tv Charlie Rose PBS May 11, 2012 12:00pm-1:00pm EDT
>> rose: welcome toto the program. we begin this evening with a conversation about the future of media with jeff bewkes, the ceo of time/warner. >> what i care about and what everyone in our company cares about is continuing this wonderful journey we've been on where we have this voice, whether it's not just journalism, you know. having good information in the world is obviously good for everybody. having good entertainment is not just entertainment, it's also up lifting and enlightening. you can imagine a comedy or a drama, it's fiction but it changes the way you think. it changes how you see other people. it changes your view of the world. all of that which comes to some extent from mass media and into targeting media, like this show.
>> rose: right. >> allows people to show us, it awe theallows them to interact h other people and bring the world closer together. so having a strong company, and we are, that is succeeding in doing that, and then keeping not just our competitive access to talented stories that we get by virtue of our success but creating these evolution, these models of revolution to go into worldwide internet distribution, in other words to make the diversity and economic support for free expression sustainable and not visit wiped out. >> rose: we continue this efnevening with yogi berra, ron guidry and harvey araton, driving mr. yogi, ron guidry and baseball's greatest gift. >> people asked me why is yogi such a beloved character. ron says it in the book that yogi is probably the most beloved person in america. we can't say that about the
president, we can't say that about mitt romney. most entertainers, kin kind of e people. but you know, if you ask does anybody out there not like yoag eerks the answe -- yogi, the ans most certainly no. i think that's the beauty of their relationship. because i can say here's what i think. yogi's got a wonderful demeanor about him. he's the least pretentious celebrity that i've ever been around in close to 40 years of covering sports. >> rose: jeff bewkes, yo rr ona,be r berra, ron guidry and harvey araton when we continue.
>> rose: jeff bewkes is here. he's the chairman and ceo of time/warner, the company that's the global leader in media and entertainment. it has businesses in film, television, network, television programs and publishing. you might be familiar with a few on of their iconic brands such as warrener brothers, tbs, "time" magazine, sports illustrated. time/warner is poised to prosper in a challenging environment in the entertainment industry. jeff bewkes is leading its transformation through the digital age. i am pleased to have him here at this table for the first time. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: you don't know too much of this. >> not too much. >> rose: how is time/warner different today than it was when you took over as ceo? >> well, we focused the company and we focused on what we think that we're best at. so as you mention, whether it's warrewarner brothers in films oo
or turner networks or "time" magazine, each of those is the number one industry in which they compete in. each of them makes the most money. the result over the last three years is we've doubled the earnings of time/warner. given the environment we've been in, there's a pretty good course that we're on. >> rose: has there been some disinvestments. >> yes. we did separate out our cable distribution company. we owned a big cable company and aol. we didn't sell them, what we did is we gave them to our shareholders. and if you are one of those shareholders that now owns time/warner cable or separately, or aol, you've gone up in value considerably versus where it started. >> rose: where do you want time/warner to be that it's not? >> i want it to be more profitable even than it is and i'd like it to continue to cement the position that we actually have. it's not that we're not, we are the strongest voice, the most
consistent teller of compelling stories. so whether it's telling a story in journalism, whether you're telling a story in entertainment, you know, having it be fresh, having it be something that appeals to people across the planet because now these days everything that is made that's electronic, even a magazine goes across the planet. you can't really succeed unless everything you do is relevant on a global basis. and it's still fresh, got to feel authentic. >> rose: what's the challenge of the digital platform with you. >> well the challenge is, there's actually more opportunity than challenge. and if you test that by thinking about what's happened recently, the last 20 years has had this explosion in television. and when you and i grew up, i think we're roughly the same age that we work in a world of broadcast networks in the united
states, that was essentially true in most countries. and that world was free tv, supported by advertising, and therefore everything was aimed at getting the biggest mass audience, less common denominator and that shapes a certain kind of program. if you then look at the last 20 or 30 years starting in the united states, there was the advent of choice, the advent of tv you could pay for. so things like hbo, cnn, mtv rose up and now they're happening all over the world. the result is that you have much higher quality tv, you've got much more diverse subject matter. you still have mass appeal, you've got some narrower appeal things. and all the signs that you look for in a business, you know, revenue, subscribers, viewership, ratings, programming investment, the kind of talent writers and directors work in tv
now. everything's strongly up, tremendous resources going into tv. not just the united states but everywhere. so as that happens, tv's getting better and it's really a golden age of tv. >> rose: you said that a number of times. why the golden age? >> well, because it was idea in the 50's and 60's when it started. it was new so people thought hey this is great, it's tv, i don't have to go out to the movie theatres. you ha jack had jack parr, the y show. things we remember. it was billed because nobody had seen that before. now we have that, modern investigatorversions of that ane literally hundreds of channels and shows that are excellent with the best, the biggest stars from what used to be the big screen at film that are working there. huge production budgets. some of the budgets for tv shows are bigger than some of the budgets for film. >> rose: and you can do
things on television you can't do in film. >> yes. >> rose: you can have a longer time, stretched over several nights, you can do a whole range of things. >> think of some of the dramas like sopranos on hbo where you can get a much longer. >> rose: the most interesting thing and it's not just hbo and time/warner is really creative people are attracted to work in television today because they can tell stories better than they can in the movies. because the audience is different. >> yes, yes. so there's more, you'll have big actors doing huge worldwide film releases and then they'll come and work on a project. in tv it's much more particular audience and you can make money if we're going to the money part. whether you've got a mass appeal or narrow appeal thing. the fact you can pay for it makes a huge difference. and the thing that resonates with me on that is hbo because when that came on the scene as tv worth paying for, not interested in ratings, not
interested in advertising support, it changes everything. >> rose: is it in some ways a model for the future that netflix and other people see as their ticket to the future. >> yes. you know, if imitation is a form of flattery, then that's what that is. >> rose: it will take your audience away because it has the highest whatever it is in terms of down load in prime time. >> yes. it hasn't actually -- >> rose: it doesn't scare you. >> look, we have competition and always v when hbo grew up, the competition was abc, nbc and cbs. that was thought to be pretty daunting. we've now moved to another place. netflix has done a good job on its interface and starting out with those that you get in the mail and now the service you can get streamed to your house. but the reason that we welcome the competition is what you can get on hbo today or tnt is
fresh, big appeal, hit programming. and what you can get on those services, whether it's netflix or amazon is basically older stuff, although there's a lot of it. >> rose: do you believe that people will pay for content? you give them content, they'll pay for it. >> i do. >> rose: advertising supported content ain't enough. >> yes. now look, there's a huge place and size and value to advertising supported contented. so you think we should, you get tight, abc, nbc and cbs are now restored and that's a good thing. but in the business we've come to call the cable tv network business whether it's hbo or tnt, all those new entrants, the fact that you've got subscription support and advertising or you got both, allows you to have more of a
diversity of the type of program you're trying to do. you don't have to go for 20 million people for every show that you make. and so what you've got, you've got the spectrum from free broadcast network tv to the tnt to hbo or show time which is no adds, yoads, you just pay for i. if you go over to the subscription-supported program, they don't care what the rating is. if you're at hbo and you're making game of sopranos, enthusiasm, girls, vehement and and -- veep and news room. >> rose: because you have revenues. >> at hbo we don't have advertising. we don't care what the rating is because we don't make any money based on that. in fact, in these, staying with hbo because i want to keep it straight, that lets you make some shows for big ratings and it makes them shows where you
know. when you're making a show and casting a show, you're not going for the biggest rating. you're going for the correct audience or the full treatment of whatever that subject is. >> rose: apple is the largest market cap company in the world. do you worry about that, do you worry about they have the resources to be competitive in a different way. >> yes. you have to worry about everything and make sure you see which new animals in the forest, what are they going to do. >> rose: these are new animals in the forest. >> yes. >> rose: in a big way. bears. >> so there's the part where it's the challenge and then there's the part depending on what it is that they do. they could be very helpful because, let's take apple. so apple has gone and done some extraordinary things that i think conventional wisdom would
say they shouldn't have been able to do. because in the world of commodity electronics and all the things they are being produced, tv sets and all that are not thought of something you can get an advantage in, they have created devices that are well designed, consumer enter face that's fantastic, and as a result they are basically supporting people buying or renting content and being able to use it at a more powerful way. so as they're doing that because that's where they, sell and that's what they can do on a global basis, that does not mean if you're asking apple, that they want to make television shows or movies or create networks because it's not what they are doing. they are essentially like companies that made television sets. >> rose: sony was at one time. >> yes. so if you have better tv sets in the house or better tv sets you can carry around and furk take
in our case -- if you take in our case tv or film or even magazines that are working great on viewership, readership, people love their connection to hbo or people magazine, and if you can now get all of that on demand, either on a big screen in your living room or on whatever you're walking around with and it's just more immediate, you can go deeper into what you want and it doesn't cost any more money, then what you have basically is a support system for the content that's being made. >> rose: but there was all those that's called horizontal or vertical integration. >> yes, the horizontal works better. >> rose: i know it does. you can argue that. >> i never understood whether you had to make a higher arche of content versus distribution. both of them had a role to play. if everybody focuses on what they do best, if the device
makers like apple makes the best device and the best interface. if the social company, facebook or the search company google focuses on that, they're going to do better doing those things well than they are trying to go and make the next tv show or the next harry potter. >> rose: let me turn to a couple things. one is network programming. is hulu a threat? >> hulo is u a threat. what hulu is abc, nbc and fox that's that'.>> rose: that's w. >> the main programming is that and then they go and license other things. and now you get the two levels of hulu. there's one part where it's all free. i assume your part is in there. >> rose: right. >> there's another set of programs you have to pay a prescriptiosubscription fee for.
they've got a lot of people tuning in to watch the shows because they're on demand and there are less commercials on them. >> rose: and it's not real time. >> yes, exactly because that's how people want to watch their favorite show. it could be you know law and order, it could be a show on nbc yesterday. the bad news they're trying to figure out is that people watching the shows there, how do they pay for the show or the network? because they've got to get the advertising to support it as well as it does on television. and increasingly, they're asking for a subscrichio subscription r television network and there's no reason for anybody to pay that if it's being given away free on the internet on demand. >> rose: so will hulu make it. >> i think they will. what they've said is we're going to now make our, we're going to line those two things up. so if you've subscribed to a
internet, if you've subscribed to a tv service which 95% of americans are paying for. >> rose: right. >> the package of channels, then you just authenticate yourself and then they'll put those programs on fox.com and on hulu and you can get them on demand. so i think they'll survive that way. >> rose: what business do you wish you were in that you're not? >> we like the businesses we're in because they are growing so well and we're in such a good position. i should advanced it earlier. the reason we're focused on these things that we do, movies, tv and magazines is that we have an edge in it. that our h people have an edge, they know how to view it. we've got the best access to talent. if somebody has a story or a movie and they want to take it to a celebrity magazine they'll give it to people. if they have a movie they want to make, we basically can make
more out of that movie with production budgets, marketing and distribution power than anybody else can. and so what it does, it gives us access to the freshest newest best ideas for tv shows, movies, whatever it may be. >> rose: what's the future for motion picture production companies like warner brothers. >> well looking pretty good right now. we just much attention gets focused on the huge success that we had with harry potter. there are eight films and the biggest franchise in history. it's tremendous for us. and then you get into this, how do you keep that. >> rose: when is the next harry potter. >> so the next harry potter is the dark knight rises, the next batman film which is one of the last batman's film was that top ten. we've got the hub i hobbit comit
at christmas which were in the top ten of any film made in history. >> rose: dvds are dead. >> no. they're still over in wal-mart and 7-11. sure. if you can get movies now, rented and bought electronically, you don't have to go anywhere and that's going to take over. the good news about that is that we can deliver to you without brieks anbricks and mortar but o be cheaper. >> rose: the motion production company and dvd sales has become a significant part of their revenue projection. >> very significant. >> rose: electronic and whatever it is in terms of what u receive at home does not match that revenue. >> well, that's true. that's the debate. you can't go short. this year there was actually a pretty robust in the first three, four months, sale of new
electronic blue ray, high-def and all that. over time it will all adjust out but there's nothing that says if you take an industry like that, make it more efficient. the issue is not if we make harry potter, you don't care if it comes on your screen using a dvd, you just care that it's on the screen. >> rose: that i get to see it. >> it's got to be good. if you're looking at the future and you say all right, there are seven billion people on the planet. in the old days you had to get dvds ship them out on trucks, price them a certain way. now you can put bits and bites out across the planet. it really doesn't cost anything to show another person the movie or the magazine. so the efficiency and the cost goes down. that means theoretically the price can become more attractive. >> rose: how far off are we from a movie, a big movie at warner brothers, time/warner, being released simultaneously in
theatres as well as over every platform available. and what will be the model for the release of the movie on the platform. >> that's a good question. number one, you ask why didn't we do this show earlier. whenever you answer that, there's no surprise to theatre goers. the movie business relies on the theatre change, not only but as a bunch of companies and investors that put up your local multiplex. we've been trying to make the seats cleaner, been trying to get the screens to be crisper, you got 3d. >> rose: you want to make the appearance there at the theatre. >> that creates a certain cut viewer experience to go to the theatre and see it that way. so as we think about the fact that of well can you release simultaneously and what happens if you do that. we are all trying to be as
thoughtful as we can about doing this in a way that doesn't undermine the equality of the theatre experience and not take away all the business. >> rose: you still haven't answered my question. >> well so it's something that -- that's one answer. the other answer is if you stay with the current method which is we delay a while to give the theatres a chance to make a long run, sell out of ticts tickets,t you're doing is creating a gap for piracy where people go in and make dvd copies and sell them bootleg or they put it out on the internet. and the quality's not so good. but for a lot of people it's good enough if they can't just get the movie. so i think everyone in the business including the theatre owners have an interest in getting this thing to a more current release and try to figure out a way to support what u you don't want theatres to disappear, you want them to remain and get better. >> rose: when will be the time that you're prepared to
deliver a movie around the world on that day at the same time it opens in theatres. >> that will happen but it will probably depend on what the movie is. >> rose: harry potter, yes. >> do you know what. maybe, because we don't have that. that's a dangerous question. >> rose: yes, i know. >> so we're going to all work on it together. >> rose: all right. >> in the last analysis, what's good for consumers is what has to be the priority. >> rose: what's good for consumers. >> yes, what they want. >> rose: because what's good for them is what they'll pay for it. >> they have to get what they want. because if they don't ... >> rose: you have no business. >> that's right. that's why television which is by the way 80% of our business. so in the television business, if you don't give people what they deserve, and i think they
paid for 100 chamentz on television, emt, mtv, hbo, then they ought to be able to have it on demand, any show they want on whatever device they want at all times wherever they are because they paid for it. so that's what we've done. we've basically made our networks work that way. the easiest one to see it on is hbo. >> rose: i want to come to cnn. what's wrong with cnn? >> well, there's a lot of things right with it. >> rose: go there first and then go with what's wrong. >> let's go with what's wrong with it because that's what people like to look through one end of the telescope. and what they usually say is wrong with it is that the ratings aren't high enough. they are usually thinking about prime time ratings and they are thinking about it in relation to other news channels. they are in fact news channels but they have a bit of a
different mission and strategy than we have. >> rose: what's the difference in the mission of knox and the mission of -- fox and the mission of cnn. >> i think both knox and cnbc have taken not talk radio but talk show host-led approach to news where it's not so much focused on hard news but foreign analysis and opinion. >> rose: so it's billo bill o'reilly or keith olbermann seem to agree with what your own philoshy is. >> they've taken a host kind of talk show and interview not hard news approach. and they've taken a bit of it apart -- >> rose: has cnn resisted that when it was clear that that was a money making way to go and a ratings way to go. >> not only the money way. i would go to your show. so the mission of cnn from the start and continuing today. this is part of what's good about cnn is a devotion to
strong comprehensive journalism, non-ideological coverage of all points of view. that doesn't mean you have a wishy washy no point of view. we should be able to cover more than one. no reason that can't be bigger and more interesting than just one of them. and in breaking this, you have a lot of people tuning in. beas we go bacbut as we go backs think of the charlie rose show. you're not getting up every day booking guests and trying to shape the show to get the highest rayings. you're trying to fulfill your mission of being informative, getting in-depth, answering -- >> rose: smart television we call it. >> there you go. cnn is really the same. >> rose: cnn doesn't care about ratings you just said. >> i don't want to say that's not true. we do care about ratings. we'd like to do better and there's no reason you can't have higher ratings than we've had trying to cover the news and having a non-ideological -- >> rose: here's what people say about cnn. they look at it and this say
they don't know who inner. >> why do they say that. >> rose: they can't see what the driving philosophy is, i don't think. >> i'll tell them what it is. >> rose: okay. >> covering the news comprehensively, globally and not ideological filter to shrink basically what is in play. and to take it, and we shouldn't overdue thoverdueoverdo the pol. that's not the only thing that exists in the world. let's technology, culture, science. all kinds of things changing and interesting in the world that don't reduce to some kind of political point of view. i think that what everybody loses when you're talking about ratings, and we do need to do a better job on making our stuff compelling. the way i would say it is whenever there's breaking news, we have high ratings, we have pretty good shows that people tend to be satisfied with. we have more people tuning in to
cnn on an average than tune in to any of the other news channels. >> rose: why is that. >> because there's more people coming for a trusted source of news. what happens, though, and the reason the ratings are lower at cnn is that they don't stay as long and there's two groups or two reasons why that is. one, there's people that show up a lot of them i think are in audience that said i got the news, i want to stay two hours. and then there are people that show up to try to get a feel for the news, if it's breaking as it's happening, if it isn't, they aren't. >> rose: hbo. go back to hbo. can you imagine that being offered on the internet and in a way that you could access it. >> yes. i'm glad you asked that. it is. it is. if you're looking at this and you're an hbo subscribe. first of all you already have hbo on demand on your
television. >> rose: right. >> you can watch everything on your tv that way. >> rose: you can watch everything hbo has ever done. >> and you've got ten channels of hbo and cinemax on your channel also. and you got hbo go where if you turn on any internet device and you're a subscribe to hbo, you can watch hbo for free. >> rose: is that working, though. >> yes. >> rose: it's up and going and working. >> yes. i encourage everyone listening to try it. the problem with it is that some of the connections where you try to sign on are not as good as they should be and that's what we've got to fix. not just for hbo but for all of tv. >> rose: you have got a marvelous stable magazine, time, sports illustrated, people. >> and style. >> rose: is that as big as people say it is. >> bigger. >> rose: i don't understand it anymore. >> it's growing and bigger. look, there's differences in certain categories.
news magazines have been tougher than celebrity magazines but the one thing it should say is the magazine business still has steady readership. it's not like people aren't reading magazines. newspapers went down, magazines stayed up. right now the whole magazine business has not a very good advertising environment due to the world recession. and partly due to money moving to digital out of print. but the answer to that is that there's no reason why you can't have people magazine or "time" magazine, in fact we do have it in the tablet or on-line. >> rose: of course you do and the pictures are really good now. when you look at how far digital video has gone, the pictures are quite good. >> also you can get more stills than what we put in the binder, and you can get moving -- >> rose: here's a reason you ask about it. trees and trucks cost money. >> yes, which we can move away from it. >> rose: how analysis will you move away from -- how fast will you move away from it. how analysis can we say if you
want "time" magazine or want to look at sports illustrated just go to your internet and go get it because it will not be available on your newsstands. >> we're not saying the second part. we're saying the first part now. >> rose: the question is when will you make a decision that it's not worth it, it costs too much for us to do the business we've been in delivering magazines to a newsstand. you got to cut down trees and you got to fuel trucks. >> yes. i'm not sure. >> rose: you got to think about that because it's a huge revenue or a huge expense item. >> we do but we're very profitable in printing magazines, we're reasonably profitable. you don't just give that away before you have a functioning thing to replace it. and it's not clear that people want to give up their printed magazine. i'm sure there are people listening to this, they are holding a copy of "in style" or "vogue" and you're saying to them do you know what, charlie and jeff have decided you're not going to have that anymore,
you're going to operate a little tablet. >> rose: who are they. >> yes. >> rose: who do they think they are. >> right. >> rose: but you look at the digital revolution. give me your vision of the extension of it, where it's going. >> yes. >> rose: as it affects time/warner. >> okay. so we think very strongly that if you have, and we do, very, we have growing engaged audiences reading people, watching hbo, tuning into cnn more than any other news channel every day. >> rose: you know you've got problems there. >> but we've got more people tuning in. it's up to us to fulfill them once they're there. >> rose: do you know what you said to me earlier you said we want to be number one. you want to be number one in cable news as well. >> we are number one in reach, we're number one in global view at cnn and we are not number one in earnings. >> rose: that's what you said.
you know where you're not number one too. >> some things you're numb one in -- number one in and some others you're not. going back to the future of media on internet and the digital world. if you have a strong brand, and you know, let me not use corporate speak. if you have a place you go as a person, people magazine, hbo and you know what you expect, the content, the editorial, the voice, figure sea fiction or jo, getting that, being available not just on your tv or on in a magazine but on every internet screen on demand where you can go in and share it with your friends. you can move things around, u rewiped. -- you can rewind. if you have a very strong economic model which we do, a subscription without support is the strongest model anybody's created. if you go ask the people at
google, apple, facebook, mike microsoft, wherever you want to go out west, they'll tell you subscription plus advertising, if you can operate at scale. >> rose: if you can find subscription plus advertising. >> that's business in the world. >> rose: that's doing plus and doing good at the same time. >> yes. >> rose: that's the best place to be. >> it allows you, because we've talked about this. if you then start trading off the quality, if you want to go mass or narrow or doing higher brow, like here or doing at the lower thing everybody will turn to right after this is over, the combination allows you to fit between the two and support the content appropriately. look you're moving to a world where getting access to more viewers, seven billion people on the planet, getting easier and cheaper per person and the quality what you can give them is going on. >> rose: i hate to ask it
this way but i'm going to ask it this way. >> please. >> rose: what keeps you up at night. >> well it's really that. you know, what i care about and what everyone in our company cares about is continuing this wonderful journey we've been on where we have this voice, whether it's not just journalism. having good information in the world is obviously good for everybody. having good entertainment is not just entertainment, it's also up lifting, enlightening. you can imagine a comedy or a drama. it's fiction but it changes the way you think. it changes how you see other people. it changes your view of the world. all of that which comes to some extent from mass media and you know into targeting media like this show. >> rose: right. >> allows people choice, it allows them to interact with other people, to explore new ideas and brings the world closer together.
so have isin have having a strod we are in succeeding and doing that keeping not just our competitive access to stant and stories by virtue of our success, we're creating evolution, these models of revolution to go into worldwide internet distribution. to in other words make the diversity and economic support for free expression sustainable examine noand not have it wipedy somebody basically taking away the freedom to make content and have people pay for what they want. turning it off for example into free with ad support would change. it would reduce the diversity of the type of thing that got said, whether it's news or entertainment. >> rose: do you admire rupert because of the way he's fought the battle for paying for content. >> yes, because when you say that, i mean paying for content sounds like it's some kind of a
trick to entrench the people. >> rose: "wall street journal" basically said if you want to read the "wall street journal" on-line you have to pay for it. >> i think he's right about that because that enables the "wall street journal" to give its readers the kind of coverage and focus that you could never get if all you're doing was ad-supported mass reach. you'd have a different product. >> rose: if i was on your board of directors, here's what i would say to you. this is what i would want to know. this would be my question. as ceo, you've just told us the competitive advantages we have in terms of the businesses we're in, television, magazines and other assorted businesses. we're in the communications business. we're in the entertainment business, we're in the information business. convince me how you're going to take that advantage and give us
additional advantage and an edge in the future. >you would be a good director. >> that is what we talk about. what we say is let's get a digit, let's expand where we can in order to take any kind of scale position or natural extension and make use of it. we have plenty of money to do that. and let's go internationally and get connected to people over seas because the growth rate of economics overseas and the consumption of media, the kind of media we've all gotten used to is growing up much faster there than here. the media challenge when you do that is that as you try to take media overseas, it's not construction or steel or those kind of industries. media is something that governments get very interested in for obvious reasons.
so you know. >> rose: because they are political animals. >> yes. you start connecting with people. it's something that the political process gets very interested in. so it's not all that easy to go and have the kind of protection of free expression that we're used to in the west, particularly in the united states. >> rose: it's a pleasure to have you here. >> charlie it's great to be here. >> rose: i should take note of the fact one of the underwriters of this program is hbo, which they had been doing and we're grateful to have him for a number of years. thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. >> rose: the ceo and chairman of time/warner. back in a moment. stay with us. >> rose: yogi berra for the new york yankees on cept 2 2-7b8d, 19 -- september 22nd 1946. part of the team ever since. he was the mvp three times, every spring. he is a welcomed presence at the team's training camp in tampa,
florida. he and other yankee legends are invited to share their wisdom for the past 14. he's had an inseparateddable companion in ron guidry. he wron twice in the 70's as a star pitcher. these days he's a proud self proclaimed valet in a way for an american icon. harvey araton capures the evolution, in the book driving yogi berra and ron guidry's greatest gift. i am pleased to have them at this table. start with harvey. how did you get on this story. >> it was a year ago february, charlie. and i have a 14 year old black labrador that died. >> rose: you were in mourning. >> i was in mourning, i cried like a baby. only dog i ever had. and a good friend of mine and former colleague at the daily news going back into the 80's, dave capland is the director of
yogi's museum at the state university. we both live in montclaire. they took me and my wife out to dinner. >> rose: to cheer you up after losing the dog. >> of course. i happened to mention i was going down to spring training and thought it would be good for me to get out of the house. i said yogi's going down too right. he says yes he goes down every spring. and i said does carmen go down with him, yogi's wife, of course. and he said -- he said just to make sure everything's okay and to look after him a little bit. and he said to me actually it's an interesting story that's never really been told. and he mentioned that you know ron spends a lot of time with yogi and is driving, they have dinner and there's this long relationship. i thought to myself that would be an interesting story. so the next day actually went up to the museum and asked yogi about it and yogi said yes, you know ron's a great guy. we hang out together and that was the extent of it. when i got down to tampa, i
waited for ron outside the coach's room. he came out and i asked him about it and i said, i mentioned his relationship with yogi and ron initially was reluctant to talk about it because you know, are he said it was a private relationship and it was something he really rather not share. and i said oh, i was a little disappointed but i said, i was up at the museum the other day and i talked to yogi about it and yogi is so fond of you and so appreciative and carmen as well. and ron just sort of relaxed and said well if yogi's talking about it, you know, what the heck. we spent the next i don't know, 45 minutes talking about it. and it wound up on the front page of times and within a few weeks we were on to a book deal. >> rose: how did it start, ron? >> our friendship? >> rose: yes. >> our friendship started way back in 70 when i first got to the club. when billy martin became manager in 76, he hired yogi as a bench coach. and our coaching staff was
martin, yogi, elsin howard, dick houser, gene michaels. they assembled a great coach. but in the locker room at yankee stadium, at the new yankee stadium, he lockerred one locker over from me. i was sitting next to him almost every day. and things started slowly for me at the beginning of my career. i was supposed to be a reliever. i got stuck in the starting rotation. now you're learning things. once you start to learn a few thing, you know you have an all star catcher here one of the greatest catchers. let me ask this guy a question. you start asking questions and you start learning. i tell a story all the time, the season that i had in 1978, you know, by far the greatest i ever had. isthad. i was 12-0 at one time. i turned over to him and said
hey i got a question for you and he turned around and looked at me and said you're 12-0, what more can i say. here's a way of telling me look, enough is enough. >> rose: that's like saying if it ain't broke don't fix it. >> that's more or less where it's always started. and you know, years have passed but we remain friends all the time. >> rose: it's one thing to silt next to each other to have your locker next door and to ask for advice. it's another thing to see an evolution to what it is now and what it became. i mean how did this sort of really being together. >> well that occurred in 2000 when him and george patched up their differences. and the very next year, he came down to spring training. i mean, we saw each other throughout the years at old timer's games every year, here
and there. i called and i found out when he was coming in. he's coming in. what time's he coming in. okay. and then i said i'd pick him up at the airport. >> rose: you would pick up the story there. >> yes. that's pretty good. ron picked me up, fixed me up every year. i've been going down to spring training now since that happened. we play golf together, we eat together. >> rose: he drives you around. >> he drives me around, picks me up in the morning to take me to the ballpark. takes me back. then we go out to dinner. we say where are we going tonight. we're close knit. raising my golf tournament, i like that too. he's a good golfer. >> i'm the only one you give a mandatory. it's mandatory for me to go. you scrve else. -- you ask everybody
else. you tell me. >> rose: tell me about the firing by george stei steinbren. he fired you but he didn't fire you personally. >> no. what do you call it -- i wouldn't have mind it if he would have told me himself. usually when you get fired someone tells you you're fired. >> rose: it was early in the season wasn't it. >> yes, six games, seven games. >> rose: six to seven games. and he fires you and he doesn't tell you himself. >> no, he doesn't tell me. i was back on the bus with the team. i get another job some other place. >> rose: did you say to yourself and did you say to other people, i will never set foot in yankee stadium again. >> oh yeah. i said that, i know, i would never go back to yankee stadium
again. it took me 14 years before i went balance. >> rose: you didn't go back until. >> he called me. came to the museum and apologized and everything and then the kids were saying everybody went to see yankee stadium. they're the ones that made me go back to tell you the truth. >> rose: your kids. >> yes. we went back and we became good friends. >> rose: you and george. >> george. >> rose: roll tape. this is an interview that i did for 6 "60 minutes." >> it was an icon with joe. >> i became close to joe demaggio in his final years expwr he kept saying to me you got to get him back. he should be here. he was yankee from start to finish, he is yankee. >> just two months before demaggio died, stain brenner final -- steinbrenner finally
told yogi he was sorry. >> it was my mistake and i apologized. >> it was great the way he did it, there was tears. >> rose: because he was sorry. >> yes. he says i did the wrong thing, i know it. i made a mistake and all that. >> rose: this spring, steinbrenner invited yogi back to yankee stadium to throw out the first pitch on opening day. it's things like this that are making people say the toughest boss in baseball has mellowed. >> yes, he mellowed. [laughter] >> rose: this is a great story because it got you back to the yankees and it's created this, it gave life to this friendship that is so rich in everything. >> i know one thing. john mcmullen with the houston astros, he asked me to come down for spring training with houston. i said john, we're friends
aren't we. let's stay that way. [laughter] then that's when i went to the mets. george weiss was over there and casey. >> rose: you admired casey, didn't you. >> very much so. tell a lot of stories about him. one story i was about to tell you, whitey ford was pitching. threw four pitches and four guys got on base and one run scored. got nobody out. casey come out to me and said does he have anything. i said i don't know, i haven't caught one yet. [laughter] >> rose: you knew that. >> i knew the story, yes. >> it was a lot of fun. >> rose: is don larsen game your greatest. >> it has to be, you know, the greatest. ogreatest pitcher and no hitter
in a world series. still hasn't. >> rose: how many pitches did he shake off. >> none. he got it over. >> rose: when did you think it could be happening, sixth inning. >> seventh inning. nobody went to him. it got away from him. he called me and said what i got the plague or something. but he went out there. >> rose: this is from sports illustrated profile. yogi berra has now crossed into that american realm where mark twain, abraham lincoln and will rodgers. the famous collection of words by being connected to his name. just throw as yogi berra says in front of anything and you're ready for the banquet circuit. how did that happen. what is it that makes him in that realm. >> well, i think you know the test of time. the connection to the yankees, the continuation of the yankees
as a winning organization. and a lot of people have asked me since i started doing the book, why is yogi such a beloved character. ron says it in the book that yoig is probablyogi is probablyt beloved person in america. we can't say that about the president, we can't say that about mitt romney, most entertainers kind of divide people. but you know if you ask does anybody out there not like yogi, the answer is most certainly no. but i think that's the beauty of their relationship, because i can say here's what i think, you know, yogi's got, you know, a wonderful demeanor about him. he's the lease pretentious celebrity or at leas athlete i'n around in sports. >> rose: let me show you some photographs here. yogi this is you. this is you and your wife carme.
thers carmen. what was that,th 19 thsomeing. the next one, issso i y simply okyou go.dlo a great photograph that is, don't you think. the next one is, this is ron cooking something. cooking something. >> doing my job. >> frog legs. legs.g >> rose: i come from north carolina but none that he's cooked. >> you'd like them. >> rose: when he's coming to see you now wants to know -- >> he's going to call in september and ask me about february. did you get them yet. [laughter] >> they're still sleeping. [laughter] >> rose: there you go. the two of you together. this is a wonderful story of a friendship. tell us what this is. >> i had a lot of fun doing that. [laughter]
>> this is when i got married. >> rose: why did he get mad. >> i had to go all the way -- >> i had to pick him up the morning i found out he had to fly to make the commercial and he was upset because he had to fly all the way out to california for the commercial. when he came in the truck, he was trying to explain to me what he was doing but he said it was the affliction commercial. i was trying to drive it in my truck and i was turning around like that and he said i'm trying to think in my head what could he be possibly talking about. and he said you know with that do yodo youduck. and he said yes that duck. >> rose: doe how does it come back derric deja vu. >> e it just comes out.
>> we'll be sitting at supper and i put my hand on the table and my fork and my knife and let me see if i got that straight. but you know, i know that's how he is and that's what you love j usitt it just comes out. >> rose: congratulations harvey, this is a great story. >> thank you charily, i appreciate that. >> rose: driving mr. berra, growing bear. growing -- yogi berra. thank you for coming. >> thank you for having. >> rose: we'll see you next time.