tv Journalists Panel Examines Global Influence of the Press CSPAN July 22, 2017 3:06am-4:16am EDT
dr. oyang will discuss a recent piece on the challenges to adequate health care in rural america. watch washington journal live at 7 a.m. this morning. join the discussion. c-span3 sunday for an american history tv live special. the 1967 detroit riot 50th anniversary. at noon eastern, heather and thompson at the university of michigan and detroit free press editor stephen henderson. at 1:15 p.m. eastern, former detroit police chief isaiah aiken mckinnon. and then can kiss to. 50th967 detroit riots anniversary live sunday at noon eastern on c-span3. >> now look at the global influence of the press.
this discussion includes journalists talking about the and howmedia landscape people outside the industry respond to what is being reported. from the center for strategic and international studies, this is just over one hour. >> good morning, everyone, and thank you for coming. i'm glad to see there's a large group of students in the room. want to raise your hands. that's great. wow. i'm deborah mccarthy, the executive director of a new program we have here at csis to bring diverse voices and diverse perspectives to discussions of foreign affairs. it's the result of a partnership between the international career advancement program aluminize association, icapaa for short, and csis, and we have some
amazing donors committed to this effort we want to thank. the panel we have today is fantastic. it will challenge you, bring new thoughts and provoke new questions. our moderator, beverly kirk, is well known to many of you as the program manager of smart women smart power, plus four other incarnations here at csis. she's also a member of icapaa and was instrumental in getting this whole program going. please enjoy. >> thank you so much, deborah and thank you to everyone joining us here and online and to viewers on c-span. as deborah mentioned, i'm beverly kirk, a volunteer at csis in the international security program and i manage the smart women, smart power initiative. full disclosure, i spent more than two decades as a journalist. most of that time was here infrc and international studies, this is just over one hour. washington and i've worked with three of the four people sitting here this stage. let me introduce them to you. jeff ballou is the president of the national press club and the
first african american man and the first representative an international media organization to hold that post. jeff is the news editor at al-jazeera news network and helped to establish the english channel in 2006. he is a peabody, murrow, and emmy award winning journalist who's worked at c-span, npr and local d.c. stations. next to him is diana marrero. it is a new media platform she helped to launch that is focused on latino affairs. she was an award winning journalist beginning her career at the "miami herald" where she was part of the team that covered the elian gonzales international custody battle.
and she also served as the washington bureau chief for the milwaukee sentinel. she's the founder and past president of the washington, d.c. chapter of the national association of hispanic journalists. of hispanic journalists. welcome, diana. next to her is roslyn jordan. is the united nations andespondent for al-jazeera has previously covered state department and pentagon for al-jazeera. the white house for nbc news and tribune broadcasting. emmyas nominated for an for her work on nbc's 2004 presidential election night coverage and won a regional associated press award for her reporting on the u.s. immigration debate and i worked with her at nbc. her is eric hamm,
analyst for the bbc, sirius xm, the hill, and has contributed to cnn. he's been a senior contributor a formerews and is hill staffer, was a key adviser to senator bill nelson and the author of a book called go the the g.o.p. civil war," inside the battle of the republican party. is a homecoming for eric. he was previously director of atgressional affairs here csic so welcome home. we have a saying here that you leave, like the hotel california. let's get started with the about thet hand geopolitical impact of the fourth estate and i want to issue of trust because that is an issue that is ever-present and i want to know you think about what happens when people feel like the information that they are
getting, they're questioning whether they can believe it, that concernss global issues, global hot spots. >> i think trust is paramount trust, once you lose the you can't trust the information and as it relates to the fourth estate, a lot of -- as you can tell in the current arena, challenges toof the profession, a lot of people andging in twitter trolling a whole range of interesting i'll nicely characterize it. >> it's pg-tv. >> yeah. but when it gets down to is this. if you have the leader of the free world spending days, weeks, months, for 18 months leading denouncing thecy intricatech is an
part of the constitution itself, underminingnly trust in the fourth estate, you're undermining trust in the when youion itself and do that, that undermines trust in the other institutions in a country. and if the united states is supposed to be a beacon for democracy and freedom of theession and freedom of press, other despots in the world can say, see, the president of the united states it, we can do it, too, and they do. scaryore, it's a situation in the sense that it not only puts journalists in danger, it puts your information it can be where created by people who don't have best interests in
that aren't upes to snuff in terms of having stable environments, having safe streets, in terms of having anything that resembles a sense of safety and security to move about and even feel they can question their representatives can't do it here, then you're left -- you're left devices and that's chaos. chaos.uld lead to >> i come at this from a political standpoint. i work for a political newspaper. and it's interesting to see how around part an lines, as well. there's been surveys that show versusmocrats republicans, republicans are actually less likely to trust they are -- than than democrats are. interestingally dynamic that's happening. the columbia journalism review study around the time of the election looking at the
retweeting tweets from clinton versus trump and what media sources they were and retweeting themselves and they put out a fantastic bubble chart that was a proxy and republicans and how much do they trust certain media institutions and like "the places washington post," "new york times," cnn, all organizations that should be trusted, that are mainstream, that are credible, discarded by half the population. and it was really striking to that, and then on the other hand looking at places like breitbart news being trusted and not,eted by the right, but obviously not by the left. what i feel good about is being thehill, i work at a place
that's very nonpartisan and a veryt it from straightforward perspective so we were right in the middle. middle, we were the most trusted news source by both democrats and republicans. one other thing i'll say about trust is that this is board, it's not just a news phenomenon. if you look at surveys, there's lack of trust in institutions globally. government, you could go down the line, companies. just not trusting major institutions that for held that years have trust of consumers and the public. you're in the field reporting on issues. you -- how do you make sure that people trust what you're telling them? mind that from the very beginning of the united
there's always been suspension of a free press. let's not forget we once had the alien -- act in which criticizing political people for their behavior could land you in prison and it was bipartisan. like to be don't held to account. i keep that in mind when i do my work. say to people who try to challenge my work is look at my -- was i look accurate, was i fair? give all sides credence? did i present a skeptical view where it was necessary? one of the things we have to remember about working in the it's a two-way information.
we collect the information, present the information, analyze the information. but it is incumbent upon the public, the readers, the viewers, thee people who engage with us on to actually think about what they're hearing and reading.d use your critical faculties. be skeptical. ask your own questions, don't just take what al-jazeera puts or or what the bbc puts out what cnn puts out or what any number of newspapers -- because still very much a vibrant part of our political culture. just take what is being published as the gospel truth. your own questions. ask whether the people presenting the information have track record of actually happening orhat's if they have a record of trying to pull a fast one on you. a passive consumer. and i hate that word because
it's such a business word. be a passive consumer of the news. this is my personal view. person isnformed being a good citizen, particularly in the united has the first amendment. say, well, people what about this? i will say, take a look at these stories. i will say, take a look at what i actually said. really what you're objecting to. then we can have a conversation. that's usually how i defuse it. i end up taking it back to the took thed saying, you time to reach out to me and say, i have an issue with what you reported. about it. do you have insight that maybe i overlooked? inform me. that's my job. i get paid to learn something to share itd then with everyone else. but you have to do it every single day. there's a story or there's a
line, you're only as good as your last story. in this climate, you're only as good as your body of work and if mistake, people will hold you accountable but i challenge journalists to hold readers and listeners and viewers accountable, as well. us in goodaging with faith or are you simply looking for someone to reflect your personal opinion? i'm not here for that. you can call your mom. [laughter] >> eric, you come at this from a spin.ent you do analysis. do you make sure people trust analysis? >> that's an interesting point because i try to stay away from because so many people are looking for that. a lot of people want to know who's down, and i'm always asked, you know, are you a republican? you a democrat? and you try to tell them that we that anday away from we're just looking at what the
impact is of the action, the policy we're addressing right forand what that will mean multiple audiences and different groups. when we look at the fourth estate, if i could go into this, coming from the inndpoint of having worked one of the three branches of government, in congress, when i saw the fourth estate as sacrosanct. it was an independent body, it was a free press but something howelt was important to democracy works and it was also a tool that we could use, not in terms of actual propaganda or anything like that but getting out the message in terms of what the work is we're doing, what on, what're focusing legislation we're trying to pass, what we're trying to do of fundingy in terms for at the time i was in congress, the iraq war was at an and we were really engaged in that so we were
make suren trying to people knew about how we were trying to provide for our troops and so we in the war want to try to get that message out and also, too, one thing i a contributor for the hill in terms of actually writing, what i have found is i write about stories of interest,nal unfortunately, i don't get as get aseballs, i don't many comments or much feedback and ite types of stories just seems that, i don't know, i guess maybe it's because we're a heightenedh political environment right now, but when you write about the down, you know, in terms of the politics, that's get people really seem to engaged and so i think it's incumbent on all of us in the really try to break through that and really focus on and try toducate bring our audience along because
what we want to do is we want to try to, i think, take them to higher ground and not reach for common denominator. >> you raise an interesting point about international news and our attention and appetite for it and we were talking back about howen room things are covered here in the u.s. versus how international organizations, which all of you have experience with, cover that. so we'll jump to that topic. how are international news outlets impacting coverage here u.s.? i ask this not necessarily from a political perspective, but i i watch the bbc or when i watch al-jazeera or i watch -- the story lineup areissues that are covered often very different than what i see when i watch cnn, msnbc, fox news, abc, nbc, cbs.
so if you guys could talk about difference there. >> i would say probably not nearly as much of an impact as would hope. we were talking before about the in venezuela.is seniore of our correspondents, our latin andican editor can get in get a visa, she will go in to report but if the venezuelan give ourt doesn't crews visas, they have to sit on and watch in colombia people come across and sav -- scavenge to keep alive while the political crisis plays itself think u.s. would networks would want to be there. this is human suffering and all of therisis, elements of drama, tension, and a political figure who for better or worse is considered a here in washington. can't break through.
the story can't break through. cynically, i think, it would peopleme mass casualty, losing their lives, before the u.s. media would actually invest time and people. and people are expensive, to cover the political crisis in venezuela. in.n, no one can get it's an active war zone. control theeally access. the u.n. does not have the ability to take reporters in with it right now. we've already asked. choleraof the ongoing epidemic. so we have to cover around the edges. but again, because the u.s. is involvedely directly in the conflict, it is supporting the saudis, but because the u.s. is not this war, very little, presence, certainly on the airwaves.
you'll see stories in the "times" and in the "post" but if you want better reporting, you're going to have to start "the guardian," "the independent." it you're not going to find whole scale in a typical u.s. newspaper. also, just with the qatar crisis. i'm actually speaking on that on air practically every day, either for bbc or for sky news. and i don't see any u.s. media companies actually really engaging in speaking about it but it's something that is -- an ongoing issue and it's something that many audiences outside of the u.s. are deeply engaged and concerned about and such a huge demand with really not news to only address it and talk about it, but they want to know what u.s. role in the crisis, and what's the u.s. policy,
the u.s. position, what is donald trump, what is the president going to do to try to address this issue and so it's something that they're covering it's also something that they're desperately looking states and the united states engagement and what is the u.s. position on these issues. any international issue that's you have -- and i think tobe one of the advantages being an american, i shouldn't say that. that sounds pretty bad, right? there's so many advantages. >> passport is a good thing. huge demand, huge thirst and appetite for media outlets looking for that u.s. voice and someone who can speak coherently to what the
explain it andd break it down to those audiences, those particular audiences and i think that's so see,ight now and we don't i think, american media outlets addressing the issues and speaking to traditional american audiences about what's going on the rest of the world. >> diana -- >> to your point, i just wanted your point, i just came back from two weeks in the covering the diplomatic crisis. i didn't see any of my fellow american reporters until rex tillerson left the president's europe and flew to kuwait city for a week of shuttle diplomacy and then because the secretary of state isn't carrying a big media previoust, as secretaries have done, people had to fly in domestically and in random hotels around the city and couldn't
really get access to meetings because they were all closed-door but that was the one moment that you saw "the washington post" and the "new the tv networks paying more than three seconds' attention to something that directly affects the u.s.' national security interests. every war that the u.s. is is out of its operating base in doha and yet we can't coverage of what 11,000 u.s. doha in theoing in u.s. media otherwise. so you have to consider also the trigger. when the secretary of state ans, it becomesamly important story. that bothyou noted latino americans get their news in english language from english language media outlets and yet watch given night you english language media outlets
and you don't hear anything as rosalindela, noted, and you don't hear about their happening in countries of origins or what's going on in the latino community the u.s. unless it has to do with immigration. that's all you ever hear about but that's not the whole story. could speak to that. >> absolutely. coming at it from a u.s.-based perspective, that is national in nature, that covers i launchedast year, online portal for u.s. and arewho live here primarily english speakers, the vast majority of hispanics in english, consume their news in english, but attentionry little devoted to news that speaks to them and that covers the issues they care about. noted, many of them
either are immigrants children of immigrants, and have a vested interest in stories on mexico, venezuela, cuba, puerto rico -- immigrants but they care about what's happening on the island, as well. is a -- isn't a lot of attention paid to these issues. our core audience are the in washington. it's the president, members of congress and staffers who are hill" to do their job. i'm proud of the fact that we've brought more international more issues of international importance to that audience through the latino lens. so we've written quite a bit, obviously, about immigration, can't get away from that. but we've written a lot about trade and the crisis in puerto rico. in fact, we had a report, special report we were -- i
u.s.-basednly newspaper that had an entire the crisis ind to puerto rico and what was happening there. for those who aren't familiar with the crisis in puerto rico, could you -- >> it's going into a complete economic tailspin. people are leaving in droves because they don't have jobs. so all u.s. territory puerto ricans are u.s. citizen who is can easily come to the u.s. and they have to find better economic opportunities that very huge story few people are covering and we section to it.re we've covered it throughout but day and spent a lot of time writing about this issue. it was interesting because is globalout all news , and a leading newspaper in puerto rico reported on the fact that a u.s. newspaper had reported on puerto rico because was such a unique thing that
no one was paying attention to. an interesting perspective. last two points, eric and you were raising, roomsou have in u.s. news is if it doesn't matter to me, if it's nott -- landing on my front door step, i don't care. may care but i don't have the resources because there are definitely economic factors to as rosalind alluded to. is thoseis missing valuable perspectives. press club, for more than a century, we've hosted people of politicaler perspectives and walks of life. we had one of the leading contenders running for the wascan presidency and there media from all over latin
roomca packed in the press but you can't find a u.s.-based camera to save your life in the room but when general dunford shows up, everybody's in the room. you wonder what's going on here because this is your neighbor to the south. vigorous campaign for yet you'rency and hear aboutroom to this leading contender may deal and all those critical issues and we lose when have when you don't seat at the table and a window into what's going on, not informed, and that's bad.
>> is it because americans interested? or is it perhaps that at least america accessf to news outlets like al-jazeera or the bbc,latino, is limited or nonexistent? make the decision of what is important to cover livingng into people's rooms in the 24-hour news cycle. you decide that covering the crisis in venezuela's important, then they'll pay attention to it. but if they don't have the the dots,to connect to say, like rosalind was got oneabout, if you've operatinggest forward bases full of american troops and you don't care until the shows up andstate what complicates that is rosalind -- i was digging into the notion that the secretary of
state has a very low opinion of journalists where he barely keeps a handful of us in the known for has been leaving us behind and those other things. to -- you have to care about the issue and you have you have to -- you have to the harder, dare to be in room, so that people can be informed but if you don't -- if you can't connect a to z, and, economic factor in commercial television is that people want to have -- it's sponsored. >> you read my mind. that was my next guest. you're talking about a sponsored enterprise and if sponsors don't care about these and the eyeballs, then you're not going to have to the deploy the people to cover the issues that people should be caring about. >> then there's also the infrastructure issue. if you don't have broad band for
for internet access, on can't watch al-jazeera basic cable in the u.s. right now we're only online so broadband,t have you're not going to see this video andh.d. luscious graphics and the photography that my colleagues out because if you have regular dial-up, you'll never get the signal. never be able to access what diana and her colleagues her website. all of the added extra material, the conversations, the extra content, animation if you put it on, because dial-up can't accommodate it. and there's so many parts in this country that are rural, that are in the back country, that don't have broadband access. irony is that cable was invented for people who live outside of big cities. if you can't access the work
that people are doing, you just know. it's not a question of whether or not you're interested, you the basic get information and that's a problem. it's a tough question because you look at google internet what americans are searching for in terms of primarilyand it's domestic. it's western europe, when it is the country. they're googling mexico but i is anknow that there interest and i don't know what comes first. is it the fact that domestic media's not covering these international issues makes it that the news consumers care because they're getting less of that information, or is it the other way around, that these news industries are catering to the needs and wants who don't care about international news for the most part? but many people in smaller
towns, their eye on the world comes to them through their local television stations and if of factor in the economics having of havingics reporters who cover local issues and pay for access to other news get information from around the world but most local news stations have limited to bring in the world writ large. question that because even if you -- and rosalind, you travel extensively but i think oftentimes when you mayo different places, you meet people and it's amazing how internationally savvy they are. so many people know so much, especially about what's going on here or about many of the issues that are driving, i think, the landscape and so we don't often see that here but also i think given that you do -- we now have a 24-hour news
that and that's something i think is global and so that's a lot of ground to cover and me, wearing so many different media hats, you know, oftentimes feels like a cycle. news from rural america, full up,losure, and where i grew broadband right now in 2017, if i want full access to it, i have miles from where my family home is into the little son to have broadband access that my smartphone works and can and "theal-jazeera hill latino." the economics, bringing that not that people there aren't interested. they're interested. requires a 10-mile drive from your house to go to the local library where you tond is free for make your smartphone work,
not's a lot of effort and everybody is going to do that to make themselves globally informed. what i was getting at is you have this enormous amount of and i just oftentimes i think maybe in the world that now, we're not necessarily utilizing that space the most effective way possible and by that i mean pushing thetually stories that i think could i think be drivers to actually an audience along. and sometimes i think we really up on the low-hanging fruit. it's easy to focus on what's the latest tweet storm. but, for example, if you look at trade20 and this massive deal with japan and the e.u., i thought that was a really, big deal. and it was -- what it spoke to the opportunities that are being missed
particularly by the united states and how globally other are taking advantage of that space and that was something that we were addressing and covering on the many americank focusinglets weren't on that but i think was crucial needed to be addressed. but when you look at this 24-hour news cycle, i think story that could be taking up quite a bit of that but we're just not seeing it. we've got this much space and i think only this much bandwidth is being accessed and utilized. issues that come up. one, the one that beverly raised in that is if i'm in a town kentucky where beverly's from or if i'm from a part of montana or whatever, i have to prioritize issues. my key
more about broadband? or if i'm in a farming community, do i care more about subsidies that deal with farming of thatmining, things nature. that's one issue. two, if you're talking about an that'sike the g-20, where the affiliate news services -- i used to work for one -- those sorts of things are that a newsmportant service, where it's based, can g-20 and distill that issue down to the local communities where they do make connection of why is the g-20 important to me. what does it boil down to the thatcal goods and services may be unique to my part of the world. the third part is who's in the decisions andg that gets to diversity.
diversity.st racial it's geographic diversity. if you don't have people from rural communities, if you don't color in thef room, if you don't have all those other factors in the room has decision making power, then those stories aren't going to be covered. not going to be covered. g-20's not going to be covered. yemen's not going to be covered. qatar dispute won't be covered and definitely not without thosely folks in the room. >> i want to piggyback on that. this country's becoming more ever.e than the while population in this country is just over 60% at the atent but if you look newsrooms across -- domestically, across the only 13% of news rooms diverse.lly gulf and i agree you miss stories when you're not
reflecting the communities serving.vering and >> i'm sure the audience have plenty of questions. if me state for the record, you do have a question, please raise your hand. we have a couple of people in microphones and they will come to you and there's the stipulation. ask a question. no filler busterring allowed here. it's not congress. [laughter] the first is this young lady up front. your name. >> helena. after -- i had a question about sources and trust. there was a huge discussion on from reportersn that npr and such when the withall shooting happened congressional baseball and reporters were saying that sources weren't willing to talk them because they were part of the media. struggle you've been seeing throughout in terms of people wanting to talk to
reporters? huge issue because you don't have sources or people who aren't trusting and talking to missing stories. >> excellent question. >> it's not a new problem. when i was a local news reporter in milwaukee in the mid 1990's, a story in which someone was killed and my job go to the neighborhood where this person was murdered neighborstalk to about this person, if they knew the person, about the incident. i walked up and down the street, not ad on every door, single person wanted to speak to me. not even off camera, record the voice, record the feet, the house -- they didn't want to talk. they were scared. afraid abouty much being punished, being attacked,
target of retaliation if they spoke to the media. -- lead story.ad the newsroom and told the assignment editor, i don't know what to do. i've knocked on every single door. the photographer waited in the car so we didn't scare people wanted to talk and the assignment editor said that's your story. this is what crime does to a it steals people's voices. you can go back and stand on the is whatnd say, this happened when we came to ask about the murder of this person. ownle are afraid for their safety and they don't want to speak out. story.t was the that was 20 years ago. always going to be an issue, that people don't want to wordsthat they feel their will be taken off context, that their views won't be respected,
have an, in the media, agenda. so it's an age-old problem. people want to talk, they will talk. i am asking people who open up up thises, to open lives to me. i'm not doing them a favor by putting them on my tv channel think this is an attitude among many reporters, tv, that people should want to be on tv because i'm on tv. wrong way toe approach doing your job. so when you have a lot of people out there with that attitude, understandable why people who witness something horrible, such as what happened to representative scalise, don't becausesay anything, they're afraid that their words will be taken out of context so you have to do is sometimes
if you work with a camera, thetimes you have to put camera down -- sorry -- and you just have to just talk with the person. see if the person will say anything. you can then turn around and say it. obviously, the gold standard is having the person who saw something happen say on camera, this happen. because that person now has skin in the game. but it doesn't always happen. it doesn't always work that way a journalist,as is to find a way to tell the they as it is, not tell story as you think it should be told. offshouldn't be ticking boxes and saying i got these three soundbites, i spoke to i got this official, video of the scene, here's my and i'm piece to camera done. that's -- you're chronicling what actually is, not filling formula.oxes in a >> but it has gotten much, much
worse, especially in the political atmosphere. 10as a political reporter years ago, and experienced it. vitriol and the level of hatred by some for the has completely intensified. if you look at the way that the youaigns are covered and heard reporters being heckled in pressgn rallies and in jorge ramos kicked out of a press conference by the be.ident to >> he was dragged out. at some point it becomes harder to deal with for the news industry. >> there's a couple of other diana andt pull rosalind's points together and issue, back to the trust don't feelf people
their communities are being longed fairly, that's before anybody ever heard of donald j. trump, they're not their doors to you. that, what was said oflier, things taken out context, and you add on top of who have, over a course of time, you know, trashed the press because it was convenient to do so to score political points. age-old history the politicalth frosting on top of an already tasting cake. and so you have reporters being political rallies covering the president or having out by police, things of that nature.
that's what happened during this last campaign. ashave a responsibility journalists to get to right but have theake sure to voices in the room and also the people who are in power, who are thised with uniqueibility, have a role and power and must use it accordingly to reinvest trust in all of the institutions. be a skeptic. yes, you can want to change trash itt to simply has that cascading effect down to the point where people trying cover an honest-to-good booted awaye being old problem and the new problem on top of that and that doesn't serve anybody findse you're trying to out whether or not one of the
leaders in congress is going to thatwho did it, how did come to happen, who else got hurt. and this vitriol gets in the way of fundamental information. can i take my kid to that ball on saturday because we were thinking of having little league. if would be really easy if i were queen of the world, to say media, now, if ever, is when you need to hire more this work and they need to be hired to work all the country, not just in and l.a. washington but you need to put people in tory state, and they need cover that state, that's their beat and they need to get to know people, they need to get to understand the culture. understando get to the faith, they need to
understand the history, they localo understand the issues and their job is to tell were queenes, if i of the world. but this is the united states and journalism is a business and the media organizations are owned by companies that have dividends quarterly canheir shareholders, so i dream. here?er questions, lady >> my question is about misinformation and the idea of guess given your jobs, as experts, do you think there's a possibility of a basically truth in information and experts that there needs to be one space where we can all agree and share
information and it has a stamp experts?al amongst i know in the charity sector, have charity navigating. have you practiced things theseh a broad branch of, are fallible, and valid organizations. is there a movement towards doing that? that. points on one, there's beyond your local library, it's impossible to say this is the single repository of things true. it's just not feasible. of organizations, the national press club has organizations,er c.p.j., and others, to come begin this process out and begin to try to say who's really doing who's not doing the job well and be able to spot
falsehoods. there are collectives happening in the journalism community can spot falsehoods. definitely a is really popular thing nowadays and that's happening. to the polit facts, if other to these repositories to see if something is true or false, generally they're there, and it's growing because the haveis there, because you actors who aren't even journalists jumping into the be us andending to giving the stamp of approval by being inserted into the white house briefing room, by being inserted into congress and elsewhere. you want to give examples of that? is a perfecttbart example of that. gateway pundit is a perfect that.e of these are organizations that
don't practice the craft with forness and balance and yet political reasons the white house has allowed them to be briefingled in the room. you.should scare >> there are folks who would disagree. difference between conservative leaning in some respects news organizations that strikes.l balls and there's worlds of difference breitbart. news and let's just put it out there. trustu have -- i would fox news. i will not trust breitbart historybreitbart has a of doctoring video. breitbart has a history of the facts and distort formering back to the assistant secretary of agriculture incident which helped put them on the map and it turns out making her look
chirac, making it look like she was having a racist speech when indeed you looked at the whole thing, it was nothing of the sort. it was that organization and now they're getting credentialed at least in some parts of this town. some committees booted them away when they asked for credentials because we have to have standards about who's job. the >> and the first amendment is not because the first amendment, it is not for the government to say you're a legitimate news organization and you're not. it really is the ultimate free of ideas.e is thelicing, i believe, way we will do this but to have a central repository for saying factual, this isn't factual. there are people who say that with ph.d.'s,ople people with years of research
and publication and teaching under their belt don't know what they're talking about. think it's possible to have a central repository when we can't even agree as a agree on who is qualified to toge and who isn't qualified judge. i think of the movie hiroshima an incident is replayed from four different perspectives. that is the way journalists work. we're coming at it from a lot of different perspectives. we never actually get to the of what happened. we try to get there. we don't actually get there. centralave a repository, i don't think that's possible and frankly i don't first amendment would allow for it. >> question from this side of the room. i just wanted to say, let's go back to the issue of revenue and what kind of value are capturingews sources from this digital disruption
that's happening in media and see that there's five companies that right now are which -- moste of providers ofot originally done for themselves. it's the facebooks of the world, aggregators that are capturing. of digital ad revenues right now. to the rest is being devoted organizations that actually are providing the reporters on the ground, that are paying those salaries to cover those important stories. toit's something important kind of think about is how how you -- how do you bring about the revenue that's needed to cover the important stories that matter-of-factd
based. >> just so you know, if you study, the state of the media in 2016 found that 62% of u.s. froms get their media social media. ty wiggins with the american institute. what new role does citizen coveragem play in the of global events, especially poses that might complications for u.s. foreign policy. of ja cinkun, we saw the sarin gas attacks which might have inspired donald trump to launch attacks. does social media have on this dynamic? >> it can be good and bad. just cited a perfect
example. sometimes it's hard to get to various hot spots and you have relationships with fixers on the ground who know the area and know how not to get killed and be able to extract that video but you also have to proviso when you put it on your air and say, look, this is how we got it. is who provided it to us. authenticate, fully authenticate what you're seeing but some things are what they are and so it's a very some proposition in respects but it's important, if precariousch a situation, that you're truth to people what the standards are and what is -- what is a story and things like that, just opening up your you'reone does not mean committing journalism.
>> hoping you have the preponderance of video, not just the one video that inspired the president to order the air strike on the airfield, but the preponderance of video coming from that incident. i had to look at all that video. there's a lot that didn't get on the air because it was incredibly gruesome. sahimore so than the attacks of 2012 in palms and incamma. you have that preponderance haveidence and quietly you other governments saying something needs to be done before the u.n. can actually do own sanctions, that does have an impact but again, as have to tellu people, this is where we got it, this is who provided it to us, we can't independently verify it the preponderance of video that we have, we know something happened here and you be very honest with the viewers and with the readers
are seeing and reading. don't move usually that quickly when they make these sorts of decisions. have intelligence ahead of when we actually see video, that something happened. perhapsainly this is the new version of someone calling the newsroom and saying, i heard gunshots over on this street, or you hear scannerg on a police that everyone's moving towards a certain area or you hear that is goingdepartment somewhere. of thatthe new version assignment desk phone or a police scanner. but people who are actually seeing it are saying, so certainly, a lot of things that witnesses a attention to before trayvon martin are now
being paid attention to because people feel free to say, wait a minute i am seeing something that is not right. normssn't fit our local it is potentially illegal. and the media, love it or hate it needs to know about it. because then they can share it with other people. to see if our outrage is justified. impact it is a positive on the whole because it means that we in the media are not stock on the same three stories every day permit we have people saying -- no no no, pay attention to this. sometimes it feels like those 24 hours in a 10 hour day or 11 hour day, but i think ultimately, we are better as a profession. the people who watch us and readers are better served because you're trying to get more of the universe out to them.
>> one last question. from the side of the room. my name is sasha scott. i wanted to ask you about orreach to new audiences even i am sorry to say, lost audiences in some cases. especially given everyone's earlier points about diverse city, whether it be race, country of origin, -- what are some of the bridges that you all like -- going from diagnosis to the. what are some of the bridges that you use -- like social media that brought a lot of --ple from rural america what are you doing outside of what you bear on your own to reach people. maybe through comedy shows that people learning through jon stewart the first things about
the middle east that they have ever heard in their lives. and the second part of that question is when you see outlets zzeera,dget zero --al ja what would you say are good promising models for sustaining quality journalism? at the risk of sounding poorly self-serving, we have been doing that since 1908. building bridges and hosting forums to talk about what we do in our profession and how we do it in addition to bringing newsmakers into our house and holding them accountable. we definitely talk about the profession, we talk shop in addition to doing that. to your second point, that is much harder. yes, there are good models, but there is also bad economics.
one of the biggest reasons why that outlet went away was economics to read the rest are well-publicized. you are looking at what you want , and at the end of the day, this goes back to your point, you have to demand what you want. you have to be able to say -- i want this, and i am willing to actively cultivate that viewing habit. and tell your neighbors and have them tell their neighbors. at the end of the day is eyeballs. listast cities for -- at -- at least it is for television. whye are people who say -- do i have to pay to read this newspaper? well first of all, reporters have to be able to eat. they have mortgages read >> and children. >> and children.
we cannot just give away the service. reader, thend listener, they all have the responsibility not only to get and have theon, right information, but they have to want to pay for that information. cable, for whatever you want, and you have to pay for good journalism to bit -- too. , being an analyst, one of the things that has always been important to me is making sure that, there are a lot of voices in the room and that those voices are actually heard, and also trying to reach out and move beyond -- it seems like most media outlets like to or -- 1-5 people as a team. them tose them to get
speak on everything. what i am always pushing for is saying -- here is someone or think would be good to talk about this. in this particular place, or country, or have you, this person that we are not hearing from that i think would bring a very different respective. i think when we get in those rooms, and our voices are being elevated, it is important to make sure that we are bringing diversity voices of of thought and ideas and making sure that they are being pushed out there. it is not a collective ideal or notion, it is something that individually, at least from my perspective, i think we need to make sure we are pushing eight out there. got ans a journalist and mba.
from that perspective i can say that the industry as a whole has been experimenting with subscriptions as you all mentioned. doing a lot of events in mobile. we just hired a new president whose mission it is to scale our video services. to your point about reaching out to new audiences and experimenting with other -- about adels, i month ago we launched the first latino leaders summit that we ever put together and there was just a hunger for that content. that audience has not really been spoken to in this way about leadership. in a very mainstream way. english language, you know, forward, way to rip the reception we got was incredible, 250 people in the room, 55,000 livestream views. an incredible thirst.
for the information and for the content, something that can drive revenue. these are the kinds of things that we have to experiment with. thank you all for being here today at thank you for joining us online. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
eric. >> you don't stick up for mccain. as opposed to saying, donald trump, why are you smearing john mccain? >> no offense to you. i'm not here to cheer on or defend john mccain or donald trump. people mistake when you criticize media behavior. i don't support donald trump or am cheering him on. i see that as separate things. it is misread as you must be supporting him or months not like x or y. it has nothing to do with that. fair and accurate media coverage about the candidate. watch "afterwards" sunday
night." >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. at the white house friday, president trump welcomed the service members of the uss arizona, who survived the 1941 attack on pearl harbor. during the visit, the president was reportedly given a piece of the battleship, along with a commemorative hat and calling. from the oval office, this is 10 minutes.