tv ACLU Membership Conference - Panel on the Media CSPAN June 11, 2018 10:37pm-11:59pm EDT
it is a pleasure to welcome you to this luncheon because this topic is near and dear to my heart. just as all of you areoing here in texas fighting for racial justice lgbt equality and and all too often immigrant life. so for 32 years i worked in the newspaper business and cut my teeth as a reporter in connecticut. if we had auto fill it would have been so much more easier to get an indicted politician on the screen every night. i ended my newspaper career back home in texas not long after rick perry put his arm around my shoulder and told
the crowd he was proud he was his hotown newsper editor. cause and effect? peaps. [laughter] what is obvious the media and first amendment are tngs i have.with pretty much pretty much every day of my adult life. and n those issues that were there dealing with every day. i still think the mission of journalism is to shine the right on the wrong the powerful accountable and with this information without total disruption. what does that mean for our constitutional democracy. nowhere is it more important
than right here, right now as the aclu members seek to learn to be inspired and then without vigorous defense. to help us do that we have an panel that represents a variety of media and i thank you will know their names. first of all the opinion editor of the washington times , president of nra, a political consultant and presidential advisor, david keene. he has collaborated with the aclu on issues such as prison reform and government surveillance activities. a distinguished reporter and editor of the washington post, ruth mars with the newspaper
35 years since he graduated from harvard law school currently deputy editorial page editor in the column has been nominated for the pulitzer prize in commentary. c-17 katrina vanden heuvel editor and publisher of the nation written for about every major newspaper in the country and a frequent contributor on television news shows so for her work and the arab antidiscrimination committee and education fund. welcome them to the stage now. [applause]
is busy aclu cried crowd. what about local television? what about cable-television? raise your hand if you have increased your media consumption in the last 18 months. now do you get more news do you trust the media? but it can. there is a full new landscape here when we started in this business and in the face of a
little more than 5s. we have gone from a president held an average of 23 news conferences per year to today with a president who averages ten tweets her day. many directed institutions including the press. he wants to reach the people directly. going from all of us the same way to have breath and depth of analysis to the democratization and those paid on this search engine and newspapers online sites that we may of what we thought of as professional journalists 25000 newsroom jobs were lost in the past and some neighbors
would say that's a good thing those that went overwhelmingly with henry and journey from. where conversation one centered on pain does it tell you why you should care? from a landscape dominated in places we never would have called journalism. that could've been in all day p.m. vanessa be divided up in a couple of part so how do we arrive and where do we go in the future? i expect we will have a robust conversation not without opinion with a conversation
starter or two then they out-of-the-way. to write everything okay is a new tweet, a new trump gone a new outrageous statement of policy, and/or news about stormy daniels. so how do we arrive at this moment? does this president used twitter to distract the film the real catastrophe of the administration? >> this is a very dangerous moment from institutions or rule of law. i think it is particularly dangerous because this president and his war on the media today is the end of net
neutrality as we know it. and that is a real peach fighter of our generation. that the structural changes in media so then they can live with donald trump e the loss of local journalism and jobs. for news and entertainment. every time we go down an escalator. and use that as predicate because there is a nation and democracy now and then for
these last two years have not serve the public interest. go from table style media malpractice weace this moment where structural changes who is determined to delegitimize as a check on the power the italian journalists working around the political and gave that journalist said with the character and the man because that would allow him to portray himself versus the establishment. because after trombley sees the mea uld do well many
institutions cited favorably look at the source economic social political factors. and that is the fact that we would argue in the first election of the post- financial crisis in this country. and then to build the public interest. you focus on the trump b12 don't make him let media bd elite institution because for the public in institution and those help protect those institutions like the aclu. [applause]
>> mac much of what you say of the structural chaes to him -- is true. and for goo reasothey are not supposed to but when i first came to washington and presidential politics. >> that somebody wants to run for president they actually had to go embedded. all these people decided the candidate was okay and could ru that began to break down and every candidate tried to find ways around that and now we have a breakdown and then
to take advantage of that in the way that they wanted rather than the way it is filtered by the existing media and in the nixon years president goes around to band the national press from press conferences he wanted the local people to have it covered differently. i do when i was ronald reagan he went to florida. and then the local media did not get it so the wrong story in the wrong place.
what about the infrastructure that breaks down with multiple ways to reach people with the other problem with that and that daniel patrick moynihan said we all have a right to her own opinions but not to our fact that we do have a right to her own fat. if you just watch you don't just get different opinions but different faqs and reflected in public polls. twenty years ago if u.s. voters and asked if it is voters and that the democrats will save you terrible republicans will say it is great regardless.
and then to the two bays. into a society where we get our news in this way. and then to talk about the negatives that there was the source of facts and use a we can disagree with that all operating on the same thing today. and we don't only agree on the solutions that the problem. that is part chaos probably that will be resolved in some way the only thing i will add that this is a generational thing where you read your hand.
understand this is a policy to be reacted to? or is that a distraction mechanism? you have to understand simultaneously as both. for what those are were or responding to and not to allow to serve as a distraction from the underlying policy to be mesmerized by twitter this is a phenomenon. lighting for the basic structure -- construction and
in a weird way trump has ameliorated some of that problem even though there is a new degree of fatigue with cable news and newspaper eyeballs and has created with the reality show presidency in the uptick of interest. he said incorrectly, we will all be routine for him in the reelection because we can only think of how we think of our job and the subscriptions will collapse in television will go down. that's not true in some ways that i will and is on a hopeful moment but it is
something i have never experienced before. and this to which the media is accountable on how much was i out for? and people are thanking me for what we are doing. and the news media generally to have a president who describes what you do for a living as an enemy of the people recognize that we do play an important role and for me the outside of the trump administration. >> i come back again in the exotic read changing time that
that old order is disappearing or dying but i was reminded of this from the trump administration starting the league and then there may be three others people may not think that is a danger think it is an extraordinary danger but on the other hand but several people in the media quickly noted president obama template would be used with the espionage act. and what would happen to
snowden. _spee17 i disagree with my colleagues at the washington post but i thank you did a public service. some of what we are living in a historica context. that may be too much to ask founded in 1865 by appellatio appellation -- abolitionist but to think this is our moment to show resistance in a different way but any we need to rehear for who languishes in moscow but i am horrified i have to say by how many former intelligence had signed up as talking on cable. you may not fit cap or perjured himself twice and he is giving advice to all of us
how to combat intelligence even noted to be a commentator that would be more helpful. [applause] and i will say there is a breakdown in the old days there were gatekeepers and by what is possible from the opinion. and those whose voices were not heard are considered marginal. that has the downsides also. >> i had hoped with the obama administration to be passes.
but then we are not. but when cap her blood -- clapper heard that he was reminded that he was fired and the left was all for that. and now for some reason he is a hero. same lying intelligence officer in mac that i agree with you about me jump in for the night you all the way so a lot of reporters a last few weeks that this could be the new golden age of television.
but that has the abundance of opinion online but one of the things we discovered in egypt from as a conservative, and a conservative columnist, who would dislike him the most? and it creates a big cllenge for us. and with that disagreement. then instead of the we hate donald trump echo chamber. we actually have to do something that i know people would not be encouraged enough to do this or spending all of our energy but to try to find
intellectually honest pro- trump with a pathetic columnist. that is one of the central challenges as the author and editor for the trump era. and as an editor we don't overreact to trump or under react. there are things the president is doing that any republican president that i happen to disagree with with the editorial board might disagree or within the norms of republican presidential behavior and that means we should we bond accordingly i
agree we should stop that but it is not fascism. but at the same time to under react to things not what normal president does that we mentioned before and it is the disturbing seizure from the metadata with those antecedent so those behaviors if not completely contain to deal with a deadline or those current guidelines that is a little bit unclear. because there are ten outrages
and in the face of the day that doesn't mean we should only reacted to with them but we need to figure out a way with constrained resources that we need to figure out how to respond and then last week i decided we would use my column with the administration with those decisions with the constitutionality of the affordable care act not because of the impact of the healthcare law but on the rule of law and the terrible precedent it sets in those extreme cases for the administration with those statutes. but not that reaction but also
in particular under reaction to the excess of this administration and that was a central challenge of the trump era. >> how are you approaching your work differently? >> into do a cover to organize on word which was a template. founded in 1865 with the belief that our journalism can be a more democratic and equitable world we continue to build out in the trump era. in the racial justice reporter and what we quickly saw was injustice but with progressive politics 153 years with that
fundamental belief of the social movement make the transformational change. with the me to movement economic justice, environmental rig, the bernie sanders campaign. love him or hate him or don't care he put issues on the agenda that are now part of the debate. medicare, higher education and racial justice issues. if there is the enduring strain but war and peace than just the agenda but if there is talk that gets people a little more interested but yet we also say why are you voting to give this president more
defense budget money if you're so worried about him? so we try to oppose the war in iraq vigorously even by senator mccain that we try to do investigative reporting and talk about when that is resources we have limited resources that i am proud the event the trump election that said deputy of the doj announced they were shutting down. we have to go back into do that work again to make change. pplae] because i don't know but and enou wake up and part of journalism is to shame but people who seem incapable to be ashamed you have to be in
it for the long-haul through proposing to get their attention and finally to put new ideas on the agenda. i think medicare is something we have been chanting over 20 years. [applause] we should see the ideas that may seem radical like abolish the second amendment. [laughter] [applause] >> good luck with that. >> that what we try to do is a whole set of issues that may seem radical but you have to wake up with that and it is
important to the nation with the great work that it doe in the aclu playing a larger role to change the politics of this country. and there is complexity but after a moment it was founded in that spirit that one of the things we have with reconstruction. so he e-mails late at night in bed with the berni campaign can you tell him to stop talking about denmark? i love denmark but can he have our own radical tradition which exists to remind people what is possible even in the
darkest times which these are close to i would submit country is resilience and the judicial resistance which the aclu is so centrally a part of has fought and won. it is a long battle but that resistance reminds the media that it is legitimate and continues to work even when the president calls it fake news it is so vital. [applause] >> you better be weighing in on something other than the second amendment. [laughter] >> one caveat i'm no longer the full opinion editor but now editor at large because i spend more time fishing than editing and i write a column but so we have to do so of
this reaction that is what readers expect that we are not pro- donald john or anti- but about accomplishing things we are the conservative alternative in washington and the first off and that was published when i took over the editorial page was written by a fellow named romero. [laughter] because we believe in order to accomplish those goals that they need to work together. i know 97% of the people in this room are not paying
attention to what trump is doin he wasn't my candidate for president. but the change that we see that you might fear very different things and that is legitimate and that is what we should be fighting about. but just opposing everything because it is one of the things that i dislike is their team and our team at doesn't work that way. there are things we all want to accomplish something that she wants to accomplish but what we all want to accomplish we ought to work together. [applause] i think that's incredibly important with conservatives and in particular the aclu networks over many years i had some of my closest friends in washington the activist with the aclu in the next and era
the younger members would not remember chuck morgan or joel from new york or anthony. there are areas where we believe in individual freedoms and one of the things and this is part of the discussion but it is important to remember what we are about and what other organizations are about and not get political or tribal food fight and not just of skiers that makes it more difficult to make real progress. today we have greater assault on her privacy we never had. we don't know how to deal with it also faced with a generation to some degree doesn't care. that makes it even more difficult because these are important questions in should not be varied by the fact that
we like joe or we do not like bill. they should give people a like mind to get together and work together to accomplish real thing the 17. >>o i think all of you mentioned agenda setting one way or another. not a lot of hands went up trusting the media or the s ability to hold public officials accountable. but in the old days we talked about editorial pages as a place to set the agenda for local conversations that balance of discussion and debate and katrina you talk about investigative reporting leading the way that too often i hear from full to a that is biased journalism.
of course i contend it is bias if you decide what you cover but how do you overcome the feeling that the agenda setting is really a conservative or liberal bias? >> i was asked by a producer for one of the networks not too long ago to talk about certain things i said 20 years ago i would do it because 20 years ago people observed the norms if i said something off the record it would be off the record. today that is so true so i don't think i will do that. he said i can't blame you. because we live in a different world now and here is the difference when 15 years ago or ten years ago reporters whether conservative or liberal's they are all biased
in their minds. we all are with certain beliefs and what we hold very dear that there was a professional desire to try to not let that show up and reporting. now we are in an era where the new york times for example said reporters have the obligation to let their views of donald trump affect their reporting but then you can't expect the people on the other side not to react to that. and in today's world it is very different world you are dealing with and some years ago. i have been involved in politics for more than 40 years. and in all that time never had a problem dealing with any journalists. sometimes with the local journalists and washington
journalists you could talk to them or deal with them or disagree and that has changed and they feel very cornered by this. i'm not saying that others don't feel the same way they told me because the reason why people don't trust the media is years ago with their local newspaper when the kids played in the junior high school football team so everybody knows that reporters get things wrong but then when they report something they don't like they think he is wrg. >> sthis links up to some of the previous conversations about the challenges to the media and the age of transcendent special challenges when you called the enemy of the people for
fighting reporters or what they are supposed to be for the most part strove to be fair and objective. how will we respond? can't simultaneously, how do you cover a political candidate and now a president toay thiat demonstrably untrue? i know there is a lot of frustration on the left. i am not a big believer in using the word why because that is the ability to get into somebody's head but those news organizations have created a fact checker with that 2016 campaign i was embedded in the fact and then when it was warranted in the
headlines of the news stories. or to be super warranted you knew that you were saying something to show that you needed to be untrue and that was the location from my point of view but he has created a whole set of challenges for people and i am an opinion writer now but i used to be a news reporter it was completely different. he created challenges for people who are in opposition the executive editor he is not the boss of me don't report to him but he said we don't go to war we go to work. so that is very hard in human nature to sustain and i see a lot on social media where my colleagues in the newsrooms
across town or not serving themselves or their news organizations very well by responding in kind while continuing to do their jobs while reporting the facts. and when you allow the president to turn you into the opposition that you create your own set of opposition. >> i am not sure one side was only one side. but this was a mutual hostility but i will say that as you know not just today but there were reporters that feel about presidents and politicians the way donald trump feels about them reporters and the different is that those things used to not be public and this is the
changing age where everything we say is publi politicians shouldn't do that neither should other people. >> don't be ashamed if it appears on the front page of the new york times. >> years ago if somebody got mad and wrote a letter and they had a secretary secretary would stick it in the drawer and have a fax machine it was worse and now there is a twitter account. >> there is now an app that it will shut down at a certain alcohol meter. [laughter] that has caud a l of trouble for many people. [laughter] that you come back to the full idea where i sit that you are a news reporter now opinion editor but it was an interesting debate between
someone who i think highly of that in the former editor of the new york times on objective versus adversarial journalism. but he came out a little bit ahead say this is where the nations and it isn't fair and balanced but it is being honest where we sit or stand to disclose your values and principles that never giving up on the core which is verifiable data. [applause] >> so the whole issue with the trump administration is how many agency have data to
data and then has long-term consequences. because the idea in my mind has been complex and i do think that you witness the shaping of all opinions into objective news stories without the honesty of where you stand. that is an important debate to be had and absolutely graphitic event i hope to meet a congressperson who has been a leader and fighter on a number of issues and then go see senator rand paul. they have written an op-ed together for the need for restraint and realism inform policy and rand paul wrote just a few months ago with kamala harris on failed reforms there are fundamental issues you can have your differences and we do. major differences that find those areas of principal agreement.
that story needs to be told more because there is more of that man in the news where it is polarization in tribalism. in the aclu has for that principle and i recommend that debate because they do think we are in a moment because it is true that this p has actually tried to incite journalists and violent at rallies. even if you try to bring history and who can forget the negative is the mandy attack on the media this is not new but i would say that journalism as a profession has fed some of that not to allow that incitement to violence but that realization of the profession which does lead to
a disconnect with people let's say we could use more humility and as your executive editor is right don't go to war go to work to make you and i have a slightly different definition of what the work is or should be because i do thinkhat went work not of the opinion journalists like me that in the newsroom needs to be to not respond to that provocation and continue to do their job even the other day as spokesman of the epa referred to a reporter as a piece of trash. but in my world the best thing you can do is write it down and tell it to people. >> when i say adversarial journalism with party or
i want to get to the future of journalism. but one less question. bill clinton said that the press went easy of barack obama. a whole host of folks on the right to the media has been incredibly unfair to president trump. discuss. >> where you asking, me? >> let's start with katrina. we will go right on the line. >> winter president clinton say this? he's been busy the last week. >> it was right in the middle of all of that. he said that he thought the press had gone easy on barack obama because he was the first black president.
>> i think parts the media in this country went berserk with president obama. his birth certificate in the conspiracies, i can speak for myself and the nation that the prs secry at one point people remember to attack the professional left. in retrospect, in the belief that you need an inside outside strategy and he wt to push a president to listen to movements and take certain steps, there has to be a different calibration. president obama, i think he was savaged by core elements of the press in this country. >> so was that fair to president trump? >> the problem with the coverage of president trump and said with
humility, because it is not the case all around comments to fixated on the scandals, the man in the character. at a certain level were playing his game. it becomes all about trump. [applause] it's not about the forces that will continue to afflict our country after trump is gone. in that sense we need a >> i really aee with things that bill clinton said but i think he is right. i would like to use a concrete example. during the bush administration the press was over, and properly so against violations of privacy of overreach of security and the like. i agree they wrote a lot about it. but i thought the bush administration was overreaching
and were misusing a lot of the power there should be a little reason involved. i stood up at a meeting and said, i am willing to j i the criticism of b wts going to happen when yuy in. i relayed the story that when the patriot act was up to be passed, paul who was two of the major critics of the patriot act. the justice department sent some people right after and said we know this is extraordinary power but you have nothing to worry about because we are the good guys. he said, what about when the bad guys have that power? they did come to me because they knew a visit was of no value. i said paul, i worry about when the good guys have the power.
when you have the power there is a tendency to abuse them. then barack obama became president. the issues that hn h issues were not covered anymore. a major reporter who i said before set a lot of this is political. it's not that these people care about these rights, they want to be george w. bush over the head. he covered these and he came to me after and said i thought that was hyperbole on your part. it may be true. these issues were not covered. as presidents do, barack obama did not attack off, he doubled down. yet, it was covered differently. that is a fact-based analysis were because a lot of people, for whatever reason saw him as part of their team. well, we don't need to do that,
we have done that before. >> i think there may have been -- i think president clinton may be a little bit right in terms media who are enamored with the barack obama from the first time they saw him at the democratic conventions, giving his keynote address going a little bit easy on him. it's really was not my experience with the obama white house that there ever happy with anything i was ever writing about. i think they probay felt like why are you guys so hard on us because they probably perceived us to be incorrectly more on the same team. i think it is telling that president clinton would see it that way. he is on this i was a victim xyz
tour going on. some of it is that he had it so much harder than barack obama so i take it with a grain of salt. the more interesting question whether we're easy on barack obama is whether there is an element of us being too hard on president trump. that gets me back to what is the baseline. i believe that we cannot great this president or should not trade this president for any president on a curve. were doing a series called what her presidential president would have said. we take a trump moment and model what parents do what proper behavior might look like. but, we should not treat all
trump acts as heinous and respond to all of them as the highest level when some are what i said before, ordinary republican president would do that we would happen to agree with. what it be that much different under romney than trump. doesn't mean it's not worth writing about. but is there feeling of being facetious frustrated that's leading to some people respond to all trump acts it's worth for us to continue to think about as we tried to cover him resolutely and aggressively.
>> what switc let's switch geard look at the future of journalism. katrina has written about this a lot. we need real reforms and media in real accountability centered journalism. not valuing profits over public interest. we have six companies today in this country that owned the vast majority of metropolitan newspapers and television stations. regional newspapers, et cetera. sinclair as we know has the potential to reach 72% of households in america because of their ownership of television stations. do we need antitrust enforcement?
or, should the government start propping up independent journalist and helping them out? if you do either of those things, how do you do those without risking what i might call the slippery slope. the loss of state neutrality. >> i may have been writing about it but how we will see the future of a robust journalism is a tough one. i think we definitely need to revive antitrust. i say it with eouragement that there are key democrats were reviving. i think you'll hear from senator . she has been a big player in talking about the need to address this not just a media but of corporate power with a vigorous and vibrant antitrust structure. that should not be democratic or
republican. it's very tough and one can begin in the states. with the federal government in control of both houses, it's difficult. i also think at the same time i do need and john nichols has been writing about this, he's the founder free press and it's the net neutrality battle, we need to think about a way for citizens to get a tax write off by contributing to certain media. the public it corporation broadcast in this country has been a political football. when they talk about the slippery slope and government control, look out from the industrialized world. there are other examples.
we do have some government funding, but decentralized and protected. it's hard to see that now and i don't think it would fly with the trump administration. the marshall project was founded a few years ago. one of our editors left us to run a nonprofit terminal justice organization called the appeal. investigative reporters and editors, their across the country and also operating in states. we forget the corruption at the state and local level can metastasize without some media. in some states there are these that make up only barely for state reporters and you local news. it is not a perfect model. what happened to the washington post with the complexities,
putting 110th of his fortune into the washington post and reviving. if you can find civic minded millioires alionaires denver post, very good newspaper has been ravaged by private equity companies. these people are far away. if you could find people not the people in a community who want to ban together that would be a first step. think you have to find a way to crawl back from facebook. google has already set up a fund to support public interest journalism. it's a tiny amount. europe is ahead of this on data privacy protection. finding ways to shame or clawback from facebook which as
we have learned has taken a model and raked over our data. to find funding from those sources, these are first steps. there is no excuse. >> i fint interesting, becathosere often stated concerns and they are not unimportant concerns, but were talking about it at the same time that were talking about proliferation. i don't know the answer. i won't claim i do. one thing i'm worried about is when the government decides it will start regulating the news and say what is valid and what isn't. >> i think governments which will control the news and regulation. >> last week the french president announced freedom of the press is so important. the next daye announced to
make sure freedom of the press is done they what they way they wanted. whatever the problem or chaos, the one thing you can say about people in denver, chicago, or washington as they are not the government. i would rather fight with them because you can find ways around. that's one of the good things we talked about earlier. getting around the existing media. e american people are inventive. these things will sort themselves out and i have great faith in a much better way that would happen if the government decided to get into it and help. >> especially when you have had the president talk about licensing. yanking licenses and a very nick
sony and conversation in threats like that. the last model i would look to would be government support and funding. you will inevitably go down a dangerous slope on that. katrina puts her finger on the thing that worries me most about the journalism landscape and that is the evaporation of coverage of state local governments. if you don't have reporters covering statehouses you have corruption just like if you don't tend your garden it will get weeds all over. the really bright thing i would say in an otherwise difficult business climate for journalism has been the growth of subscription models. as young people get use to pay for things on the internet,
whether netflix, flu, or whatever, they're used to paying for news. you see the new york times and the washington post, people are understanding that if you value this you need to pay for it. that to me is the best way to ensure our fure. if we got 2 million pain a little bit, that is the w to keep it going in a climate where the rest has collapsed. >> ruth, do you think the president's attacks on amazon are connected to the ownership of your paper?
>> i think i renounce my ability to read the president's mind. i think the facts speak for themselves. he has called it that amazon washington post. i will leave it to you to make that connection. >> i ask in a more serious way. if that is not a little frightening to us about the threats of the first amendment, finding that neutrality i came back to it's not a happy d the ending of net neutrality has been taken over by telecom is potentially very dangerous. maybe we're told there would be this great flourishing on the internet, that could be shut down. it's become pay to play. the civil rights issue, digital
divide issue. we haven't seen the full results here. we have to fight as best we can against attorneys generals state level to retrieve against that. the u.s. post office the postal service which the nation has championed, whenever we do a story there it's that's a tricky thing for a lot of publications even though they say print is dying. when they jack up the prices are go to five or six days a week that is part of the public interest shut down. >> what happens then to your discount? >> on a historical note, if you look at journalism and the
history we are now getting back the chaos that existed before the wars of the 19th century when there were hundreds of publications. most were bought and paid for by politicians and business people. it's like the cable news today. that was an error and i'm not saying this is good, but it solved itself that we had a peaceful era in part because of advertisers did not want to advertise in boutique publications but more general things. once craigslist came along it wiped out the most profitable part of most papers which was the classified. the new technology came along way back to the 19th century. it solved itself once and will probably solve itself again.
>> we talked about the different models of journalism. as these folks go back to the 50 states in the territories, the places that to not have congressional representation, what can they do to support their local journalism? if there's shorter billing a billionaire that buys the paper. what can they do to promote better journalism at home about the protections that we talked about. what would you suggest? >> i was disappointed in the low number of hands i saw the people who said they turned to their local newspaper and maybe it's like a chicken and egg thing that your local newspapers are not as good as they used to be where they should be, so it is not the first place you turn to towards news.
but if you don't support them they can have the resources to do that job. why you should subscribe to the washington post and reduced online, you should also wspapers and get themal delivered. thanks for doing about that. we need both national sources of information and local sources. >> anybody else? >> i agree. i think local papers are vital. i tried to read the local paper every day. the inquirer had a great article on the op crisis. every day, but go back to your community and write letters to the editor. maybe try to find a network of people who could raise funds to take up over a local paper.
follow the news in the sense of news about the media. you're not gngoet a from cabl television. if you can go like the free press orhi those are vital for a healthy community. >> i do not disagree. i think the real tragedy of the nationalization is the purchasing of him and turning them into things that resulted in lack of oversight of state government in a lot of the investigative reporters that did that work don't have jobs anymore. there are two ways that's been dealt with, the right some people have been picked up by public-interest firms to do the same. i hate to say this, there are very few newspapers that will
exist five years from now in print form. that is just a fact. but, in the states and not all states there are developing digital, very good reports on state government and politics. better stuff than we would have gotten in the past. it's real problem because the states are so important. a lot of what affects people takes place in the states. you need a vibrant journalistic community to make sure there some accountability. for certain time it could be recovery. that'll most vanished in many places. >> we have a wonderful nonprofit publication.
one thing i appreciate so many of their stories get picked up by newspapers. they share the report with everybody. those that don't have the capital staff can turn to the tribune. that's worked well. the last question, we talked about if this is the golden age of journalism again. what would you tell an inspiring young journalist about the business today and what they ought to pursue? >> i think what i would say, it's funnier interns just started today. i did not to go to the lunch because i was coming to your lunch. i think what i would tell them is doing if it is what you are really compelled to do.
you're not going to make a lot of money. you're going to work long hours, but there is nothing more fun than being a reporter. if that is what you want to do, you should do it but understanding it's a different set. i left law school and chose to be a reporter knowing there were different financial routes. i don't know if i would end up making that same choice now that i did decades ago. next because of the state of the industry. i would say if this is what you feel you are put on earth to do, it's what you have to do. if it's not what you feel like you were put on this earth to do there's a lot of other interesting ways to make your way in life.
>> i say there are a million ways to make living. the parallels what you're saying. if your big interest is money go yoead. should do it makes you happy. there are people who want to be writers and reporters. it's not a queion of money, it's a question of doing what you want. many people are rich and unhappy in their people who are poor and unhappy. there are people who make a living doing what they want to do. if that's what they want to do, they should. >> last week, the nation had its thirnnual student journalism conference. student journalists around the country from all places in community colleges came together for a day of learning how to cover movement.
within that some of the core concerns of the aclu. there was real passion. many are doing podcasts, videos, some are just doing the basic journalism reporng and writing. you need all whole n set dhe flourished in those arenas. they were excited about a journalism that they could make change. that's the journalism i have been a part of. it could cause trouble, that's good too. i recommend the nation's internship program, it's 40 years old this year. one of the interns founded the marshall project. at one moment the editors -- julie was a great nation intern, check the program out.
if you believe in journalism is making change and not forgetting that there is a verifiable data and evidence, but the belve there's a larger role for journalism over time, there's a passion to it. you can make a living, better living in other arenas if you wish to. >> this is been a wonderful discussion today, thank you. [applause] >> thank you so much. [applause] >> we will wrap up now. as i understand senator warren is the next speaker. [applause] thank you for joining us. thank you, it has been great