payoff, i think that can be helpful. that is my optimistic sense. i think that can go off the rail at any point. >> yesterday we were e-mailing about possible topics. i asked you, what mistake do d.c. journalists often make.
6:38 pm
>> agreed to do the playbook breakfast. [laughter] >> and in second choice, sinking be elected officials they are writing about, and they said thinking too much about the officials acting so solicited of solicitious of them and wanting to be their friend. have you ever made that mistake? >> i was worried just this follow-up would happen. i thought the first question i would get is why did you agree to do this? i am thrilled to be here. thank you all for coming. it was not a mistake, it was reality. it happened once. once?e on -- >> i am friendly with many
6:39 pm
public officials. there was one public figure that i felt like i had a personal relationship that i would not write about. 7.5 years ago, i wife had breast cancer. i was writing a profile of elizabeth edwards and john edwards the weekend after she announced she had a relapse. i was supposed to be the first print interviewer of them in vegas. that day my wife gets a diagnosis. i told her then pr rep that i cannot make it. then elizabeth edwards called. she was an incredible friend through that. so then i recused myself from all edwards-related stories. >> why are journalists too solicitous of public officials? >> i do think one of the mistakes in journalism and
6:40 pm
washington generally is people accrue their own self-worth to the institution they are working for. the function they are trying to play. meaning, people think a politician is being so nice to me and solicitous of me because they really like me and think i am special and we can be friends and it is really cool that senator x and y come to my wedding. look at this and we can show all of this off. in fact, it can be a real seduction game. >> you have known some of these members and senators for years and years. how do you avoid having them think you are their friend? >> i do not think we are personal friends, i think we are professional friends. i think there is value in being friendly and knowing that their interests. i think there is benefit in the simple nicety of life in getting
6:41 pm
along, but i do not think i am personal friends with anyone that i cover. >> who there is the friendliest? who maybe thinks the friend is the press is their friend? >> that's dangerous -- the trap door is right here. i think politics often will draw into it. people who have the need for -- i will not name a name, only because i have to go to work or today. there are friendly people, and i appreciate the friendliness. i find that i have the best relationship with people that i have been to their home state and have been to their district.
6:42 pm
i think there is a different dimension to knowing them in that way. >> what is the speaker like when reporters are around? >> he is pretty frank and direct. >> i thought i should alert fire officials. he is very warm. i think he is willing to give us respective i enjoy those moments because it helps you in turn it public activities. >> the eight years of the bush administration, but you are also one of the most astute of bert observers of the obama administration. yesterday there was a story posted online with the headline, this is the end of the presidency now. that was referring to bush.
6:43 pm
the point is, there are perils between the fifth year of obama and the fifth year of bush. like there are parallels. >> i think it was your newspaper that try to make that case. >> i think the case we try to make is the political case is similar. the point is president obama one year after reelection has found himself, credibility challenged, the trust that people have in him has diminished. more than 50% do not think he is telling the truth all the time. his reputation is challenged.
6:44 pm
and you saw the potential ramifications of that. he fell below 50% approval rating and mark show of the fifth year in office. he never got above that again. he went longer than any president before with less than majority support. that has had a substantial impact. he did not immigration a second term. the society that he articulated did not go anywhere. that is a danger for president obama. the difference is the overarching albatross for president bush was the iraq war. president obama does not have that. in theory he can get past this moment and can recover. you can lose 10 points in a
6:45 pm
week, but cannot get 10 points back in a week. you tend to get it back one week at a time. >> you have a sentence here that says even to the extent that president bush salvaged a a failing war through the surge after years of living is general call the shot, he could not openly salvaged the presidency. at this moment, is it possible the presidency looks better than iraq? >> that is a good question. he is definitely in a better place today than he was when he left office. the numbers in some ways are better than president obama. in the summer he had a 49% favorability rating. that is the first time in eight years he had a positive net. i think that results from the fact that we tend to be more reflective and ponder about ex presidents than we are in the moment. i think that his quiet grace after leaving office has probably helped him with a lot of people.
6:46 pm
>> why does he do that? he has this amazing platform. what did they tell you about why he has run so clearly under the radar? >> he did not much like former presidents second-guessing him when he was in office. president carter -- he reacted badly to that. he does not want to do that to president obama. i think he is tired of politics. i think he is just done. he said when he saw obama's hand go up on inauguration day, he thought to himself on the free at last, free at last. only would happen in this town. that when he is leaving office.
6:47 pm
[laughter] he recalls morgan freeman had been president himself in a movie. that is where the lannett -- that a comet hits the planet and destroys all civilization. i think he was exhausted. did not want to be part of the whole environment anymore. >> president bush flew with president obama. hitched a ride on air force one to the nelson mandela funeral. during the flight he came back, chatted with a reporter longer than on air force one probably on the air force -- probably than the whole presidency combined. what have you heard about what he said? >> i am under no obligation.
6:48 pm
the reports i have heard is he came back for 90 minutes. he left at one point and came back with laura a second time. without giving anything away, i think in general he was very relaxed. chatting about painting. has obviously picked up a hobby. he was chatting about his life today, about his presidency. he was reflecting on world leaders, things like that. he was asked about the book. he did not participate in the book. he says he has not read it. >> very generally, what does he think about it? >> i think i imagined he would be upset about is for nothing else that equal billing with cheney. i think the reason we framed the book that way he cuts if you are
6:49 pm
going to write about the bush presidency, you had to address that question anyway. it was more interesting than we quite new at the time. why not use it as a structure for the eight-year story. while the book punctures the myth that he was somehow the secret master running everything, i think president bush is probably annoyed he is on the cover with him. >> jake tapper, this year you launched the lead on cnn after being chief white house correspondent for abc news. what was it like to adapt to the role from correspondence to anchor? >> a completely different job. i imagine going from reporter to editor. you are responsible for an entire hour. i do not have to beg to be on air. ultimately also, i am responsible. if there is a mess up, i am responsible.
6:50 pm
if there is a story selection that is not the best, i am responsible. so there is a greater freedom editorially to assert what i think is important. to report on things i had trouble getting on air as a correspondent, specifically related to the white house. that is freeing, but also comes with the burden of being in charge with -- in charge of something and being responsible for something, which criticism comes a lot more than compromise. >> there is a lot of cable news out there. how do you try to make your lead the signature? >> we're trying to do is -- to do a fun, smart news program. if you pick up a copy of the new york times and there are five stories, one is money, world, politics and what is pop-culture and you read all five of them,
6:51 pm
that is what we try to do every day and try to get a wide array of stories. we also tried to do it in a way where hopefully you cannot tell what my political leanings are, which helps with today's cable- tv landscape. it distinguishes it from competitors in some ways. >> at a time when we're all reading to so much on our device, how does cable news stay essential? >> i think there are two ways we can do it. we do not always succeed. one of them is obviously what is going on at 4:00 or 7:00 or 9:00, whatever the case may be is important. more important than what you saw on your ipad 3 hours before. also trying to get smart people
6:52 pm
and contacts for the story, things that everyone on this panel except for kelly has been on the lead. >> i turn up the volume. >> we would have you any time you want to come on. >> i think there would be a very gracious combination of that. >> you have been on. we're trying to get smart people to talk about the events of the day and talk about things you have not talked about obviously. people who read the news or are relatively savvy news consumers. we need to bring something to the table other than what they are ready no. -- already know. >> kelly o'donnell, you have been a news correspondent in new york, l.a., and d.c. what is the difference of the news capitals? >> i am so grateful i had a chance to do work at the network level in other places, because i did not fully appreciate until i
6:53 pm
got to washington really does happen in america, too. i found everything from covering the the -- the o.j. simpson trial to fires and floods and the urgent -- emergency urgent to the entertainment things. we actually did entertainment stories. the variety that jake is talking about, being able to do that in the course of telling stories is so helpful. i have been on the board and doing a variety of stories along the border, and that gave me context personally. you may not always find its way into the story but certainly frames how i look at it. in new york everything from launching international stories to being on wall street on all things that have helped in covering politics here. my favorite times are when you
6:54 pm
get out in the country and get to talk to real people, as we say, and see them in their lives and hear what is interesting to them, and people are quite bold about telling you what they like and do not like. great to get that feedback. >> what is the failing for telling the bigger story? >> time -- that is always hard. has always been hard. >> when you do it, the power is incredible. >> brevity is very compelling. i always look at it that we are all writers here, but in some ways it is like the person predict the -- writing the record, the song, leary, all the team the production team can put
6:55 pm
to it and there is a different impact. just hearing the basic melody. with tv news on the there is a way you choose the news, choose the soundbite and images, whether they be video or graphic things, and that combination gives you the experience of being there. i think that is what we go for. >> i am from the l.a. area. people out there just do not care about the news. do people care what we do? >> in a way. l.a. is a industry town about media and movie and new trends. many social trends come from the west, which i found very interesting when i was working and living there. i do not think people care about the minutia that we care about, and that is ok. we trade on it in this town.
6:56 pm
[laughter] i see these guys in the back signing books. i am like is there a petition i can sign it? i would be held -- happy to. people do not necessarily speak the same language of legislation or politics. they do care when it affects their lives. more often than not i find what happens does affect people's lives we just have to be smart about telling it. >> i am friends with a lot of soldiers. a lot of them are retired now. a lot of them were e-mailing me about ryan murray. they knew it was ryan murray and the retirees knew the cost of living was going to go down, was going to be cut. they were aware of that and the budget deal in a very real way. for the guys that do not make a lot of money when they are in the service, a lot of them are messed up from their time of service for what they did for us.
6:57 pm
this was a moment of bipartisan compromise and affects people in the real world, and whether you support the compromise or not, they were very aware of it. >> there were impacts. you already have patty murray a part of this saying we will find a way to adjust that's going forward. other people are looking for ways to make a change to the effect of the increase of cost of living for pensions. there is an immediacy for when people feel things that can have an impact. >> mark lubavitch you write -- politico gets blamed for an thing up and camping down political news. playbook is an insiders dog breakfast. [laughter] overnight news, press release
6:58 pm
previews, and birthday greetings to people you have never heard of. is it that that bad? >> dogs eat breakfast, i eat breakfast. i read playbook. i absolutely dispute the bad premise. >> what is the most legitimate criticism? [laughter] >> would you like me to step back? >> most legitimate? i would say putting it in the context of this -- put it this way -- i would say it amplifies the insider doma i think can be a very dangerous part of what we do here, what the media does. what i mean by that is one of
6:59 pm
the many reasons washington seems very out of touch with the rest of the country is a group think prevails. a group think that leads to major misconception about what is really going on or really important to people. whether it is the conventional wisdom that there is absolutely weapons of mass destruction, which the new york times has a hand in perpetrating. america is not ready for an african-american president. health care. there was a ton of coverage in politico. the politics of health care. it would have been nice they have a technical debate about
7:00 pm
whether it would work. the espness model is for politics stated this. it is true. they would say espn has elevated the personality of sports. also, the notion of sports. also, the notion of sports. sports does, too. >> what is the most important thing that you have learned since this town him out on either feedback for people -- from people or doing talk shows that you wish you had included or reflected? this reflects on what is the distinction between this town,


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on