Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  October 20, 2015 12:00am-1:01am PDT

12:00 am
>> rose: welcome to.program. tonight from the walter cronkite school of journalism and mass communication, a conversation with senator john mccain of arizona. >> vladimir putin is presiding over the weakest economy, perhaps, in all of europe. it's not as if these people are invincible. it's only because they have a goal and a strategy and we don't. >> rose: we conclude with adialh chris callahan and eric newton of the walter cronkite school and steve capus of cbs news. >> the basic skills of journalism are arguably more important now than ever. the ability to identify a story, to be able to report it accurately, thoroughly, objectively, fairly. and to be able to write with real writing that can compel people to read or listen to or watch a story. more important now than ever. >> rose: foreign policy andjour.
12:01 am
>> funding for charlie rose is provided by american express. additional funding provided >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we're in phoenix,arizoe school of journalism and mass communications at arizona state university. i'm pleased to have as my guest senator mccain from arizona. is he as you know chairman of the armed services committee of the senate and a big proponent of a strong defense in america's role around the world.
12:02 am
he ran for president in 2008 before serving in the senate he was a member of the house of representatives. all of us know of his courage and hero im, senator mccain, i'm pleased to have you on this program. it is my pleasure to have you in this home state. >> thank you for coming and could i say profound congratulations on being awarded the-- the award for outstanding journalism from the walter cronkite school of journalism and i think it's richly deserved. and we're honored that you would come to arizona to receive it. >> rose: thank you.whenever thee same sentence as walter cronkite, that's a winning day for me. >> i know what you mean. but it is well deserved. >> rose: thank you.let me talk e president's recent decision about afghanistan first. made the right decision? do you support him in that decision? >> i support the decision, but i don't support the number. if we could maintain 10,000 then i think we would barely have enough. but he is also says that that is going to go back down to 5,000.
12:03 am
now maybe his successor would have a major impact on that decision. but to have a minimum number rather than the most efficient number, in other words, i know for a fact that military leaders recommended a much larger number. but when you go down to the bare minimum, you put the lives of the men and women who are serving at greater risk. and so i wish he had listened more to the recommendations of general campbell and some of the others. >> rose: but was that numbertha. was it a question of two or 3,000 more or was it significantly large sner. >> well, first recommendation i'm told was 120,000. >> rose: that's almost think, been comfortable with say ten to 15. but again, it's very clear that what you need to do is withdraw on the base of conditions, not on calender. charlie, what just happened in kunduz is indicative of a
12:04 am
fundamental weakness that cannot be addressed unless we stay and give them the support they need. they don't have an air force. they don't have good intelligence. they don't have med evac capability, for example. there are so many things that we can do in support that we would have to do. >> rose: but people will raisetd this at the armed services committee. we have spent so much. we have given them so much. both in terms of treasurer and blood and they have not been able to train a very effective force so far. >> one reason is is because of the rapidity of with the drawal. another reason is, is that of course because so much of the sanctuary in pakistan exists. but could i also point out, when the sphwhreel to get everybody out, we've got 38,000 troops still in korea. we've got troops in germany. we've got troops in boss kneea. we have left stabilizing forces
12:05 am
behind ever since world war ii. american people don't mind because americans aren't dying or wounded. but we do expend a large amount of american treasurer to maintain stability in those places. and libya is the example of what happens when you don't. >> well, i'll come to libya in a moment. but do you think this say recognition of the failure of the obama administration in withdrawing all the troops from iraq? >> i think-- i think it's a contradiction to what the president had planned on. because he wanted to leave office and got us out of both wars. and by the way, remember, this was the good war in the present. >> afghanistan versus iraq. >> right. >> and so i believe that it is acknowledgment of the, and recognition of the need to have an american force there unless we want to see a destablization
12:06 am
and deter raise like we saw in iraq. the taliban are being given weapons by iran. isis is gaining a foothold and the sanctuary in pakistan still exists. it's a tough call. >> rose: let me turn to syriath. you have said the white house has no strategy. that it's action there are floundering. what should we be doing? >> well, a long time ago when the secretary of state hillary clinton and the secretary of defense leon pan eta and the director of the cia then general pet rayus recommended that we train and arm and equip the free syrian army. that was when the president was saying it's not a matter of whether but a matter of when bashar assad will leave. so since that refusal, and of course the red line was one of the sem nal moments in the history of the obama administration. my friend, that had a profound effect, not only in the middle east but around the world.
12:07 am
>> rose: meaning that the redlie president did nothing even though there was an agreement with the russians to get the chemical weapons out of syria. >> yeah, but-- first of all, they're still using some chemical weapons. but the point is, that the president didn't say if they cross this red line we're going have to intervene militarily. he didn't say we will cooperate with the russians to get it out. he said we're going to strike if you cross that red line. and he didn't. and that was what the message throughout the middle east. that's why, see now, the saudis just went to moss could you to buy $9 billion worth of weapons. u ae, what, $7 billion. quat ar bought $5 billion, from the russians. that's inferior equipment, because they are trying to adjust to the dramatic reduction or even end of american syria influential in the region. now we see vladimir putin
12:08 am
establishing himself as a major influence in the middle east. first time the russians have been able to do that since sadat kicked the russians out in 1973. >> rose: through the di plom se. >>-- kissinger reasons right, right, but again, if we had taken those steps at the time, then i think bashar assad would be gone now. i still don't think we should give up on the moderates because what vladimir putin is trying to do and what bashar assad is trying to do is face us with the choice of either isis or bashar assad. and obviously then show make some accommodation with bashar assad. >> that's exactly what vladimir putin said to me. i'm coming to defend bashar assad bawses it's the only strong government, the only government. there and we need a government to defeat isis. so let's do that firsz. and then we'll figure out what to do about a government. >> but charlie, i say with great respect, i understand putin's point of view. but what about the $240,000
12:09 am
syrians that have been butch erred by bashar assad. what about the millions of refugees much are we going to come to some accommodation with this guy? i just think it's-- right now we are training and equipping young men to go into syria to fight in the case of the program run by dod, it's been a complete collapse. >> and they announced that. >> yeah. but why did that collapse? because they made these young men swear they were only going to fight against isis. when these young men think their enemy is the guy that has butch erred everybody in their family. and so now we see the dod spoarnsed program which is still has some vy ability, excuse me, the ciabacked program which has some visibility, guess what. vladimir putin is attacking them and killing them. so what is the message to young men in syria. go bash dk dk we'll train you and you go back in. but we're not going to protect you. we're not going to protect you
12:10 am
from-- from vladimir putin slaughtering you? that's crazy. >> rose: what would be yourmessn fact, you knew that air strikes had killed people that the cia was support ing? >> i would say as hillary clinton has recommended, and david pet ray us before the senate armed services committee recommended, and that is we establish a no fly zone. and we have a buffer sphwhroan. and we call it also for refugees, and also a place where we could arm and train-- . >> rose: and if a russian planey gloarntion you shoot it down? >> i think it depens on how they did it and what they did. if they come in with evil intention to destroy these people, i would say they do so at their own risk. if it it is an overflight, then obviously you're talking about a different scenario. but if after we had declared a no fly zone and buffer zone to protect people and would we allow the russians to come in and bomb if? and by the way i bet you a hundred dollars to a doughnut
12:11 am
they never would if they thought they were going to be responded to. >> rose: so the question aboutpa because he sensed a vacuum. because he didn't think the united states was prepared with what was necessary to do? >> i think his primary reasons were one, bashar assad was very, very weak and was on the verge of being toppled by the moderates, were the major factor there. he wants to maintain his base in-- on the mediterranean, which would have been in jeopardy if bashar assad was overthrown. and third of all, he wants to be a major player in the middle east which he has obtained that role. >> rose: he is going to be amajt now. >> yup. >> rose: he will have a basethe. what's the solution for syria? because of all of the tragedy of what has happened to that country, with more than almost 300,000 deaths, with $4 million refugees, is it to find as the administration suggests, some
12:12 am
kind of transition government? is it necessary to figure out how we can work with the russians in order to defeat isis? because the director of the cia said we don't want to see isis marching too damascus. >> do you know how many times they have floated this idea of how we're going to work with the russians. do you think that vladimir putin is interested in removing bashar assad from power under any circumstances? and even if you did, do you think that putin would agree to someone who is not as close ally, who would make sure that he kept his base there and his major role? of course not. you know, tell va lad mir i will be more flexible. >> rose: you know what theadd--t that, that he is going to fail, and it will be em bar-- embarrassing. and that he will fail just the way he failed in afghanistan. >> i certainly hope they're correct. in the mean time, how many thousands innocent syrians have to die while he finds himself in
12:13 am
a quote quagmire, or as our secretary of defense, a guy i like very much, says unofficial, it's unprofessional. and the major goal seems to be to keep our airplanes from flying anywhere near russian airplanes while they kill the people we train and equip. there is a certain immorality here, charlie, the likes of which i have seldom seen. not never, but seldom. >> rose: okay so where would bek would be affective and on the ground? and would they need some kind of additional help from american troops in one way or the other? >> well, i think in the no fly zone and buffer zone i'm talking about, yes, they would need some american troops in the form of air controllers, some trainers. that kind of a assistance. and that would be perfectly legitimate to me. but also we need a lot more in iraq itself as we watch the russians. i'm sure you have seen this new
12:14 am
accommodation between a body and the russians that quote intelligent sharing. and the prime minister of iraq has just announced he would like to see russian air strikes in iraq as well. >> rose: and is there risk of a? >> there's always risk of a wider war. there are always risks in anything we do. but right now the path we are on is going to lead to the results that i told you that vladimir putin's ambitions are. and the continued growth and rise of isis, and continued russian increasing influence in the region. which can not be good. >> rose: braz insky said that russia cease and desis and to say that any repetition will prompt a immediate retaliation. >> i am a great admirer of brezinsky but i think that if you could do-- without being-- you could state we're going to defend these areas.
12:15 am
we're not going to let you come in and barrel bomb these people. we're going to train and equip free syrian army people. this is a no fly zone, my friends. and this is a buffer zone. and we're going to care for these people. then if vladimir putin flew in, and then you could expand from there. isis isn't that strong. isis is strong because they're succeeding. vladimir putin is presiding over the weakest economy perhaps in all of europe. it's not as if these people are invincible. it's only because they have a goal and a strategy and we don't. >> rose: there are people whoart the rush arnes fall on their own sword, that if in fact they are there, they will find out that they are no better at solving the mess in syria than anybody else. is and it will end up the same way afghanistan ended up for them when they went home, having been defeated by the mujahideen. >> i might remind you that we poured arms into the mujahideen. >> we supported them, yes,
12:16 am
indeed. >> which is something i wish we hadn't done. but my question, how many people are we prepared to watch, how many men, women and children are we willing to watch being slaughtered by the russians and bashar assad and drive millions of refugees into europe and then eventually the united states. >> rose: you are say stg a morao do whatever is necessary, including boots on the ground to stop them. >> some, now remember, i'm not talking about 100,000. i'm not talking about the surge. i'm talking about some boots on the ground. >> rose: when you look at libyae we supported going into libya to overthrow qaddafi, and now you have a failed state. and you have a failed state with isis making gains. >> uh-huh. >> rose: what are the lessons o? >> the first lesson is that the first step is defeat of, is the changing government. we still have 38,000 troops in korea, as i mentioned. but most importantly, is, that you have to help them build a nation.
12:17 am
we walked away. we completely walked away from libya. joe leebe-- leiberman, lindsey graham and i wrote a piece right after. you have to help them secure the weapons caches, you have to help with society building. you have to help them with those who are wounded. you've got to do things to help these countries make a transition. if you walk away from any country that has been governed by nothing but a dictator, look at south korea after the arm i stis in south korea. so i'm saying that it didn't have to turn out that way in libya. it was because we completely walked away. i called up leon paneta and said send a hospital ship. they have 20,000 wounded in libya. send a hospital ship in the bay of tripoli and help them treat their wounded. it will be the greatest pr thing you could do. nope, they couldn't do it. they didn't do anything. so when you say that these things end up the wrong way, they end up the wrong way because we don't follow through. >> rose: and you have saideverys
12:18 am
winning. you did say that. >> in the short term he clearly. is look at what vladimir putin, as i said, he has been able to insert himself into the middle east in a way that it hasn't been-- how long since 1973. and he is playing a major role in a lot of places. he's been able to dismember ukraine. he's been able to take cry mea and the base he cherishes. he is putting enormous pressure on the baltic countries, and even on-- nor way and sweden. >> rose: there are those whoarg, that it has built up and wisely built up its military, not withstanding its circumstances, so it has a much more effective military than it did say five years ago. >> his goals are much larger than a well trained military. >> rose: there say recognitionty than he has ever had. >> absolutely. you look at the investment they've made. look at their latest aircraft. look at their surface to air
12:19 am
capabilities. look at their operation when they invaded georgia and it's kind of hand fitted, a lot of mistakes. compare that with what they did in cry mea. it's vasesly different. they've gotten a lot better. and their economy is fundamentally weak. in history, when dictators have weak economies, and problems at home, what do they do. >> rose: they create wars.what . >> rose: benghazi, speaking ofl. has the committee been totally discredited in your judgement? >> i think there's been attempts to. and i cannot judge what the committee has done until the final rendering of before anybo, let's see the results. >> rose: but the argument is it, it's now about her e-mails and everything else.
12:20 am
>> well, i think that every major investigation that you and i have seen leads in different directions. certainly watergate was a great example of that. >> rose: but is the republicanc? as secretary clinton comes to testify? >> oh, i think their conclusions at the end of all this, because at the conclusions that they reach, whether the american people believe they are legitimate or not will be the ultimate test. >> rose: what do you believe?i . i know this, that people don't come to spontaneous demonstrations with mortars and rpgs. i happened to be on a sunday morning show right after the now national sceurlt advisor, susan rice, talked about hateful videos and spontaneous demonstrations. and i said this. nobody brings rpg and a mortar to a spontaneous demonstration. and even when the bodies came home, i was at andrews. and hillary clinton told the
12:21 am
families well, we'll get these people that made this hateful video. by that time it was obvious that there was no hateful video. that this was a plan and well carried out attack. >> rose: there was a hatefulvid. but in fact you are saying that not withstanding, it wasn't that. that they clearly-- you think they clearly went there with the weapons in the beginning, in the beginning. >> absolutely, absolutely. i believe that. i know that. and chris stevens and i, by the way, are quite friendly. and it is well-known that chris stefns sent back many warningses, severe warnings about the breakdown of security. >> rose: and secretary clinton't my responsibility to be in charge of the security. it is not what the secretary of state does. >> when the ship runs aground, the captain says it wasn't my-- i wasn't in charge of and a half gaition. the nafer gater was. the person, we-- . >> rose: if it happens on yourw. >> exactly. >> rose: so thereforeif-- what-e held accountable?
12:22 am
>> well, what did she know. when did she know it. why didn't she know it. all of those questions. the usual. you have seen, you and i have seen these investigations before on certain occasions. and the famous watergate about nixon, i guess wa, did he know and when did he know it. is plies here. >> rose: howard was hod that. and so we'll see, i think. what i would ask is let it play out. i'm not familiar with what they're doing. i do believe that they've been pretty well, and in controlling leaks. i think they've done a pretty good job there, given the-- sieve like nate of washington. >> it will be an interesting session when she comes. >> yes, indeed. >> but i was there, i was on the foreign relations committee at the time when she went through that tie raid about who cares. what difference does it make if they are out for a walk. that was a disgraceful performance on their part. >> rose: americans were killed.e
12:23 am
said before she made that statement. let me turn to iran. the iranians are now beginning to dismantle. what is your expectation? >> they are beginning to dismantle. they have just tested an icbm. they are now pouring in to iran. >> rose: to see if they have th? >> an icbm usually carries a new clear weapon. they are now pouring in to syria to fight with russian air power. >> rose: so are you sayingiranit iranians. >> iranian revolutionary. >> ku ds forces are pouring in. >> under the. >> they are still supporting and supplying the hu dus in yemen. >> rose: so what should we doabd at greement which does not deal with iranian behavior? >> well, i think that it's very
12:24 am
wrong headed to take an arms agreement and treat it in a vacuum. especially when everybody knows that barack obama's ambition from the beginning when he refused to stand up for the demonstrators in 2009 was this new arrangement with iran where we would have a whole new changed landscape in the middle east. and obviously, when you see the iranians behavior, that is not happening. and now they will have a hundred billion or so to reinforce the hu dis test the weapons and all of that. >> rose: listen to this, this iy good friend who you speak to often and especially during the time in leading up to running are for president. >> many american policy on iran has loved to the center of its policy. they insist they will take a stand against jihaddist and imperrist designs by iran and deal with sternly with the new clear agreement but seems also
12:25 am
passionately committed to the quest for brunging about a reversal of the hostile-- hostile aggressive dimension of iranian policy through historic evolution bolstered by negotiation. and then he goes on to say that if, in fact, they are looking to an analogy with china, it doesn't work. >> as he points out in that article, there were 40 some russian divisions on the china border. >> rose: yeah, this wae prekrept. this is why barack obama refused to say a word on behalf of the dem straiters in 2009 after a corrupt election in tehran. so it seems that at least so far, it's a bund antley clear that there is not really any change in iranian behalf-- behavior. >> so with respect to israel and with respect to iran and the united states' rep with israel s it at a low point? >> oh, clearly. it is very much at a low point. and i tawblged to the israelis all the time. they're very disillusioned and
12:26 am
very upset. by the way, just for a second, this new thing where people are going around and stabbing. this is the quint esence, charlie, of asymmetric warfare. motivate somebody who is willing to give up their lives. kill as many people as you can before you are killed. boy, that's hard to cover. >> could it lead to another inte fatah? >> rose: i think you havealreadf it, but this new wrinkle, rather than stone throwing and that kind of stuff, you know are you going to die but kill as many israelis as you can before then. that's awfully hard to counter. are you going to have-- one of these, just had the killing, had a press i.d. on. i mean this is-- . >> rose: one of the palestiniand a press i.d. >> yeah. >> rose: let me turn topolitics. you are running for re-election. >> yes, sir. >> rose: what is it like to run. >> the temper of the public is very andry.
12:27 am
>> rose: at washiw recovery of the economy, particularly where middle income and lower income. >> rose: and they have a reason. >> yes, and they have a reason to be angry at congress because they don't see the, any real results that would directly assist them to better their lives. they are seeing a degree of antagonism between the two parties which is maybe higher than you and i have seen. and so they want to clean everybody out. >> rose: speaking of that,donal. >> well, look, he's leading. he's again struck a nerve. and he has, you know, played on what the situation as you and i just discussed. >> rose: immigration and otheri. >> i mean is immigration policy, you were out here struggling to help lat-- to get latino votes. and people will sairks the republican party, is throwing away any opportunity to have
12:28 am
hispanic and latinnor support because the perception is that the republican party holds the view that donald trump does. >> well, that is true to a significant degree, that there is that feeling. look at the percentage of the vote that has stedly decreased since george w bush took a-- well, ronald reagan used to take a majority. how it has decreased election after election. so i think it's pretty clear that we are not attracting sufficient percentage. >> rose: it's more than that.yo. >> let me just say this. if you look at the demographics of the growth of the hispanic population, no party is going to win unless, if they are consigned to a very small percentage of that vote. by 2035, in arizona the majority party will be hispanic. it is just the growth of the party.
12:29 am
and by the way, the small business, prolife, promilitary, all of the things that-- . >> rose: and create jobs.exactl. small business. >> i was just over the mer cado the other day. there is a hundred and-- there is 52 new small businesses located there. who are the best small business people in america. >> rose: if donald trump is attt the head of the republican ticket, and the polls say that he will, if you look at the polls today. >> yup. >> rose: if he is the head ofthe presidential campaign of 2016, will that threaten the re-election of john mccain? >> i think it's bound to have an effect on everybody. >> rose: but will it be anegati. >> i would think this it would be minimized because i have had such a long relationship with the his tannic community here in arizona. but i don't think it would make it-- . >> rose: any easier.would make . but i think it could have an effect nationwide. one of these guys that does these statistics that said that
12:30 am
ronald reagan got a certain percentage of hispanic votes and if there were that many now that it would be hard for republicans now a days to win a general election with the percentages of hispanic vote due to the demographic increases of numbers of hispanics. >> rose: is the john mccain ofsn in 2 thousand, the same john mccain today? >> oh, yeah, oh, sure, yeah. i don't-- look, charlie-- charlie, there is no point in me changing now. >> rose: and this.when you look. >> that's one of the reasons why i'm going to have a tough fight. >> rose: because are you astrai. >> yes, sir. >> rose: so there is also this,d career, what are you most proud of. what has john mccain, beyond the sense of the family tradition of service to the country, your grandfather and your father, and you, both in war and peace what is it? >> well, one i'm most proud of
12:31 am
my military service for having its strength of my come rads to refuse an offer of coming home early. in public life, i think that i have been most effective and can be effective in the future on national security. being chairman of the center for armed services committee has enormous responsibilities and authorities. and that is reason why i'm running again, is because i see that we are, and part of the problem vep kans. that only care about deficits, that we are in is he questions traition now. we need to care for the men and women. we need to train them. we need to give them the weapons they need. we need to give the benefits they need. we need a strategy when you are quoting henry kissinger. when he and george shulings an mad line albright tefd before the armed services committee, they all agreed on one thing. the world has not been in more turmoil since the end of world war 2, and by the way we now
12:32 am
have the largest number of refugees since the end of world war ii. >> rose: thank you for allowingr home state. >> thank you, you're always welcome back here to arizona. i know you will be here a little while longer. please spend a lot of money while you're here. thank you. >> rose: i don't have a lot ofm. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: back in a moment.we'll. we're at the walter cronkite school of journalism and mass communications where they are doing some remarkable things as they look at journalism, almost a laboratory for how journalism can have an impact. back in a moment, stay with us. >> rose: walter cronkite oncesa, our job is only to hold up a mirror, to tell and show the public what has happened. while the mini landscape continues to evolve, this vital task remains the same. here with me are three who bring honor to our noble profession. eric newton say cronkite school of innovation chief. he previously spent 15 years at the john s and james l knight foundation. chris callahan say cronkite
12:33 am
school's founding dean. he's also vice probu s of the downtown phoenix campus and c.e.o. of arizona pbs. steve capus is my friend and executive producer of the cbs evening news with scott pelley and executive editor of cbs news. i'm pleased to have them here. welcome all, even though it was your home, thank you for letting steve and i come all the way from new york to be here. and steve has been here before and it's really an honor for me to be here and to meet you guys and meet your students. where are we? and in journalism today, with the impact of new digital technology. how is it impacting us? and what are the lessons and the challenges? >> from a teaching perspective, huge challenges. because the basic skills of journalism are arguably more important now than ever. to be able to identify a story, the ability to report it
12:34 am
accurately, fairly, objectively an be ail to write with real writing that can compel people to read or listen to or watch a story. more important now than ever. layering on top of that are a whole series of new dij stal tools that our students and young journalists and journalists going forward have the ability to use. but they have to learn them, and how to learn them well. >> they can help tell the story but you still have to write the story and still appreciate the pictures and how to put the picturing to. >> the pown daition remains the same. >> rose: eric?i think the digits turning journalism upside down and inside out. they are why we need journalism is the same. but who journalists can be, what stories are, you know, when, where and how people get news, all of that is changing. the digital age is a major new age in human communication. so while everything chris is saying is right, the fundamentals of storytelling are not changing.
12:35 am
so many things are, that if we don't pay attention to those, we're going to not just experience sort of the decline of current-- of current traditional media but a missed opportunity and connecting with the next generations. >> rose: so what is tu want tod? you have used the idea of it being not only a lab, you know, but a place not unlike medicine where you really do get a kind of training that you may not have gotten in the past. >> right, so charlie, when i was at the knight foundation, i worked with about a hundred journalism schools around the country. and the idea that it is becoming the best idea for teaching jowrmists is i mersive education. it's like a teaching hospital. so you know, at a teaching hospital, medical students can save lives. they can you know birth babies. but they also develop new techniques and technologies. in burn treatments, heart transplants prot o kales, infant
12:36 am
icu came out of teaching hospitals. and our idea is that students have the capacity not just to do journalism while they're in journalism school but to learn, to test and try new ways of doing journalism. no ways of engaging can communities. and then they are better prepared not just for the job when they graduate, but for their whole career after that. >> rose: you have been executiv, president of nbc news. you are executive producer and additional tight titles at cbs news. is it different today then when are you the executive producer at nightly news? >> it is different. you can't have this explosion of technology and distribution platforms and say that we're going to do exactly the same job that we were doing back in the '80s, 890-- '90s. things have changed. there is-- the information age say wonderful time. i think if what this really comes down to is a quest for
12:37 am
relevance. we want to stay relevant to news consumers. and so we have to recognize that by the time they come around to a place like the evening news, they know what's going on. there is a lot of commodotied information. i don't want to be in the commodity business. i want to be in the business of offering something new and interesting and compelling. >> rose: but i see the sameelem. they have a white house correspondent and you have a state house correspondent and you have correspondents around the world. >> true. and you know, from those types of deployments, we are in pursuits of the same types of things. and i would say that in this age you can kind of do whatever journalism you want. you know, i've chosen to be at a network, where i think what our quest for relevance is by presenting information that is of a high-- of unquestionable caliber and you know, high quality, and unique. enterprise journalism. that white house reporter has to
12:38 am
have something that's different, it has to advance the story. and the competitive situation has become so much greater. however, we still do rely on the fundamentals. and i want the brand of cbs news to continue to mean something. and that is where we are actually-- absolutely in partnership with some of the great schools like arizona state. or my alma mater, temple. you know, they have to give us journalists who are ready to go. otherwise we're not going to be able to turn out the kind of quality work that is required. >> rose: i want to come back to. but has the path for journalists today become different than it used to be? i mean for example, often you know you would get a job in the 150th market, if it was television, in the 150th market, then maybe go to the 50th market and then you were in a major market. then you might go to the network. or ask that the path now or is
12:39 am
it different? >> there are more. so those are still paths. and those paths in legacy media still exist. but there is so much more in the news ecosystem today. that there are so many different paths. and the skill sets that the students are learning today in digital news are so transfeverrable to not only news but quite frankly different industries because everybody is in the business of trying to tell their own story, trying to tell it accurately and powerfully. >> everybody has a podcast and so many other ways that you can, in a sense, create a different kind of newscast. >> sure. and if you know some of the tools and technologies that are coming out now, you can, even as a young person, get hired in an entry position at the best news organizations in the country. because news organizations have to change with the times. and if graduating students are prepared to help with the newest ways of doing things, things that can save a lot of time. things that can be better and
12:40 am
help us do journalism faster and better, then they can become extremely valuable to the big news organizations. they used to take a long time to get to "the new york times." now you can get there right out of school working in digitally related jobs. >> rose: today i watch you atth. i mean you're making tough choices as to which stories you're going to lead with. what is going to be the arc that you are going to lead and you have a variety of different dine kinds of stories am but you do something really interesting to me. right after what happened in oregon, i assume you and your collegeses said this story deserves more than just one-story. and it deserves more than just whatever the change each day is. it deserves analysis and perspective. talk about what lead to that decision. >> we created a segment called voices against violence. and the idea was to go a little
12:41 am
bit deeper beyond the day's headlines and talk to some people. there are no shortage of opinions of about how we can break this cycle of violence. and we wanted to get people, this, we did not want this to be a vehicle just for an antigun control or progun control or-- we wanted to get a lot of different voices in. and talk to some people who have been involved, painfully so, family members who have lost loved ones. we've talked to law enforcement types. and this is a commitment that we have made. we want to keep this going, i don't see any reason to stop. we want to keep going with a solution's based discussion. and they've been very powerful. but the reason around it is i think this is where the conversation at the dinner tables or in the lunchrooms all across the country, there is so much passion in those
12:42 am
conversations, it's not just congress where the conversations are taking place. this is happening everywhere. and if we're going to stay relevant, than we have to be a-- convening point for those types of conversations. >> rose: you once said that whae a mindset rather than a skill set. >> yeah. >> rose: what is the mindset?th, of course. but the mindset is for, we think success, is when those students leave here, not their first job or sk or third job, but their ability to grow throughout their career and the mindset of change. the mindset of these young people when we go to send them to steve and others, that they are going to have the ability ability to drive change within those news organizes and to embrace change. >> i also hope, and i'm totally with and proudly work at the same place that he does, it is a sense of values about news and values about a sense of right
12:43 am
and wrong. >> that's always our starting point. and that is, and that remains true throughout. >> rose: or important or notimp. >> exactly. at a place that has walter con cite-- cronkite's name on the building is a little easier for us to do. >> rose: how does this happen.ii won't get into detail but su fies to say, walter was good friends with the gentleman who owned the cbs affiliate for decades and decades. at the time, it was early 1980s it was the late tom chawnsy who was with a group of media leaders in the valleywh said how can we help. at the time what was a small regional and some what struggling journalism school. said well, being affiliated with a great journalism-- journalist. and of course walter is the first name. and walter had only one condition. and that was that journalism remain a journalism school, not a school of media or commune kaikses, journalism was the driving element. and that it focused on-- .
12:44 am
>> rose: has that changed?not a. the focus on journalism remains. that is our standard. that is our values. >> rose: he would come andpresen interest. >> he would, and interact with students a lot it was actually a wonderful, wonderful thing to see. with a hundred, 200 students in a room with walter regaling them with stories. and as you know because you knew him well, he was always much more interested in their stories than he was in telling his own stories. >> rose: the great secret ofwalw but not many, or not enough, is his curiosity. i mean he was known for being an anchorman and for hard news. but his fascination, show he invited the nation's curiosity about space. and about medz medicine. and about the universe. there was this about-- and also, you know, about celebrity and the rest of it. i mean he enjoyed the company of people, you know, that he admired because of their skills as a musician or as a filmmaker
12:45 am
or as a cultural figure. >> and if you had two students to consider for a job and they were equal story tellers, you would want the one who was creative. the one who was curious, the one who was adaptable. the one who had more than storytelling skills. they had something plus. and i think that's what makes the difference between the great journalists who tell people things they absolutely need to know, to run their governments and their lives. and the ones who aren't as great. >> rose: for a long time peoplee demise of the evening news. yet at the same time, at least the three newscast, nbc, abc, cbs, add fox to that, reach an incredible, what, 15 million people. >> yeah. i mean the audience is a significant audience. there is no question about it. we have been hearing about the imminent demise of the evening newscasts as long as i have been doing this. but i don't see it. i think that there is always
12:46 am
going to be a home for a place that does some arize the day's news. that gives context, gives perfect-- perspective, unique reporting, vifght reporting. and in the places that are true to their brand, will survive. >> rose: what i think isimportae should-- what this has done is freed us up from realtime. you can watch the evening newscast if you are there in front of a television at 6:30. but there are other places you can watch it. >> that's true. but you have to remember that. >> you don't want me to say that, do you? >> i don't mind that. i actually like that. because my point is, you're not going to get somebody to watch something that has got a short shelf life. if all the news that we do on the evening news is only kind of a sum are of what took place, and there's not any real investigative reporting or something unique reporting, thren there is no reason to go to the dvr and watch it.
12:47 am
because you've already known the headlines. you were riding in your car on the way home and you had all news radio on. or whatever. you are, you know, you got a steady stream online all day long. so i'm okay if somebody want totion dvr the broadcast because i think we will make it worth their investment. >> i don't think they're going to watch tai week from tomorrow. >> it's not just that. you can go to a cbs news app now and what can you see? >> yeah. >> rose: you can see a reportfr. you can see a report from. >> you can see a streaming broadcast. you have cbs then is a 24 hour streaming channel of cbs news programming. you can go and you request go back in archives. you can watch 60 minutes. you can watch any of the broadcasts, you can watch cbs this morning. and i think it's well worth the time. but this is as much a nod to our audience and making sure that we're staying relevant. because they will say well, i get my news from my phone. and if that's true, you have
12:48 am
to. >> if that's true, see, i get my news from my phone. >> then we better be there. >> that's my point. >> there are different things at the same time. on the one hand we kosm from the 20th century when the television networks were the giant gate keepers. and nobody was a bigger gate keeper than walter cronkite. and now the fence is gone. the gate is gone. but a lot of people, millions of people are still walking through where the gate used to be. and some of it is habit. some of it, that is how at the get their news. but some of it is content. it's what is there. and it gives them meaning in a world full of data, full of information. it's islands of meaning. we continue to provide that, we'll also be valuable. >> it is now a two-way street. you know, for all the years when walter was doing the broadcast, the broadcast networks had this attitude that we were about to present the news. nd now the news. >> right.
12:49 am
>> right? and it was a one-way street, transmitted were cbs and the other networks. and the audience was told to kind of respect it because it's network programming. and they didn't really care as much about what people were saying, about what we were doing. but you better care right now. and you better engage in the conversations that the social media outlets are allowing you to have. >> so this is your point about relevancy. >> yes, relevancy and it's a two-way street. >> it's not just one way going out any more. >> and that is an institutional conversation. but it is also with individual journalisting and one of the things we're trying to teach is audience matters, in a way that maybe didn't matter 20 years ago. >> and they have a voice. >> exactly. i would write a story and send it out and that was if. >> i didn't pay any attention to who read it or whatever. and now we need to make sure those individuals reporters are, they know who is reading it. when they are reading it, how they are reading it, why they are reading it. >> we talked about public
12:50 am
broadcasting and one of the things different about the arizona public broadcasting is here at the cronkite school there is something called the pin bureau, republic insight is say general outreach program to everybody who wants to be involved in the news. they want to be sources for the news. they want to talk to reporters. so you amass thousands of people in a data base and it helps, in an organized way, you know, being able to be in touch with the community. and that kind of thing which is not possible 20 years ago. >> the phenomenon of jon stewart, recently left the comedy show. but left it with great, great respect for his influence. with a young audience who came to him. what do you say about the notion of how a comedy program gained such respect among a young audience-- audience? >> well, they were true jokes.
12:51 am
there was a lot of truth in them. and you know-- . >> rose: as in sattire.yeah, it. you know, a different generation had saturday night live. and you know. >> rose: still does.and even ths there is john oliver on hb, o. and so this mixture has always been-- . >> rose: here is what isinteres. is that most of what they do has to do with news. most of what the-- even the jokes are about playing off of what is happening today. i mean it is the news that, in fact, news is what serves them as their material. >> i don't see that as a substitute for hard news. i see it as a way to get people interested. >> rose: and then there is thisn bringing in a younger audience. >> i welcome any time anybody comes into the space and is
12:52 am
committed to serious journalism and wants to try to expand our audience and our reach. >> rose: and meets the standard. >> yes. i would hope, you know, that is what you want to see. because the quickest thing, the quickest way to doom yourself to irrelevance in the news space is to not be a stick eller about the fundamentals. and so a commitment to-- i think stay true to quality, stay true to the things that the audience expects of you. don't let the audience down. then you will be fine. and i think there is, this is a great time because there's so much opportunity and so many new outlets out there like vice. and it's-- i think it's great. because we're conditioned. we're conditioning people to seek news and information. that's a good thing for all of us. >> and for us to look at, these different types of experimentation, and are there lessons that we can draw and bring into our news korgs, not
12:53 am
necessarily replicate. >> thank you for inviting me. john mccain let the cat out of the bag, why i'm here. but thank you for inviting me. i want to say to those journalism students and those people, that this is a really wonderful way to spend your life. the i mean the idea of getting up in the morning and asking yourself what is the r and what is relevant and what is interesting. and what is compelling. and can i go tell a story about that it is remarkable. and as fast as you can develop the scilts to do that, they will enhance your preeshation of what you are doing. better writing, better comparisons, better analysis, all of that is part of the growing life of a journalist. i have found myself a long time in this business working with a remarkable group of people. and if you out there you into the quality of the men and women that i have had the great
12:54 am
fortune to work with, you would be proud of the people that are bringing you the news. these are really hardworking people who care. who care about the story. who spent a lot of time maiblging sure they got it right. sometimes we fail, but so often we are doing things above and beyond the call of duty but it is the duty, the duty to get it right. we often like to get it first but most of all we want to get it right. and i've had the great pleasure and honor to work with a series of people who have worked alongside me,ee vet has been with me on the program that first gained attention for me, charlie rose, jeff fagger at 60, executive producer there. chris lick executive producer of cbs this morning. and steve capus at cbs evening news. all of them have been my colleges and pie boss and have helped me, whatever it is that i have done, has enabled me to
12:55 am
come here and be honored by you, those people that i have worked alongside me, deserve thises every bit as much as i have. and it has given me much more than i have given it. thank you for allowing us to be with you from arizona state university and the walter cronkite school of journalism and mass communication. good night. >> for more about this program and earlier episodes visit us online at and charlie .com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh
12:56 am
12:57 am
12:58 am
12:59 am
1:00 am
♪ >> announcer: this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and sue herera. feeling blue. ibm reports its lowest quarterly revenue since 2002. and its shares slide initially in afterhours trading. securing your nest egg. how much retirement income will you need? it may not be the amount you think. fighting the flu. it's big business for some very big companies. tonight begins the first of our three-part series. all that and more tonight on "nightly business report" for monday october 19th. good evening, everyone and welcome. case of the blues for big blue. ibm's revenue fell for the 14th straight quarter, missing analyst estimates. the world's largest technology services company said it was hurt by a strong dollar and by the sale of low margin busine


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on