tv Charlie Rose PBS October 25, 2014 12:00am-1:01am PDT
>> charlie: well come to the program. we begin with this, an appreciation of two men who were friends of mine and who had done remarkable things with their lives. first, oscar de la renta, the great designer. second, ben bradlee, the great editor. tonight, we look back at their conversations. >> you know, you have to have a very clear vision of who your consumer is and, obviously, over the years i have been in fashion, the consumer has changed a great deal because today the most important consumer is the professional woman. i expect the woman who will come buy clothes and in that sense, fashion has changed a great deal since i first started in the '60s because it's no longer a lady of leisure, a lady who lounges as the most important
consumer. >> charlie: it's those who work outside the home. >> absolutely. and at the same time because they form an active part of the world and what happens, you know, they know more about fashion than any woman in history before because they are a true consumer in the sense that what they buy is a real need, you know. then even the formula of dress has so much changed because a woman today doesn't have the luxury of dressing, you know, during the day and then going home and changing to go out at night. most of the time, clothes need an elasticity that gives the woman the ability of perhaps going through the whole day in the same dress. >> charlie: i've known better reporters and -- >> i've known better reporters and better writers. i was getting to be a good writer when they made me an editor. you don't write when you're an editor. you may rewrite woodward and
bernstein's leads, but that's 120 words. >> charlie: but you're an editor, even when you were at the destroyer. >> i had a job at a destroyer. they were beginning to form a combat information center where they decided to concentrate all of the information coming into a destroyer from all of the sources -- sound, sonar, radar, radio, lookouts, engine room, everything, and instead of having it all go to the captain, it all went to the c.i.c. officer and he parceled it out to the people who had to know it. and in the sense as an editor you get all the information coming in, you make the decisions and then decide what to do, they were identical jobs. but i think i was curious, i think i came along at the perfect time.
i mean, you just can't quibble with my sense of timing. >> charlie: we conclude with laura poitras, her new film about edward snowden called "citizenfour." >> when i was first in contact i thought this was an anonymous source i would never meet, i thought he was a stranger and i would receive documents and he or she would disappear. i had no idea of the gender or agency or anything. >> charlie: remembering oscar de la renta and ben bradlee and a conversation with laura poitras, when we continue.
>> 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. >> charlie: oscar de la renta died on monday. he was 82 years old. he was the epitome of elegance both in design and life. he was a giant of the fashion industry, one of his final triumphs was the clooney wedding dress. the fashion director of the "new york times" says he cannot be contained by fashion, his life has always been bigger, more imaginative than the clothes. i have known him for many years, he became one of my great friends in new york city, he grew up in the dominican republic but moved to spain to study art. >> it happened i went to school in the dominican republic, and then at the age of 17 i went to spain to continue my art studies
in madrid. while i was in spain, my father was -- i come from a big family of seven virn. i'm the youngest of six girls. my father was putting pressure observe me to come back to the dominican republic and work in his insurance business. i tried to demonstrate to my father i could make it on my own. i started doing fashion illustration for newspapers and magazines in spain because i could do it very well. that led me into the fashion houses and sort of started learning what fashion is all about. you know, probably the greatest designer of all time offered me a job of working as an illustrator in his house and that really is sort of the beginning. i went to the very best fashion
school and i had an opportunity to work in-house and see where they were constructed. i said, well, i can be a fashion designer and paint at the same time a. i kept doing both for quite -- for a long period of time, all the years that i lived in paris i went on painting but each time i did less and less. finally, when i came to work in the united states, i really quit painting altogether. i realized that, you know, to do something well, you have to do only one thing. most of the people who are talented can do a lot of different things, but to do something very well is to do only one thing. >> charlie: oscar caught the world's attention in the 1960s when he dressed jacqueline kennedy, the first lady.
>> you dressed every first lady for half a century. >> not every one. mrs. obama? i haven't dressed mrs. obama. i would like to. she's a very fashionable lady. >> charlie: mrs. obama fulfilled that wish later this month. hillary clinton once joked he's been working with me for 20 years to turn me into a fashion icon. she presented him with a lifetime achieving award. >> there was a receiving line in the white house and people were coming through and making small talk and exchanging pleasantries and along came oscar and annette, his fabulous wife. so i reached out to shake oscar's hand and he looked me up and down and he goes, that's one of my dresses. i said, really? (laughter) i was then, as i am now, such a
fashion icon myself. so i said, really? i said, well, you know, i bought it to wear for this occasion. he said, well, turn around. i thought, oh, my god, i'm being examined by oscar de la renta. but it started a great friendship that has meant the world to me and to my family. (applause) >> i am unbelievably honored to have my great friend, i can call her my best friend hillary to present this award to me tonight. this has been a long road. i have to tell you that i hope that for all of us, and perhaps she wouldn't like me to say this, i hope she's going to be our next president. (cheers and applause) >> charlie: oscar seemed to understand women. laura bush explained it in a
film shown at the george w. bush presidential library. >> for five decades, oscar de la renta has made dresses that make women feel good and look beautiful. i'm wearing one of my new favorites. this is the dress he made for me to wear for the opening of the bush center. >> charlie: the same trait that made him popular with first ladies and celebrities made him popular with women everywhere. >> you know, you have to have a very clear vision of who your consumer is and, obviously, through all of the years i have been in fashion the consumer has changed a great deal because, today, the most important consumer is the professional woman. in my case, obviously, a woman who can buy clothes and, in that sense, fashion has changed a great deal since i first started here in the '60s because it's no longer a lady of leisure, a lady who lounges who is the most important consumer. it's the professional woman. >> charlie: the woman who work
outside the home are the most important consumers? >> absolutely and, at the same time, you know, because they form an active part of the world and what happens, you know, they know more about fashion than any woman in history before because they are a true consumer in the sense that what they buy is a real need, you know, and then even the formula of dressing is changing because a woman today doesn't have the luxury of dressing, you know, during the day and then going home and changing and going out at night. most of the time, clothes have to have an elasticity that gives the woman the possibility of perhaps going through the whole day with the same dress. >> charlie: that understanding made oscar a great commercial success. >> in fashion, there has to be a very delicate balance because you know you have to have clothing that is interesting and different and you have to do it -- you know, this is a
business where you're as good as your last collection and a there is two or three times a year where you are exposing yourself. the balance is it happens to very young kids. you will see the press write about somebody who's very young and talented and then in the next sentence why he's out of business because the fashion show is not really what matters. fashion only starts when a woman buys the dress. the show extraordinary dresses on the runway, means nothing. >> charlie: then why do you do it? >> the balance is to do the clothes that attract the press but, at the same time, are sensible enough for a woman to want to wear those clothes. >> charlie: so the coture line and the runway extravaganza is just symbolic? it is just a way of saying what? i mean -- >> you know, it service a double
purpose. >> charlie: it's probably a losing proposition. >> you need the projection and the civility that the fashion show gives you because, you know, you do a show and do it in new york or paris and it covers the world. it's on the press all over the world, and especially france. when you do a show there, you get worldwide attention that's very, very important for your business. at the same time, you know, these clothes have to serve a purpose. they have to be a reality with the clothes. women want to wear their clothes, to create a credibility. i think sometimes today a lot of designs forget the fact that a woman has to wear the clothes. it is only a fashion if a woman is wearing the clothes. >> charlie: despite his new york home and travels around the world, oscar de la renta's heart was always in the dominican republic where he opened an orphanage.
>> i left the orphanage when i was 8 years old and i never lived there since that time but it's very much my heart and i'm still very much an american. i had a lady who told me she had an idea to look at some of the children who were in the streets, she asked me if i would help her rent a room in town to try to give some classes to these children. we started -- i said, yes, of course, i will help you. it was very small. we started with eight children. today we are taking care of about 450 children on a daily basis. >> charlie: what does it mean for you? >> i do it for very selfish reasons. it gives me tremendous pleasure. it gives me a perspective of what life is really about. >> charlie: and the spectrum of life from the streets.
>> you know, my world, what i work with is sort of a very -- how can i say, it's not really very realistic kind of world. being involved with the children gives me a different perspective of what life is all about. >> charlie: what led you to adopt one? >> again, it just happened. i adoptedñi moises. my first wife would never let me do it and the only time i did it was when i was single. i loved moises. he was the youngest child in the orphanage. he was found in a trash pile. i've known him since he was born. >> charlie: how long between the time he had been discovered did you make this decision? >> well, i mean, moises came
into our life when he was just 24 hours old and we kept him on an incubator for three months, and then he came to live at the orphanage at 3 months. when i took him to the doctor, i said, what would be the best thing for moises. the name came because the nurses in the hospital had no names and they started to call him moises because of the biblical connections. i said, what do you think would be the best thing for him? they said, if you could find him a nice home. at that time, i couldn't see him go, you know. so i took him home with me because he had a very bad cold, but in my mind, i knew that he was going to stay there. >> charlie: oscar de la renta is survived by his remarkable wife annette. she was there with him as he struggled with cancer. they were an incredible couple together. also a son moises, three sisters, three stepchildren and nine step-grandchildren. and by a legacy that will live
on. oscar de la renta, dead at 82. >> charlie: the great editor ben bradlee died tuesday at age 93. he presided over the "washington post" for 26 years where he helped define the standards of american journalism. his editorial skill guided the newspaper's reporting on important scandals and national eminence. he caught the world's attention in 1971 when he and katharine graham published a study of the vietnam war known as the pentagon papers. he spoke to me about that time and his rival with the "new york times." >> the "new york times" had gotten it, it was their story and they published it for three days and we were just sucking air. we didn't have it and we had to
do the most denigrating of all newspaper acts, you had to quote the other paper. blacks blah, blah-- blah, blah,w york times" -- terrible! >> charlie: a year later, ben bradley and two young reporters broke the story that led to richard nixon's resignation. watergate, it accentuated what the pentagon papers had done with. with you were a force to be reckoned with and you beat everybody, every television program and paper in america. >> yeah, it put us on the map, nixon did, and then it put us on the stage where we were -- where journalists are not supposed to be and they're not comfortable and they're not particularly good at it and that rattled us for a while. >> charlie: i spoke with bob woodward and carl bernstein earlier this week and they reflected on their time working with bradlee.
>> in the news room when we were working on the story, but at all times he had a glass office so you could see what was going on and who was in there, and then he would get out and there would be 100 pair of eyes in the news room following them around, where is he going? what's the action? and if two people were sitting around or talking or something, he would come up and say, what's happening? and then there was that sense of, you know, we're not digging deep enough. there's a mystery out there, go get it. >> that's right, and there were numerous times, we would give him a story and it would be a hell of a story we would think and he would say, huh-uh, boys, you haven't got it, get another source. >> charlie: i also interviewed bob and carl on the stage on the 40th anniversary of watergate. this was when you were 29 and 30 years old. you will never see a story this good again. >> who knows? (laughter)
who knows? >> charlie: their book, all the president's men, was turned into a movie hit in an oscar winner turn as ben bradlee, jason. >> he's not a source. do any of them have an axe? no. anything at all? no. can we use the names? no. god damn it! when is somebody going to go on the record in this story? you guys are about to write a story that says the former attorney general, the highest ranking law enforcement officer in this country is a crook! just be sure you're right. >> charlie: ben came from a family in boston. he served in the navy in the pacific in world war ii. he told me about the experience and how it prepared him for being a news room editor. >> i've known better reporters and better writers. i was getting to be a good
writer when they made me an editor. you know, you don't write -- you don't write when you're an editor. you maybe rewrite woodward and bernstein's leads, but that's 120 words. >> charlie: but you were to the editorship born in a sense, even back to the destroyer when you were running a ship. >> well, that's what makes -- i had a job in a destroyer which is exactly like an editor's job, and it was called -- they were just beginning to form something called the c.i.c., combat information center, where they decided to concentrate all the information coming into a destroyer from all of the sources -- sound, s sonar, rada, radio, eyesight, lookouts, engine room, everything, and instead of it all going to the captain, it all went to the c.i.c. officer and he parceled it out to the people who had to know it, and in the sense that,
as an editor, you get all the information coming in, you make the decisions and then decide what to do, they were identical jobs. but i think i was curious. i think i came along at the perfect time. i mean, you just can't quibble with my sense of timing. >> charlie: after the war, he ended up in a job as the washington beauo chief at "newsweek." he befriended his neighbor a young senator from massachusetts, john f. kennedy. he spoke with me about the relationship and the relationship with the first lady jacqueline kennedy after the president's assassination. >> she was never comfortable with the fact i was a journalist. >> charlie: that's what you say. it was almost like she would say maybe we're saying too much in front of ben? >> yeah. >> charlie: jack, you're being too open? >> yeah. i bet she said it to him, you know, pillow talk. i mean, that night at bethesda
naval hospital when she came back from dallas with her clothes stained with the president's blood and came over towards tony and me and started talking about, yo you want to kw what happened? and started telling it. she interrupted herself in mid-conversation to say, you know, this is not for -- not to be used in any way, not for the "post," not for "newsweek." i mean, that's appalling, in the middle of this incredible grief and incredibly traumatic occasion, she still has to worry whether someone she's talking to as a friend -- that really knocked me down. i felt badly about that. >> charlie: that she would think -- >> that she felt she had to think of that. >> charlie: and several times later you met her and she just
walked right by you? hurt you?qñ@v >> sure. >> charlie: did you try to reach out and -- >> yeah, i wrote her a letter, but i'm afraid i wrote it too late. >> charlie: too much had gone? no, i mean, she was so sick when i wrote her that i don't think she ever got it. >> charlie: ben's political connections gave him rare insight into the power of government. yet he maintains his skepticism of washington power players as explained in his 1995 interview on 60 minutes. >> people don't tell the truth. they don't tell the truth in 100 different ways. and it's become so easy to lie that no one recognizes lies. >> charlie: another rare connection with katharine graham launched his career at the "post." he spoke with me about her decision to hire him as her managing editor. >> i had a lunch with ben because he turned down two jobs in new york. i didn't know him much, if at
all. i took him to lunch and can you believe that i took him to a club because he was the first man i'd ever said will you have lunch with me, and i was self-conscious about paying the bill. (laughter) can you imagine? it's so ridiculous. i asked him what it was that he didn't want to go to new york and get on the "newsweek" ladder, what it is that he did want to do. he looked at me and said, well, now that you ask me, i'd give my left one to be managing editor of "the washington post." so i said, oh! i said, well, maybe some day. >> charlie: bradlee retired from the "post" newsroom in 1991. then said thank god the person making decisions in the last 26 years showed us how to do it with verb and guts and zest for the big and little story. ben later told me what he missed
about the news room. >> gets the town by the throat, i want to know the stuff that's not in the paper, you know, that they struggled over and why did they leave it out. i loved those arguments and decisions. >> charlie: why is this in the paper and why is this not in the paper? >> yeah, i loved those arguments. i loved when people were yelling at me to put it in and other people yelling to take it out. >> charlie: president obama honored ben bradlee last year with the presidential medal of freedom. in a statement he said wednesday of ben bradlee, journalism is more than a profession, a public good vital to our democracy. he carried the post until his death. he hoped to be remembered by a legacy of honesty. ben bradlee dead at 93.
>>harlie: laura poitras is here. she is an academy-award and nominated documentary filmmaker. two years into her last film, he started receiving anonymous e-mails that would change more than the course of her fill. here's a trailer for "citizenfour." >> laura, at this stage, i can offer nothing more than my word. i am a senior government employee in the intelligence community. i hope you understand the con text, this is extremely high risk. know every border you cross, every purchase you make, every call you dial, cell phone tower you pass, friend you keep, site you visit and subject you type is in the hands of a system whose reach is unlimited but whose safeguards are not. in the end if you publish the material, i will likely be
implicated. i ask only that you ensure this information makes it home to the american public. thank you and be careful. "citizenfour." >> who are you? i work for -- what is your name. edward snowden. i go by ed. edward joseph snowden is the full name. >> charlie: poitras received the pulitzer for her work on the snowden leaks and co-founder of the intersef. i am pleased to have laura poitras at this table for the first time. well come. >> pleased to be here. >> charlie: thank you very much. tell me how this began for you. >> there are two answers for that. when i started getting e-mails and when i started working on the topic of post-9/11 america.
i started documenting what was happening after the attacks at 9/11 about the iraq war. after that, i was put on a government watch list and i started being stopped at the border when i traveled mysteriously because i never knew why because it was all a secret process. somehow as a kind of -- like, working on this topic for many years, i became sophisticated at using encryption to protect my source material and communicate securely. then in january of 2013, i received a mysterious email from someone saying he wanted to talk with me and asked if i could share my encryption key which is something you do if you want to use secure email. i said, sure, here you go. who are you? he came back with these sort of increasingly surprising and shocking e-mails, and then we corresponded over the course of five months before glenn and i
got on a plane to meet him in hong kong. >> charlie: what happened then? >> i had a strong sense in our correspondence he sounded legitimate. there was certain specificities of what he was saying and his motivations. i had been working on n.s.a. surveillance and working with another whistle blower, william benny, who blue the whistle on domestic spying after 9/11. it was secretive, so i received his email not quite knowing who it was. then he had also then tried to reach glenn. he had contacted glenn, and glenn and i are colleagues. so when we got on the plane, there were a lot of unknowns. right before flying, i had seen some documents and so had glenn. we felt pretty confident the person we were about to meet was, indeed, working inside the intelligence community, but we didn't know who we were going to
meet. so he had a code, he said to me he would be in a public place working on a rubrics cube. glenn and i sat down in a hotel in hong kong and in walked a young man with a rubrics cube. our first response is we were surprised by how young he was. >> charlie: what was the conversation? >> from there, he led us to his hotel room and after we sort of had adjusted to, june, the fact that, okay, we expected somebody older, and then glenn immediately -- so this is the first day -- glenn immediately went into a very, very, very lengthy sort of interview, which was more like a deposition. as you know, glenn is a former lawyer. he took him through his whole life. he wanted to understand who he was and what motivated him to come forward with this information. so i filmed that on the first day.
there's probably five or six hours of just walking him through his life. i think what glenn and i both were struck by was how sort of articulate he is, and, you know, this is somebody who clearly we were meeting who had sort of crossed the line where there was a point of no return and not knowing what the consequences were. feeling there were things happening inside the intelligence community that he believed very strongly the public had a right to know and these things shouldn't happen in secret. >> charlie: take me to a decision to make this film. >> okay. so i work on the documentary and i'm also a journalist and i think that, you know, there are many overlaps but also differences. a documentary has to have elements that sort of go beyond a news cycle. there has to be more human complexity to it. so i had been working on a film around these topics, around
n.s.a. surveillance. i had started filming the data utah center which is in bluffdale, where the n.s.a. is building a massive data repository, and i started filming that in the fall of 2011 and i was contacted two years later. so i had been on this topic trying to figure out how to understand it, how to document it. so when he started writing these e-mails, it was pretty -- it sort of fit into what i was doing. i mean, the thing that was surprising that when we look in retrospect, we understand, but when i was first contacted i thought it was an anonymous source i would never meet. i thought a it was a stranger who would say i would receive documents and they would disappear. i had no idea of the gender or age or agency or anything. after we had been corresponding for anything three months, and at this point, i thought this person was legitimate. and i was very aware of the
risks he was taking and the reporting itself would also come with risks, right? >> charlie: but when you arrived in hong kong, did you think back then that there was going to be a film in this? >> sure. i mean iring's had my -- i mean, i had my camera. this was going to be a journalistic encounter of, you know, of significance, and i had already, before going to hong kong, i had -- snowden, whose name i didn't know at the time, told me he didn't intend to remain anonymous forever and that he would come forward as the source. i said, we need to meet and i want to film and it's important we understand your motivation, as a journalist. i asked for those things. his first response was that he didn't want the story to be about him, which is something he said consistently, he doesn't want to be the focus, he said
the focus should be on what the government is doing. i made an argument that it's not really going to be up to you, that you will become the story and your motivation does matter. by the time i arrived in hong kong, he knew i was coming with a camera, glenn knew i was coming with a camera, and i felt it very much my job in hong kong -- i wasn't spending time reporting with glenn and mccaskill, from the guardian. so they were reporting and writing copy and talking to the guardian about filing stories. i felt my role very much there like this was a rare moment where a source of meeting with cornellists who agreed to be -- journalists who agreed to be filmed. there were other encounters, such as "deep throat," no cameras were allowed
there. he chose to come forward many
decades later. >> charlie: snowden wrote you and said you asked me why i chose you. he said a, i didn't, you chose yourself. what did he mean? >> what he was referring to was the fact that i had been put on this government watch list, so i had been, for six years, every time i traveled and returned back to the united states, i would be pulled aside, there would be border agents who would pull me assayed and ask me what i was doing, write travd. i had gone through this a long time, starting in 2006. when it began, i was knee've. i answered questions, well, i had been making a film about the iraq war. increasingly, they photocop idea my notebooks and i became a little less friendly at the border and had written about it. so snowden might have seen
it in two ways. i had written about it for the "new york times," published a short video about n.s.a. whistle blower who was published in summer of 2012 and wrote about
tex persons of being on a watch list and what does it mean for a journalist to have that a kind of scrutiny and glenn had written about the fact i was on a watch list. so when i was asking snowden in the first e-mails, well, why me, because, you know, at first you see somebody contacts you out of blue, it's good to be a little skeptical, who are, they is it entrapment, is it some kind of -- and he just said, well, you know, it's work you have been doing is why i'm contacting you, and i think that he also -- he knew i was working on thetomic of n.s.a. because of what i'd done in the "times," and i think he knew that i was sensitive to the issues and the -- i guess you
could say the effect that you feel you're being monitored or surveilled. >> charlie: what do you hope this accomplishes? >> for me, it's a documentary or story about journalism, about
what happens, journalists working on a story. it's very much a story of the era of crackdown on forces and whistle blowers and journalism we've seen in the last years where you have people like my friend and colleague james risen who's being subpoenaed and potentially will go to jail because he's not going to testify against a source, and the government is doing a lot of these things. we know they subpoenaed the phone records of the a.p. so i think it's a portrait of journalism done in difficult circumstances and i think it's a story about somebody willing to take personal risks, sacrifices to expose information they think the public has a right to know. >> charlie: first, there was the story, then the film, and then there's the question of edward snowden today, he's in russia. what can you tell us about him
today? >> the film axe ally ends with him -- the film actually ends with him. i made a few trips to visit him in moscow. when we left, he went underground. we reported for a week, the stories had lots of attention. then we revealed his identity in this videotape. then he leaves with lawyers and goes underground. then the u.s. requested his extradition from hong kong. then from there, glenn and i left, and wikileaks came in, particularly a young woman named sarah harrison, and helped snowden to seek political asylum, and the first thing they did is they were trying to get to latin america to seek political asylum and, in transit, they were stopped in moscow and were held in the transit zone for several weeks and, ultimately, he was able to receive political asylum. and i think, you know, he definitely -- that was not his
intended destination, but he is there now and he has political asylum. i visited him and one of the things we learn in the film is his long-time partner, lindsey mills, has recently joined him there. so that's where he is. >> charlie: he has hope of coming back to the united states? >> i think he would love to. >> charlie: he said that? yeah, he said it. i mean, i think he really believes in this country, believes in the rule of law and would love to come back. >> charlie: what is it about him that you think we don't know or understand? where is the public perception, even though he's got people who salute him and praise him, he's got people who feel like he's a traitor, that whole spelling trum of opinion. i mean, we know that, where is the great misconception, if there is one, about edward
snowden? >> he's definitely an idealist. he's somebody who very much grew up on the internet. he is the generation that came of age on the internet. and he came of age and says this in the film where the internet was a free place and he believes it was one of the most beautiful things humanity could ever have. that you could have a means where people from all over the world, all ages, communicating freely with each other. i think that really motivated him. but to see that be something that's sort of taken away from people and used for other means -- means of surveillance, commercial means. so i think he saw something that he thought was really profound and should be protected and that was slipping away. >> charlie: so that was his motivation? >> i think that's the core motivation, yeah. >> charlie: and did he accomplish that? >> i think he certainly accomplished a shift in consciousness globally around
what states are capable of doing, what intelligence agencies are capable of doing. so i think he's raised that awareness. i think one of his main goals is he shows things like we live in a democracy, we have a rule of law and a constitution and there were things happening in secret that the public should know about. >> charlie: but there's a limit to his respect for the rule of law because he doesn't trust the system if he comes back. >> well, i mean, that's -- >> charlie: is that fair? well, he's been charged under the espionage act which many people said is a really draconian legal statute that does not allow for a basic defense and, so, basically, he couldn't say, for instance -- i mean, in the case of an espionage charge, yo you couldnt expose information of a
legality, and there are few options to have a fair trial, and this is something that the aclu has taken his case, ben wisner, one of his attorneys, makes the case strongly it's hard to have a fair trial under the espionage act. >> charlie: are there negotiations for his return? >> i think his lawyer has talked about details. i don't know. >> charlie: snowden in your film talking about his desire to go public as the source, to acknowledge he is the source. >> people say, are you going public? >> i think it's soon. i think as soon as they try to make this about me, which should be any day now, i'll come out just to go, hey, you know, this is not a question of somebody
skullicking around in the shadows. these are public issues, not my issues. these are everybody's issues and i'm not afraid of you. you're not going to bully me into silence like you've done to everybody else. and if nobody else will do it, i will. and hopefully, when i'm gone, whatever you do to me, somebody else will do the same thing. it will be the sort of internet principle of the hydra. you can stalk one person but there will be more to sny's does he have any sense as to whether there was damage done to america's national security as has been suggested by the government? >> i mean two, things in response to that. first of all, he made the decision to work with journalists so he's entrusted the information to journalists -- myself, glenn green-week-old, barton gellman had been reporting. so i think the fact the work
goes through a lengthy journalistic and editorial process. >> charlie: and with consultation with the government saying this is what we're going to do. >> yes. >> charlie: and in some cases they said don't do that and in some cases you said yes and in some no. is that fair? >> everyone goes through the contact and confrontation with the government saying, this is what we intent to publish, do you want to comment on it and do you have any concerns about what we're publishing? in terms of stories i've worked on, i'm trying to think -- there were some redactions of stories that i've worked on that have happened because the government made a persuasive argument that they should be redacted, but in general, you know, these decisions are made in newsrooms, the guardian of the sometimes. >> charlie: these decisions are made in newsrooms all over the country, had nothing to do with edward snowden. >> sure, this is the process. everything has gone through that process in terms of harmony.
we have been careful in terms of the reporting that we've done. >> charlie: they argue, for example, they'll argue that somehow people will know what sources they have, not in terms of individuals, but they will know their means and that that somehow will result in them having to go through a process of having to redo whatever means they had, spying on enemies of the state, so to speak. >> i mean, i would say -- i mean, there are stories i've worked on and doing the reporting and there are two stories that talk about one of the things they're doing in terms of targeting. they've gone and targeted engineers at telecoms, so the people who are sort of the keepers of the passwords and gateways into the telecommunication systems. we have documents that show actual names of people who work
for belgian telekom in germany and names of engineers, these are people not suspected overanything. the only reason you see h.q. which is a british intelligence agency and the n.s.a. are interested in is because these people are, you know, an access point to get to their networks. and, i mean, yeah, i have published those kinds of stories and it does reveal that they're doing something so if you have an individual goes to their linkedin page and the h.q. or n.s.a. will send back malicious software that will affect the engineer's computer and they go and type in a password and then the n.s.a. or h.q. has their password. this is happening in allied countries and in europe. i think this reporting should happen and there should be questions about the extent of these technologies. >> charlie: take a look at. this a clip of journalists at the guardian discussing publication of a story on
g.s.h.q. here it is. >> well, so which ones do you want here? this is operational stuff, so we mustn't say -- >> redact that. the quotes? yeah. collect all the signals all the time sounds like a good summer home project. keep that, n.s.a., on a visit to the u.k. this one. >> secret documents. we have to stick here, single slides. if it has more than three single slides, we have to be extremely careful. yeah, that's it. >> this is really dangerous stuff we're starting. >> we kept it all under lock and key. >> i know. i'm not saying that. >> charlie: one thing everybody agrees on is the whole snowden affair caused a
conversation -- even the president said this -- about security and freedom, security and privacy. has that conversation been beneficial and has it helped the country to cop -- come to a greater sense of what surveillance is taking place, where it goes too far, and at the same time where it's necessary for national security. >> i think the debate is ongoing and it's changed consciousness, not necessarily policy. i think there are still programs in place. for instance, the first story glen did was the verizon document which revealed the government had a secret interpretation of the patriot act where they were collecting phone records of american citizens. this program is still in effect. so i think that, yeah, there has been more understanding of what the n.s.a. is doing and the government is doing but there hasn't been actual changes yet. you know, in terms of i have been working on post-9/11 stuff for a long time and i think one
of the dilemmas i've seen is a lot of the policies we're engaging in, i would argue they don't necessarily make us safer. if you look at the iraq war which i documented, you know, i think that we're seeing now some of the unintended consequences of that occupation and what happened and the kind of instability in the region. so i think that i'm not fully convinced that the security that the government says that they're providing in these policies for citizens are any safer. >> charlie: are you convinced the government is not doing things it was doing because of this exposure? >> yeah, i think that's true. so, for instance, i reported with colleagues about the tapping of angela merkel's cell phone. >> charlie: they promised her they wanted they wouldn't do that either. >> yeah, i think maybe she has a little bit less attention than
before. >> charlie: where does this story go from here? you have this document "citizenfour." where does this story go? you have a profile of you by a great reporter george in behind the scenes of edward snowden. where does the story go? >> we actually ended on a point of question that things are ongoing and threats -- you know, i think -- i believe that what the n.s.a. is doing is a threat to democracy. >> charlie: what it continues to do? >> what it continues to do is a threat. in terms of my profession as a journalist, if the government can find out who i'm talking to, then how can i protect the source, you know? and i think that -- and it's not just me. there are many, many -- >> charlie: they know who you're talking to at every level because -- >> i think i'm a unique situation in the fact that i have been doing this reporting, so i think they feel they have to -- >> charlie: back off? well, back off on one hand,
but i'm sure there are people who want to know who i meet with. >> charlie: to me, this is a really interesting question, because it seems to be an ongoing conversation as well -- the relationship between the government and internet companies. >> sure. that has absolutely changed. we're seeing that shift. we're seeing more change in the technology companies and in our government in the sense that the tech knoll companies realize that the customers do want to be able to communicate privately and they want to build tools that will satisfy that. so i think we're going to see more and more technology companies coming forward and offering ways to encrypt communication. i also think there's a movement of the free software movement that have been building these tools for over a decade. >> charlie: we said in the last couple of weeks, a case where the head of the f.b.i. said on 60 minutes, you know, that they were very concerned
about the fact that, you know, these things -- that they had no access. they didn't have the encryption code. >> i have a lot of friends who are cryptographers. if you have a system that has back doors, it's naive to think only the u.s. can break the back doors, that other gochts can break them and you have a system, an internet that's insecure by design and there are a lot of people who think that's a very dangerous way to go. >> charlie: lots of people who don't look with favor on edward snowden, you know, believe there's no way that he didn't, in some way, in conversations with the chinese government in hong kong or with the russian government when he was seeking protection from being put on a plane, didn't somehow tell them something. >> i don't believe it. absolutely.
>> charlie: he says that. yeah, he says there was somebody with him the whole time. sarah harrison was with him and she was there precisely for that reason to be able to say, no, we were not approached by government. so this is -- it does not fit in anything that -- of the person that i know and there's no evidence of it. there's zero. i mean, he sought and received political asylum. >> charlie: thank you for coming. >> thank you. >> charlie: great to meet you. great to meet you. >> charlie: for more about this program and earlier episodes, visit us online at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
charlie rose, a conversation with richard haas and neil wilson. join us. >> pe're at a period where relationships are complex. neither allies or adversaries, they're often changing depending on the issue or the day of the week. this also is power spreading around the world, diffusing it to many, many hands in many forms. decision making is increasingly decentralized. we've moved along this year, next month is the 25t 25th anniversary of the end of the cold war and in 25 years we've moved from a world tightly controlled by two superpowers two a world not centrally tightly controlled and many people are making consequential decisions. >> from the point of view of combined science and humanities, i think we were approaching a time now where the appropriate disciplines of science have learned enough and are moving enough in the right direction so they can connect with the best of humanities to create a much
better picture of who we are and where we came from than we ever had before. in fact, i would like to refer to it -- what's happening and will happen shortly as the new enlightenment. ... >> charlie:. >> charlie: funding for charlie rose has been provided by the coca-cola company supporting this program since 2002. american express. additional funding provided by...
. this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and susie gharib. brought to you in part by. the street.com. featuring stephanie link who shares her investment strategies, stock picks and market insights with action alerts plus the multi-million dollar portfolio she manages with jim cramer. you can learn more at the street.com slash nbr. what a finish the dow closes with a triple digit gain and the s&p 500 has its biggest weekly run-up in nearly two years. but will a bank stress test out of europe change the tone next week? ups delivered but it was not the better than expected earnings the investors focused on. it was something else. pit stop, reporting a weeker than expected close,