tv The Gavin Newsom Show Current May 27, 2012 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
♪ ♪ >> thanks for joining us this memorial day weekend. we're going to be talking about one of my favorite aggravation. guy kawasaki, a author of 1 is 11 books including "enchantment." after serving two terms as chief evangelist at apple and writing a book about google entitled "what the plus." and then dillon ratigan. we talk about what we need to do to save the american banking system. and then finally, provocateur michelle reed, first up, guy
kawasaki. welcome to the show. >> thank you for having me. >> it's good to have you on. >> it's a pleasure and an honor. >> you survived two tours of duty >> my claim to fame. >> you were with apple early on and then came back a few years later. and then you track a history and lessons learned from steve that are incredibly impactful and postally as we reflect on steve jobs' life. you came off with 12 things you learned. >> i hope you're not wanting me to repeat all 12. >> two this stick in my mind. don't listen to experts. they often don't listen to customers. those are leadership lessons. >> first of all, a caveat, steve jobs is a very difficult person to emulate. if you copy every thing he did does not mean you'll become a steve jobs. but having said that the time
and time again said experts said that apple would die. they thought the apple store would be a failure. the iphone, and the mackintosh mackintosh i-everything. steve constantly showed them they were wrong. lesson. these experts, analysts, great powerful people at large publications, there is a reason probably writing about history as opposed to making history, if you know what i mean. that's the lesson there. as far as customers, the apple concept of the apple research was steve jobs left hemisphere communicating with his right hemisphere. when i was there, there was no such thing as a focus group. we didn't ask commerce what do you want? if you think about t customers can tell you they want better versions of what they already have. better, faster, cheaper apple 2, bigger, faster, cheaper apple 2.
go back to the genesis of apple, this is key for most silicon valley, two guys in a garage two gals in a garage, a guy and a gal in the garage and they're building the gizmo and gadget that they want to use. stephen wanted a personal computer. it was different from reading the latest forester, jupiter or "new york times" predictions of the future, and they say its enterprise software. they say it's social media whatever. so those wise people said that so let's build a product to that market. i don't think that's how--by the time the wall street journal and "new york times" and all the experts are discussing it, it's too late. so what steve did, he--he either anticipated what people needed or he made them believe they needed what he made. >> orson welles said don't give
people what you think they want. give them something that they never thought possible. >> which is exactly what apple did. >> you're a stanford guy and there is that great book "built to last." clock builders versus time keepers. the change at apple, do you look optimistically at the furor was it a cult of personality? >> i think product plans are like apple, they're probably set 18 months in advance? so for the next year i think it's kind of office that iphone should be 4 g lpg by now. with all the wonderful innovation and coolness, it's kind of embarrassing, iphone is 3 g. i have a samsung, they are both 4 g and much better system. so they better be.
i think it's logical that you build an seven-inch ipad because the ten -inch--i use a seven-inch tablet and my calculation it's the largest taplet i can use that when i fall asleep and it falls on my face, it doesn't hurt me. a ten-inch would hurt you. >> didn't steve fight against that? >> he did. >> from our perspective of the first time, they violateed the jobs rule. >> i think one of the other lessons of steve jobs is changing your mind is a sign of intelligence. and so one historical thing is when the iphone first came out, steve declared there would be no third-party apps and the justification he used was this is your phone. it has to be more secure than your computer. that logic i never understood, but yeah, steve, that's right.
he said this is your phone. it a has to be more secure. no third-party apps. writed a-ons to safari. a year later, a change of direction. hierarchy in governance dead or steve jobs proved otherwise, leadership still matters. >> this is a complex subject. for all the love that we have for social media twitter, google plus and the democratization for information and governments are unable to control channels--for all that wonderfulness of democratization, apple is the antithesis of that. >> you've been in the valley for so many years now. you're still remarkably a young
guy, but it's been decades where you've been a leading figure and people have looked to you. >> what are you reading? >> i'm not making this up. get over it. >> all rightall right. >> just get over it. what is your perspective. you've become an author. 11 books, your last book, very successful book "enchantment," which i got here and i'm a big fan here. i'm not just saying that because it's one of the reasons i'm having you on the show. are you say success in terms of your own style to be relevant, and how it's changing? >> that would imply a conscious intellectual plan. that implication is very wrong. [chuckling] >> is that another secret? don't have a plan? >> maybe. i just happen to fall in love with things. i fall in love with the
mackintosh. fast forward, i resisted twitter completely, facebook completely, now i'm all in. if you think that i planned this, or i have a life coach, we plot it out, okay, guy, for four year doctor five-year plan--i don't think so. i don't have a five-minute plan. i react fast. >> you took a lot of time on google plus. everybody focused on facebook and here you are focusing--you fell in love with the mackintosh, you wrote a book about it. you fell in love with google plus. what is it about google plus, is it an unfair comparison and something completely different? >> at some level a duck is a duck is a duck. when we came out with the mackintosh, we could have said it's not a personal computer.
that's bs. you're going to buy a pc or mack. you're not going to buy both. when i saw the google plus, the esthetic, the design was so much cleaner than facebook at the time. and the ability to include pictures compared to twitter that was eye-opening. i like the fact that you can edit a comment or a post after the fact on google plus. but once you post on twitter or facebook, it's gone. you can't get it back. you can get fired for doing whatever you did. i also--facebook has this thing called edge rank where you might have a thousand friends on facebook but only 10% can see your posts, those who have interacted with you. 1,000 people said they want to see what i do, buffets book is deciding which 10% can see it. whereas on google plus if i had a thousand followers, at least all thousand people can see it.
those kinds of things i find the commenting, the topics are more intellectually stimulating on google plus. someone once said facebook is for the people you went to high school with. google plus is for the people you wish you went to high school with. >> so your focus on google plus, obviously social media, we're moving to that direction. when is enough enough, you have your twitter account, your facebook, your google plus, at what point is it just saturation. >> i'm way past saturation? >> i mean for the average people at one what point are we going to say i can't handle it any more. the desire to participatory. >> i think one or two services are enough for most people. >> right.
>> and it happens to be a passion. you're asking somebody who--you're asking the worst--that's like asking the pope about catholicism. >> you can't help yourself. >> no, i can't. but i am most active on google plus. 95% of my action is google plus. >> speaking of the future, just briefly in the remaining minute, where are we going in terms of the valley? are we back into another bubble? i mean, all the excitement, all these ipos. >> facebook. >> exactly. from your perspective, how do you counter, based on the decades you've been in the valley, where are we? is this a whole another plane or does it remind you of-- >> it reminds me of the.com dot -com
days. i think we realize we're in a bubble when you cross the line from, god, that was a stupid idea, why would i invest in that. and then when you go over the line you start think to go yourself, i don't want to be left behind. so i know it could be stupid. i know it could be a bubble, but what's worse? to be smart and not invest and not make the money? >> right. >> or --when you're feeling that novel all that has been taken and you're left behind. it's more stupid to be left behind than it is to risk the money. that's when you know you're truly in in a bubble, and i think people believe that today. >> there is no distinction between the late 1990s and today. they didn't have the revenue to justified $1 billion, the
expectation, buffets book and these other companies , these other ipos. >> i think it's closer to the dot-com days than not. the lessons that we should learn from the dot-com days is, the key to the bubble is to get out before it pops. that's the lesson. many people in silicon valley are welcoming the bubble. but this time we're going get out. >> but you're not out yet, no? >> no. [chuckling] >> we're out of time. nice to have you on the show. >> up next, the author of "greedy bastard" explains not you're about to watch an ad message created by a current tv viewer for hershey's air delight.
>>during the blind taste tests today you'll be tasting five different kinds of chocolate. okay ladies, let's try chocolate number 4. it's the one right in front of you. >>oh! >>hurh! >>umm. >>okay now taste your final piece of chocolate. >>umm! umm! ohh! >>umm, ah-hum. >>umm! >>ahh! >>hershey's new air delight milk chocolate, a lighter, airier meltier hershey's happiness. in 2012 alone. go to our website, current.com. up next it's out to the campaign
trail. a surprising new poll, and that's next right here inside "the war room." i have the most common type of atrial fibrillation, or afib. it's not caused by a heart valve problem. i was taking warfarin, but my doctor put me on pradaxa instead to reduce my risk of stroke. in a clinical trial, pradaxa® (dabigatran etexilate mesylate) reduced stroke risk 35% better than warfarin. and unlike warfarin, with pradaxa,
there's no need for regular blood tests. that's really important to me. pradaxa can cause serious, sometimes fatal, bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have a bleeding condition like stomach ulcers, or take aspirin, nsaids, or blood thinners, or if you have kidney problems especially if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all medicines you take any planned medical or dental procedures and don't stop taking pradaxa without your doctor's approval as stopping may increase your stroke risk. other side effects include indigestion, stomach pain, upset, or burning. pradaxa is progress. having afib not caused by a heart valve problem increases your risk of stroke. ask your doctor if you can reduce your risk with pradaxa.
♪ >> jpmorgan chase is losing billions of dollars and it's not the only one. arthur and t.v. host dylan ratigan has a sharp explanation and possible solution. dylan, welcome to current tv. dylan, you have been watching, you've been a pundit of wall street and front and center of the debates. we see what is happening with jpmorgan chase and what has not happened in the last 24, 36 months after lehman and the crisis, what the heck is wrong with us? what is it? what is the disconnect between the actions of wall street and the inability for politicians to both politics describes to do anything to rein in these abuse abuses. >> pure and un unadulterateed terror. >> terror of what? >> terror in the respect that they're very afraid of their virtual ignorance-- >> what
nuances? >> they don't understand it. >> derivatives, the language? >> it's not in their spectrum. as a result they're hesitant to have an opinion that has meaningful consequence. so where i have failed and where i could improve is actually to have more compassion--i'm like the college professor that you either like when he's really friendly and nice but who wants a college professor who yells at everybody because they're too stunted to stupid to understand the class work. >> you don't like that class. >> right. jpmorgan is an opportunity for us to actually have a little bit more compassion for the politicians, not in thens of forgiving them for their action, but i believe if we don't muster the compassion for the fact that they simply need to learn more and create a space for that, we want our politicians to be certain all the time. and it's hard to maintain a job as a politician if you're not certain. certain of anything.
>> right. >> when we're in a world where uncertainty is the necessary prerequisite to learn and listen, do things, yet a politician who exists in uncertain is doomed in this political climate. >> if they acknowledge it. >> if they acknowledge it. >> george bush never made a mistake. >> and the bankers never made a mistake. if you look at clinton, reuben, green greenspan, all those who created the architecture of what we're dealing with. if we said, we have a new technology that we can district mathematically on computers and we want to experiment where we think it's possible to create all these new capital flows and all this wonderful thing, that's a reasonable proposition. i remember talking to them at the time and thinking this is interesting. but i would be lying to you if i said, oh, this is pretty cool. so where i really get frustrated
is it's not in the experiment, it is in when the experiment failed. because we don't have the capacity to acknowledge the failure of the experiment we're now doubling down on a failed experiment. and you're allowed to experiment and you're allowed to fail. it's encouraged but doubling down on a failed experiment pretending that it hasn't failed is the most dangerous thing you can do in the society. >> we have to move the mass. how do we move the cheese. how do we educate, move the pause button and give that forgiveness, the capacity to think, reflect and act different? >> ultimately you ask where the power is? where is the power? the power relative to the banks is not in the political sphere because the political sphere is confuseed and afraid by it. it's in the shareholders. the state pensions are the shareholders of these banks.
the state pensions are the shareholders of these institutions. the state pensions are the ones that can come in who have a much higher level of sophistication and i encourage if you look at the shareholder meetings, this proxy meeting, bank of america jpmorgan, where the shareholders are saying, what you are doing with this business, what you are doing to this country is destructive, ex-tracktive, and toxic and it must be reform. >> they're benefiting the shareholders. >> they are, but they know--if you're a shareholder of jpmorgan, and you're benefiting from this structure, you also know that you're a shareholder in an institution that is now warehousing hundreds of trillions--not billions--jpmorgan has the largest credit derivative in the world. it's in the hundreds of interests. each each trillion is a thousand billion.
you know they have that risk. each time the banks have to blow up, and the government has to bail them out which will have to happen, you know the shareholders will get wiped out. the culture again will never again tolerate bailing out the banks and the shareholders. as a result, they're getting more aggressionsive. why should the new york state pension, why should the florida of north carolina pension buy shares in publicly traded companies that do not disclose their political spending. they should not share or shouldn't be political spending. we have to go for the low-hanging fruit first, it's whether or not money and politics, whether or not too big to fail, fine. but at least let's be transparent about it and use the only leverage that we have left which i see as the state pension system which represents the teachers, the cops, the judges who are on the hook for all of
this. the problem, quite honestly, the pension managers tend to have a great hesitancy to engage in that level of conflict because they don't want to be excluded from access to some of the higher yield, higher returning assets. let's say you're jamie dimon and i'm the shareholder from california. i say, jamie i'm going to lean on you. if you say, dylan, if you lean on me, all those looks i'm giving you and all though products that is paying pensions that you pay your teachers are going away. and you and i know that you can't achieve that yield which is why all this has to be done in the media and public first such as though interactions happen, people know what is at stake. >> all the good points you've beared out and all these things that you're saying an audit comes out a few months ago and bernie saunders puts it together, is reinforces everything you're saying. that's a pint where everybody
drops everything and code red. >> but they don't know what to do. if i walk into the room--it's not that nothing can be done right? mike mayo one of the top banking analysts in history of wall street. he walked out and said this is a corrupt system. i was like a guy living next door watching him and mike was a child in the house. i said what are you doing? he said, you have the established accounting standards. once you have accounting standards, you establish a banking, and then he called it the abc plan accountability banking and clout. once you have the accounting the bankrupt facility and then dediminish the relevancy. wall street used to be fun. it was tribal and cultural and competitive and all that.
but you made partners in 1975, congratulations you now own $6 billion in liability, don't screw it up. that culture is gone. >> gone. >> and just the concept of a syndicate of distributed risk, which was--i'll tell you, you talk to senior bankers on wall street who miss the good ol' days. there was a time when wall street was driven--grant it macho but opportunity-seeking culture. the opportunity was in the opportunity-seeking culture. that's gone. now the culture is on risk manufacturing and risk transfer. and the risk manufacturing is the risk transfer to the government. it pays well, jamie dimon made $23 million last year. but it is not nearly as rewarding for someone who has a sense of their own ego and their own competitive self and their own identity that they want to prove that they're good at
something because being good at risk manufacturing and risk transfer is being a really good thief. it doesn't have the awards. >> yeah, well, we don't have enough time to go into this any further, but i tell you from my perspective it is code red and we have to wake up. i share your optimism for the share hold, but elected officials need to stand up. >> and educate themselves. >> and ultimately educate the public. you make a great point. we need to educate ourselves. dylan we'll continue exploring innovation. they just don't cut it any more. vanguard: the documentary series that redefined tv journalism. >>we're going to places where few others are going. >>it doesn't get anymore real than this. >>occupy! "vanguard" new episodes coming soon. only on current tv.
break the ice with breath-freshening cooling crystals. ice breakers. if you have copd like i do you know how hard it can be to breathe and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva.
discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help.
>> innovative, insightful and controversial. my next guest from this public's school system. michell rhee, the founder of students first and former chancellor of washington, d.c. public schools. stunt first is a non-profit grassroots movement attempt to go reform public education. as chancellor michelle was prominently featured in the award winning documentary "awaiting super men." your background in the dc schools. served under mayor fenty, he lost his campaign and with it there were a lot of changes including your exit. you started this program shortly after your tenure there. students first is what. >> the bottom line we are a
grassroots organization whose mission is to try to put the laws and leaders in place that will finally make education about kids and putting kids' interest first above those of the adults. and from my haven'tage point of having been in education the last 20-some odd years, not to date myself, but you know, what we have found is that you got special interest groups who have been driving a lot of what has happened in education, and the problem is that we have not had an organized national interest group that is at advocating on behalf of kids. that's our goal to mobilize and motivate people from across the country from all walks of life parents, teachers, grandparents, business owners saying our public education system is not serving our kids well. we need to do something about it and we have to act.
>> is it still reading, writing, arithmetic or is it collaboration, communication? even the basic curricula that we use, is it appropriate again to our global competitiveness. >> both. one of the things that i think america excels at is innovation and creativity, and we never want to lose that. that said we also have to have a workforce that has basic skills. if you look right now, an alarming proportion of the kids who graduate from high school in this country actually can't go into the military because they skills. so while we want creativity and innovation and all that sort of stuff to absolutely be present in our kids, we also have to make sure that they're mastering the skills and they're learning the knowledge that they need to be able to get a job that's going to ensure that they can
raise a family and support that family. >> million dollar goal 1 million members. you've exceeded the members. who is donating to your cause? who are the people who are mind you? >> the vast majority of our donors are our members. we have 1.3 million members across the country. >> do they pay do yous? >> yeah. >> is there an endowment? large checks? or is it small? >> it's a mix . our average donation is $64. we have people like a dues paying member pays $5 every month. that's really where we think we're going to have the power of this movement is in our membership. and more important from the money is the actually the actions that we take. when we send e-mails out to our members and say, something is happening in your state, legislation pending, for example, we need to you e-mail your legislature.
we need you to call his or her office. we need to you show up at a rally on the capital. capitol, and they come. that is making a huge different. we heard that from a lot of public officials that we're working with across the country. they've been really impressed by seeing our members in action. >> your donor list is not public. is there a reason why you keep it private? someone said, well, it's just that they're concerned about the lack of transparency as you're arguing for more transparency from others and your own organization does not provide that list. >> we follow all the rules and guidelines around disclosure that we have to. but in terms of individual donors, and we have thousands and thousands of them, are we going to talking about those individual donors and release information about them? no, the vast north majority of them are every day citizen who is want to improve the lives of kids in this country, and we don't think it's necessarily right right to publicize who they are.
so we respect their rights to privacy. >> what is the core mission in terms of how you measure success for your organization? >> yep, so how we measure success is based on more kids doing well academically, and overall what we want is for the next decade for the u.s. to be able to move from being on the bottom third on international standardized tests to the top third. and it's a huge feat but it's absolutely doable. we focus on three different areas. the first is making sure there is a great principal leading every school and a great teacher in every classroom. the second is making sure that all families regardless of where they live have quality options for where their kids can go to school, that they feel very pleased with. and the third is making sure we have accountability for every child and every taxpayer dollar we're spending. >> it all sounds noble and 99% of folks would agree.
but how do you define greatness and who defines greatness as to what is a quality principal? what is a quality teacher and how is choice manifest? that therein lies, where all the groups that have been organized, organizations on behalf the teachers, organizations on behalf of administrators and all the things that have been done across the country. how do you go about in terms of the prioritization and this is what we're going to do first and scale elsewhere. >> let's take the first area that we work in, of making sure that every school is led by a great leader, and every classroom has a highly effective teacher in it. lots of people say it's impossible to really measure how good a teacher is or isn't. we do that every day.
parents who send their children to school every day, you know when your kid is in the classroom of a great teacher. >> right. >> you know when your kid is really struggling in the classroom of someone who is not as effective. and so we as parents are making those decisions oh gosh i want my kid in that class versus the other class. the other teachers know who the most highly effective teachers are. we actually do know a lot about the quality of teachers, and the challenges that we face is how can can we create an evaluation system that is fair and transparent for the teachers but that also allows us to differentiate so that we know if someone is really effective with our kids, we should be them nor money, giving them the recognition and the rewards that they deserve. >> teachers, most important factor in quality education, period. is there any disagreement on that at the end of the day?
what happens inside the classroom determines the success of the child? >> the research is very clear, teacher quality. >> teachers agree with you on that? great teachers? or they don't? therein lies the challenge. you had at it with teachers unions. there are concerns from teachers unions about what you're doing and how you manifest your ideal here and the goals, they require a different way of doing business. but is there a framework where you at least agree on some the fundamental facts like a great teacher is the most important factor in terms of the student achievement? >> there is a lot of disagreement out there in the education debates right now about what are the most important in-school factors that impact student learning. for example, you have a lot of people who say it's all about the money.
we need more money in order to fix education. >> you don't subscribe that more is better. you make the point as many do that we spend a lot across this country compared to our peered industrialized countries and scores-- >> that's right. more does not necessarily always equal better. i say that from having the experience of running the school district in this country who was spending almost more money per child than any other urban jurisdiction in the country. >> not particularly good outcomes. >> not just particularly good but the worst in the nation. you can't just throw more money into the system--into an existing broken system. you have to fix the fundamentals of the system in order for dollars and more resources to have the impact that you want them to have. i think the most critical thing in education spending spending that most people don't know is of all the
dollars that are being spent and across the country we spend about $10,000 per child on education. only about $5,000 of that actually goes into the classroom, into the schools. >> right. >> and so therein lies the biggest issue. >> is that an area that teachers unions themselves would agree with you? that they want more money into the classroom? >> i actually do think that is a place where we would agree. you know, i don't think that anybody is in favor of dollars going into bloated bureaucracies and things that don't work. i'll tell what you is not helpful which i see happening right now is that things are being polarized to extremes, and there is no one on those extremes. people often say about me, she wants to evaluate teachers solely on the base of test scores. i don't want to do that. i don't know anybody in the entire country who
who is at very kateing that. if you believe that student achievement should count for something, which most people do, then let's have a healthy productive conversation about what that percentage should be but let's not create sort of these boogie boogeyman men out there. >> do you feel you're part of that debate on the other side. a lot of people who support you and are supporting the movement feel very strongly in terms of their negativity towards teachers unions, and that they say that's the problem with the education, the union, does that play on both sides? is that fair? >> i spend lots of time arguing with people who say, the teachers unions are the problem. if the teachers unions didn't exist-- >> you wouldn't say that? >> absolutely not. there is no one thing that is causing the problems in education and there is no one solution that we can implement that is going to suddenly solve
all the problems that we face. our teachers the problems? i think personally that unions are doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing. >> protecting their members. they're like corporations protecting-- >> right, that's their job. how can we begrudge the fact that they're doing their job. we can't. they should condition to do that. >> but are you not a threat to the ways that they're doing business? seniority is sacrosanct with many organizations. ten years is sacrosanct. >> what i would say is that i think that those things that the teachers unions and "n" the past have held sacrosanct are really not that the issues that most rank and file teachers care most about. so i feel like part of what needs to happen is regular every day teachers need to get more involved in the debate. i get e-mailed all the time from teachers who say, we like what you're doing. keep going. i'm with you. i can't tell anyone that i'm
with you, but i'm with you. i'm thinking, why can't you say anything? well, because i'm worried about being targeted or i don't want to get involved in the politics of it. what i say is no, you have to get involved. i believe the vast majority of teachers know the system is broken, know things need to be fixed, and are willing to engage and want to engage in the policy debates. they just want there to be a safe space to do that in. >> speaking of safe space, you want to move fast, go along, but you want to go far, go together. it seems to me if we're going to have a debate, teachers union against reform groups we're going to be stuck in debates. small victories, but at the end of the day we got to go together. is there a framework where you sat down and you're starting to reach out and vice versa, the unions reach out, and we all agree we're way behind in internals of international scores. it's getting worse.
we got a crisis. we aren't teaching to the new technology. we have a crisis. we can disagree on tenure and other things and , vouchers, charter schools, some are good, some are lousy. they're not all on one side, and start focusing on those areas of agreement? is that possible or are we going to be at each other's throats. >> i think it's possible. the most important thing in that coming together is for us to again, sort of keep the polarized debates out of it, and focus in on we all think there is a place for, for example, for testing, and what we all want to make sure is that testing is not blown out of proportion so that's the only thing we care about, yet we still have accountability to measure how much kids are growing. let's talk about what is in the middle and where we go from there. that's the most important piece. >> when we come back, technology
[ train whistle blows ] [ ball hitting paddle ] [ orbit girl ] don't let food hang around. yeah! [ orbit trumpet ] clean it up with orbit! [ orbit glint ] fabulous! for a good clean feeling. ♪ eat, drink, chew orbit! ♪ (vo) every week night, cenk uygur calls out the mainstream >> overwhelming majority of the country says tax the rich, don't go to war.
♪ >> so you're moving past the disagreements we had with the way things have been done and some of the debates around charter schools and vouchers and tenure and seniority and the like. but what about the order of the technology and the dramatic impact in terms of education the tools of technology that can he personalize education. is this promising? >> no doubt about it. in fact, if you talk to any effective teacher they'll tell you that the hardest thing to master in teaching is differentiation and individualization. you've got 24, 25 kids in your
class. how can you be sure exactly where each one of them is and then give each what they need to move towards their potential. that's very difficult, but technology actually makes it much more possible for us to do this. some of the early data that has come back from blended abrahams where there is a heavy utilization of that technology of software and what it can do for kids is tremendous. interestingly the biggest change that is going to have to happen in order for us to move in that direction is sort of a cultural mind shift. i'm a parent. you're a participant. i have two little girls. when i put them in school i sort of pictured oh i want a class with just a few kids, small class size, and i want a grandmotherly teacher who is going to pull my daughter on her lap and read to her and that sort of thing. you think about technology. that's cold. i don't know if i want them in front of a screen every day and
that sort of thing. but with these blended learning programs you have kids as early as kindergarten and first grade who do spend a significant amount of time on the computer but the results are really starting to look incredibly good because they get that real differentiation of instruction. so i think part of it is going to be how do we sort of shift out of our old ideals of what education looks like, and understand that we're in a new day. >> does that change the physical environment? it's when they talk about a small class size but the whole idea that we have big box industrialized schools with rose of desks, that's an industrial-age frame and we have summer to go harvest the fields. the whole things needs to be dramatically over hauled and is that a
way a new way of thinking about the world we live in. >> it requires that shift in debate. i was talking to a group of teachers not too long ago and one of them said to me michelle, how do i get the kids to leave all of the distractions that they have, iphones, ipads, wiis, all these things. how do we get them to leave those things at the door, come in and sit down and learn. i said, honey, that ship has failed. you can't expect kids who have access to this kind of technology to all of a sudden and put all that aside and pick up their pencils and paper. >> and the chalkboard. >> yeah. >> that's not the way our world works. do we need to see a shift in that? absolutely no doubt about that. >> it's a great way to end because at the end of the day this is the foundational formula for the success of this country was our ability to outeducate so we can outcompete. we're code red right now in education across this country, and at the end of the
day, we may be many parts but we're all one body. we're several parts all together. michell rhee, it was great to have you on the show. >> thank you very much. >> reflections from this week's [ dennis ] switch to allstate. their claim service is so good now it's guaranteed. [ foreman ] so i can trust 'em. unlike randy. dollar for dollar, nobody protects you like allstate.
>>there's not a problem that exists in america today that hasn't been solved by somebody somewhere. >>(narrator) share your views with gavin at politicallydirect.com, a direct line to the gavin newsom show. >>focus on the folks that are making a difference, that are not just dreamers, but doers. >>(narrator) join the conversation. ♪ >> summer is here, and i hope you're enjoying the long holiday weekend. i was going to take time out for a pause but now is no time to take a break. we have a lot of work to do. as you heard from our guests this is no time for apple, for example, to lean back and bask in its ipad glory. guy kawasaki said the iphone is already lagging behind.
dylan ratigan said trillions of dollars are at staving thousands of billions on wall street unless the financial community reinvents itself. and finally no place needs innovation like our school system. i said it before and i'll say it again. we can't allow for creeping mediocrity. we need change and we need leaders to step up for this debate. while you may not agree with guy, dylan or michelle, we need to step up for action. join us again and let's continue >>(narrator) the sheriff of wall street. >>the leadership of high finance just doesn't get it. >>(narrator) the former governor of new york, eliot spitzer is on current tv. >>somebody somewhere can listen, record, track, gather this data. >>arrangements were made. >>(narrator) independent
unflinching. >>there is a wild west quality to it that permits them to do whatever they wish. >>(narrator) and above all politically direct. >>facts are stubborn things. with great taste... comes great entertainment. the amazing spider-man and twizzlers. the twist you can't resist. see the movie in theaters july 3rd.