The final stage of todays is to discuss the issue with Tech Companies with academic experts as well, to discuss those representing different aspects of the news media industry. Start off by asking members of the panel, if they could give their view on initiatives that have given us cause of concern as we go through this inquiry. Using News Consumption is a curated new space. He that a news bulletin or edited newspaper. More,ople consuming news and increasing numbers of people get their news by social media. What cause of concern news from your local organizations and also from the consumers point of view, the public point of view about whether they are getting a fair balanced picture of news they consume. Perhaps can zero, if you could perhaps start us off and give a perspective from your organization. This is simply the reality of how people consume news and information. As a News Organization we have to recognize thats how people become accustomed to consuming news. One of the things that i think the peoplerd is dont come to what we do with the same kind of intention as they did in the past. It mayfact we understand be sufficient to read a sentence or two on the move. Times has been in the while we use these platforms is a way to expose people to the internal is him that we do and we detract newer audiences and so forth. Ourltimately need to bring most engaged readers to the times itself. Other organizations find it difficult to do that. They are much more dependent on how these platforms displayed their news information. Effectively come to the equivalent of the front page for most individuals. News organizations, traditional News Organizations are still composing the individual stories, they are ranging and figuring out who oversees what and what kind of timeframe. To the earlier conversations, i think it makes it very difficult to determine whether they are in the publishing space or merely a purveyor of content that other people have produced. They clearly, through their algorithms, are applying a level of judgment, and that has a societal impact. Its slowing through those platforms. , whatat gets regulated the right approach to that is difficult in part because there is no clear bright line between what constitutes as news and other types of information. Traditional News Organizations are not licensed. Particular law for defamation laws. So theres a spectrum of information that has now gone into the mix of these platforms and it becomes difficult to separate them out. You asked what scares them. It is also the prospect that somethey had built is, to extent, getting out of their control. And if you look at how they score, generally google and facebook enjoy pretty good reputations. This is taking a hit. Engineers are of conceptsl kinds that engineers are having difficulty getting around. The advantages of making the from being a printed newspaper into a Digital Media business. Seeou think we are going to the consolidation of the news Media Business continue pace where they will have very limited local news . I think there are several challenges. There will continue to be consolidation in the news as peoples attention and the brands to which they attach that attention are necessarily somewhat limited. I think we talk about fake news as a national story. We talk about british issues on a national scale. I think the future of fake news will be a local phenomenon. Curiosity andve interest in their communities and there will be sufficient reliable sources locally. Curiosityfill that will be crazy bloggers and conspiracy theorists. I think when you are looking for one of the primary challenges of local news in the u. S. Is as we into digital consumption of news to a greater degree all the news do the local organizations have the resources to build and optimize and connect with their audiences digitally such as compared to summary like the New York Times or National Players that have and greaturces capacity to make this transition, where local News Organizations have that capacity. You can say these people are very close to their communities and very attached to their communities, so that should be an advantage. The question for the that for the future will be capacity. And then how will they have this relationship with their distributors . When you have a printed news product you created it and you literally handed it to your audience. There are sources where they will put out content, and there is somebody who stands between them and their readers. Particularly the u. S. , it has not been regulated. There are rules about the distribution delivery impact on businesses every day. A continuingll be challenge for local News Organizations to figure out their way through this intermediated delivery, and to have the capacity to make this technological jump. Two things that have followed on from this. Do you think the key issue will be one of trust . And with things like augmented , given people the believed to create fake stories, fake films the ability to ate fake stories, kate fake stories, fake films. And also do you feel as well that broadcast needs to do more toinnovate their Services Reach audiences online . A facebookbased news channel with 2 billion viewers a month, have they just got lucky . Modicum is that model difficult to replicate . When i first entered this business in 1984 between newspapers and television it was blurred entirely. Cbs news. Com is not as important a news source as cbs morning and cbs every journalistic outfit large or small has tried to find a way to merge video, audio, and publishing together, to do it credibly. I have been in this business since 1984. Worked in a Community Newspaper it was a Community Talking to itself. And there was one choice in that community. That was the newspaper and the local television stations. The choices are all over the place. We exist in a world where consumers are eating junk food. They are making a conscious decision to say what i was being nbc was thee cbs or junk food and what im finding alternatively is my good food. We have to acknowledge that that separation from our journalistic organizations that was probably built on a foundation of having away. D choices has gone we have to compete over credibility and trust. Theres nothing that cbs news can do or nbc or abc about someone who mashes together video in a dishonest way. Except broadcast that is legitimate. There is something media organizations have to take account for. When there is a hurricane or tornado or so or snowstorm, we will put it on the news. We werent there, and they were. We get it for free, we may put a teeny microscopic line in there that credits the source. We are taking content, turning it into journalism at no cost. We dont have to pay for a crew, we dont have to pay for an assignment editor. We are part of this dynamic. I think it behooves everyone in our industry to understand and own up to some of that. There are certain ways in which we profit, or if not profit gain from all this content that we transmute into journalism. I have a slogan i use all the time on two of these points. Is content is content, journalism is journalism, they are not interchangeable concepts. The other is, as far as news consumers, people ask me about what to believe and what not to believe, i always leave them with this thought, if by the time you woke up to the time you lay your head down to go to sleep, everything you read or consumed in a news context leaves he pleased and happy it and happy and verified, you are doing it wrong. Iti would do i would at i would echo that. From the sources of news and variety of news, it has enabled people to create their own media bubble. They only get reading material that is consistent with their beliefs. That encourages fake news because anything in that sphere, we dont like this guy so ive heard that terrible thing for this terrible thing, and it all gets thrown in there. My concern is you dont get to read things you get to throw across the room, because you get throw across the room because you disagree with them, but you need to be exposed to other things. And i see this in the u. K. And the u. S. , its almost like become supporting a team. And then people are accused of not being a true supporter, not being devoted enough because they can see some aspect of the other persons argument. How do we get to the situation where you have to sign up for 25 Different Things . Will most normal human beings dont do that. We k its Health Healthy if we create a News Consumption environment, where everything is consistent. Of all of the concerns, that may be one of the primary ones. Faking stuff to look like really good stuff get easier all the time. Cheaper,ology is much the programming is much cheaper. Layperson isnt going to know the difference between abc cbs, cnn. Its kind of a gloomy topic, but i want to identify one thing that is happening in our country. Proximity of people with their own cell phones that has revolutionized a certain understanding in this country and fundamentally changed the organization i was a police year six six years. If there was a Police Involved shooting and i wasnt there, it was dependent on the orientation of the facts, circumstances, timing and evidence provided by most responsible but also must potentially reliable, the local police department. The president s of citizens with their own independent means by which to video what happened has transformed not only that relationship between what notened and others who are defensive possibly about what happened say happened. I think its fundamentally altered in a positive way, not just the communitys understanding of what happened but journalists who are trying to figure out what happened. There are things we identified that are problematic with all of this. That is one area where i would interject has changed for the better. There is another side, which placed onssure to be News Organizations to get news out fast. We are certainly seeing examples in our country where people have gotten it wrong. I can give you a classic example of it. It was a tremendous amount of provided by journalists or those Monitoring Police scanners, not only after the bombing itself but on that fateful friday night where there was an effort and a successful one to find and apprehend suspects. Things were appearing on social media based on a police scanner. It was out there. There is this deeply philosophical and highly pressurized conversation, what you do with that . I kept counseling my own network internally. I listened to police scanners. Relevantyou hear is but it is also a very thin understanding of what is going on in the totality. Createircumstances enormous pressure, much greater pressure than i have experienced. Part of this continuum between what is believable and what is hyper pressurized is the ability philosophically philosophically to say i am prepared to be second and write. I am never prepared to be first and wrong. I am interested in the elections and referendum of some of the complaints that are organized. It is very much what you are talking about, where people reinforce their own beliefs. If we can go to the organize first, you have been in journalism for a long time. What do you think has changed in the last couple of years . Does it feel worse or is it something we know that the interference is there and probably always there . What do you think . Let me start with the reaction. You can consume a lot. We had a paper on the driveway and a half hour, that was the news. That was your window into the world. You have access to so much, and that is a good thing. We have crazy relatives that have weird conspiracy theories. The moon. Go to but you knew that information was different than what had driveway, it came from a different place, it had one professional, and one of the challenges is it is all put into a blender. Onus on theemendous readers, the consumers to differentiate i think there are insufficient indicators to readers about what is good stuff and what is not good stuff. I do think it provides a tremendous opportunity for people who want to manipulate the public. The most powerful kinds of fake news is not aliens have come down. It something that people wish were true. They can feed a bunch of information that unless you are a careful reader you dont understand that it is coming from a bad place. I think it has opened up an opportunity for people to manipulate the public much more than the past, but the things we can do by getting back to what is Good Journalism and what isnt. I think the targeting and transparency is hurting targeting and lack of transparency is hurting. I was more problematic than the spectrum of information and sheer volume. A bit ofuite understanding on the commercial side of our business as to how powerful those tools are. We spent a lot of money on facebook. And so it can be used in a variety of ways. Think its important in these conversations to distinguish between what is showing up on peoples newsfeed and in search, which is very much in the control of these platforms as they write their algorithms and try to tune the difference between social connection and a and authority versus relevance and authority. There i think, as you got into and potentialon solutions, i think starting at transparency area to begin to start to unpack this. As long as these are in complete proprietary control that there is a risk that a regulation will have unintended consequences with good effects. I think to your point it has been a fascinating day listening to all the key issues. If i would respectfully suggest from where i see it, i would think nothing is more fundamental than the sanctity of elections. The idea that elections can be. Nterfered by third parties a dozenspent more than years at the bbc, i have experience in the u. K. And u. K. Elections. There are always a couple of things i point out. That has enabled a broadly fair template which all broadcasters and News Organizations need to subscribe to. Because of the number of constituencies there are a number of small majorities in the u. K. Less than a thousand, maybe 1500 votes. Those constituencies are enormously vulnerable. If people are following the election via social media and they have in its have a desire one way or the other to target that area, it is hard to get you specific information. Its very easy to get a profile of peoples interest. This constituency gets hit with this wave of stories. There has to be some kind of defense to that. Whatever they may be they do have big challenges and they are they are grown very quickly. We know they have great geotargeting technology. The idea that we cant tell whether this is a legitimate news story, well you can. Just my check their story out, inferent from the guardian, which case we should be taking its down. I think its making a priority of the election, certainly in the u. S. For all the other stuff and all the other chatter you keep coming back to the idea that everybody is concerned that may have happened. And that is where it may have start. One, means and motive. I think actors long have had motives to see if they could or influence the american political process. The means is different. And i have a lot of conversations because i spend a lot of time on capitol hill and the white house. Or influence the american political process. We started having this conversation. By being so archly partisan against one another. We have created dialogue in this country. A much wider opportunity for fake news and propaganda or if some things that divide us to have traction. Our own political discourse has created an opening that havent existed before. The way we talk about ourselves, the way we speak about differences in opinion. We have to acknowledge the possibility there are behavioral adaptations to all the things we are talking about. In this telephone digital world, they are already demonstrating signs of exhaustion psychologically and otherwise. Real possibility that those who grew up with this, signalsl begin to send to google, facebook, and others about what they do believe is that possibility of them changing, quite separate from any Regulatory Regime what they may create, it gives me some sense of optimism that we are all corrective all them changing, quite separate , i believe there isollectively aboutoning coming underlying basis of shared news. That trust being reanalyzed and may be redirected in other ways. On behalf of their friends, they are looking at this world and Tech Companies. The novelty has worn off. There is a great possibility of adaptation. Adaptation at the consumer level. Thank you. Mentioned of you have Fact Checking. Often on social media the things that arent true, it was mentioned this morning there was information out there that wasnt true. One of the things that concerns journalism nal less and less people working in companies,adcasting that the kind of urgency to get a story out there that have eaten some of the big concerns and arent always checking, thats all right, we have to get ahead of the game on this. Do you think more traditional Media Outlets should be looking to make surebasics things are correct before you put them out there . I can see this changing now. When i first worked at cnn, one of the things we always used to do in a big breaking news situation is if we were the ones to break this news, we got a great big pr campaign, we dont do that anymore. A couple of reasons. One is primarily because stories dont break first on tv unless its your own original investigation. Terms of breaking events and natural disasters, whatever it it will bring via twitter or Something Like data mine, which is a twitter social mediabased news. There is no real premium. Thats the way it goes. The point is it is going away. I think you are seeing news it is awfuls who. People think they got it wrong. When the mistake is made it is terrible. Its a bad thing to happen. I think as more and more sources of instant news become available, people evolve from what they look for an established brands. Once worth bearing in mind is that traditional News Organizations like cnn and the New York Times have endured improved fortunes. It is significant that people put together their own portfolio. Sometimes folks are quite savvy. It would be different if i read the New York Times or if it was on Anderson Cooper that i read on twitter. I think the traditional media has a role. That role has increasingly to be the source of trusted news. That way there is no future in that. I think we have adopted many cases, one of the conventions we uses what we dont know. You cant go dark until you confirm everything necessarily, because people look to you actually to understand what is. Appening we have all adapted and understood. It theion was better at newspapers because they have operated in a live environment for years. They have had to adjust to the changes in social media. I think we have all learned pretty well how to act responsibility. Act responsibly. A couple of interesting is a viewthink there that the absolute value of traffic, this idea that more that that waster, based on Digital Advertising models were we get more traffic, we can expose more advertising, we get more money from advertising. Google and facebook are commanding the lion share. You are finding News Organizations thinking about their future in a direct economic relationship. One of the emerging parts to that is really carrying about longterm trust and not wanting to get these things wrong. I think the impetus to grab its now so we can to get a nasa we can grab the traffic is unfortunate. There is this new this renewed emphasis on structure and direct relationship with readers. On the Fact Checking side, journalists are the fact checkers. There are organizations that do good Fact Checking. Checkers arefact paid professional journalists and i think there are sufficient insufficient indicators to people consuming news online as to what is coming from refresh and all paid june are lists from professional paid journalist and where it is coming from somewhere else. Andeed to get much better giving people indicators about what is coming from professional News Organizations and what is coming from somewhere else. Not at all uncommon to have a large Flatscreen Television with quick rates for every one story from that day. Back in that time, which seems not so long ago, but in terms of that occasion was a while ago, of adaptation was a while ago. The stories would be updated. There was kind of, for a while, a debasing informality between a corruption a correction and update. This phenomenon of having cliques theoretically translated to add dollars as the industry has become more accustomed to consumer habits. It needs a relationship, it needs longer views. In order to monetize that. Updates are more transparently transclosed. News organizations have become more aggressive between distinguishing between the two. And more transparent in order to reestablish that idea of a relationship. Its not cliques anymore. Credible stories that have created a longterm relationship and longerterm view of whatever your product is. That is actually how you monetize your journalism. You gave a few one sentence talks about journalism always outlasting credible politicians. What we are dealing with here is incredible with all due respect. What are your thoughts on that . That it has found commercial traction. Information that a segment of our society, your society finds reef rooming or valuable has found a marketplace, found a Business Model that will pursue it. I can only take, not only professionally but philosophically, the law on that. Only true is not today but true tomorrow and a year from now will only ever live in starker contrast to that point. Those which are responsible for that, which is true, will gain perhaps incrementally but steadily over time. I certainly couldnt do it in the atmosphere that im doing it now. Thank you. Had the past week we have that we have heard a lot of of the financial effect on traditional Mainstream Media over the loss of circulation and advertising revenue. Please feel free to comment on that. I would also ask you your aboutts and reflections the longterm effect on the social wellbeing of states. Do you have concerns . I think we should have profound concerns. This being the Business Model for journalism and being disruptive for the past 22 years and with the ability to publish the barrier of entry in business has fallen, and therefore advertisers being able to go to direct these are larger phenomenon that goes beyond this current conversation. Its very hard to unwind that. It has led to a stronger position where we are talking about the emergence of news deserts or entire communities who are largely devoid of this sort of conventional coverage of Public Institutions and courts that you could count on in the past. It is not clear that established News Organizations or the many startups, for or , has yet to have found a credible sustainable model for that local journalism. Are finding models at a global scale and a national scale, certainly. It is clear those that are succeeding generally are succeeding on the strength of trust and connection to their readers and viewers and listeners and by the quality of what they produce. They leave real questions as to how fundamental journalism is going to be funded. How you maintaining maintain an informed society. One of the central problems we are wrestling with , and the major refer to it in his comments, the news is a different kind of content. Its important. A disappointing Television Show or cap video is that it is disappointing. Disappointing as an lowquality or fake news can destroy Civil Society in a broad scale and certainly at a Community Level. A it is existential that we have access to quality news. Ont think that is centum i dont think that if something certainly the test giants understood when they got into this world. I think there try to figure out and havent done that yet. There is no such thing as a free News Business and we need quality news otherwise we are not going to have Civil Society. When you look at the local level, the idea that maybe we will move the subscription we are losing out on the advertising side to google and facebook. There are some fantastic examples in that examples of that. You have to wonder at the Community Level what is the capacity of a community to pay subscriptions that will support real journalism in that community . You dont have real journalism you quickly get to fake news world locally. City council in my little town for years. We had a journalist who covered several things and city council. Would be aou there crazy blogger in the back room who had insisted that the school board was made primarily of aliens. Will be people feeding syria yesterday about the community. If it is not professional reporters it will be fake news, which has disastrous impact on those communities. Piece about aeat phenomenon in twin falls idaho that was brutally distractive to the local community. Destructive to the local community. We are struggling to help find the answer. Important and if we lose it we are going to lose quite a bit. They are small examples but they possibly point to the future. The foundation newspaper supported on a nonprofit basis. It has been a nexus to for quite some time, it creates a lot of in las vegasn you nevada i was an employee for the review journal. It has built itself entirely on donations, nonprofit donations from the community and from the businesses within that community. Offices, it has no printing press, it has no delivery trucks. And it is beginning to work. That is one possible model of filling in this gap at the local news level. Startedne whos career all of which had two newspapers competing of which when i was there. What i think about that anyone affected by this has to comprehend, it has a public value. It is the public value if the , then thoses it esteemed citizens have to figure out a way to support it. And there are small examples of that beginning to emerge in our country that give me some optimism. One final question. An intentional consequence of this fake news phenomenon has been the lost of trust in all sources of news, that traditional date keeper if you like. That is one of the most worrying aspects. You are never able to combat all this what are you doing and organizations doing, and how do you begin to rebuild that trust . Which is diminishing by the day. I dont know that it is. There is always a balancing act of appearing arrogant and aloof and then overreacting and saying the sky is falling. I think there has been a systematic focused attempt to delegitimize traditional media, because the stories of traditional media are reporting and therefore the can delegitimize you reduce the impact of those stories. There was a focused ongoing attempt to do that. To way to respond to it is double down on what it is you are good at. You can make a strong case that for the past year and a half that should be a golden year of american journalism. The number of major stories that have been broken from traditional news outlets and certainly the New York Times, Washington Post and organizations like my own, there has been one story after another which has been fundamental to the American People and the american government. Im not going to give in to the idea that we have somehow been lead been delegitimize. Having been consistently attacked, we do our own research that is extensive. See what the impact his hat on audiences. That us by ratings and revenues and everything else. We would be foolish in the to recognize that these constant attacks to cut into the core of what we would do. We shouldnt change what we are doing. The evidence is that is working for us. I would certainly agree with that. There is no question that trust youmedia has been declining begin to ask about the particular publications that people consume and you get different signals. Theres a study that indicated they were singing they were seeing a bit of an upswing. A lot of it is driven circumstantially by what is going on in the news. We have doubled down on doing what we do best, which is taking thorough andg as comprehensive as we can. Are seeing the results in terms of the number of people subscribing. I do think there are two stories going on simultaneously. Theres also an appetite for something they can latch onto, cut through the noise, and actually trust. How much of that is a polarization within the community . Is that what you are seeing . Certainly a fair amount of political polarization, to be sure. I dont know if people. Are gravitating to their preferred political choice. I think it is complex. I think you can find cohorts of people doing that, and are attached to one political outlet. There are also people reading more broadly and have an appetite to understand issues across the board. It seems to be a tremendous opportunity. For the last 20 years or so, this idea that there is something untrustworthy about the Mainstream Media has gone unanswered. We have lively conversation in our country about what journalism is, what it is and. Your presence here is indicative of a global interest in what is the foundational set of principles around credibility, journalism, trustworthy reportage. Time,s a very emotional it feels very heavy. It is also the best opportunity we have had in our careers. To do everything tony talked about enda kenny talked about. To lay it out and show what it is every day because the audience has never been more interested in what it actually is we do and how we go about doing it. There are market pressures, partisan pressures, but there are enormous opportunities to do this right and show the way. Thank you. A few other colleagues that want to come in. We will make a decision with the rest of the time we have. I will try and be brief. I think his point earlier on about where do you start, elections was well made. With mynstituency magnificent majority of 30. I am one of 11 members when i left the under 100 club. A few hundred votes, you change the government in the u. K. , that is how tight it is. I want to preface my question, i am a journalist myself. Accurate,a fair, free, responsible press is vital. The new media, Digital Media organizations are for their useful role. They wouldnt be as popular if they didnt. As far as your companies are concerned, they are taking large chunks of your revenue. Arguably going to grow as a traditional struggle. They take very little theonsibility for some of sadder aspects. And absolutely no liability. My question is do you think that is right . Do you think that is fair competition . I results of reality. These are Amazing Products that give our news brands access to many people. Amazinge built technologies. People always say are the publishers, Media Companies . I would apply any and all of those labels. I call them attention companies. They want to access as much of the public loss attention as possible. Tomorrow than they do today. Responsibility for what they are using to get your attention. Whichant a world in google and facebook are editors and publishers, and express editorial perspectives on what is on their platforms . No. But i think they can do a much better job of helping to separate helping the user to separate the weak from the chaff help understand what information is coming from what source. To help do much more resolve the fake news phenomenon. Ashink the difficulty is engineering and technology companies, they like engineering and technology solutions. This may be an area where they have to do something crazy like higher people hire people. Do they have some responsibility for what their users are exposed to when they are using them to make money . Yes they do. The competition and whether it is fair, i think it is important to distinguish between platforms. I would include apple and amazon, as well. There are those that behave more like wild gardens. Apple and facebook, in particular, where they try to keep users in their environment. And others like google and twitter, who are redirecting traffic back out. In thelatter instance, economics of media, they are tremendously complicated. We have an opportunity to build our business if they are acting as distribution platforms and not simply a wild garden. The argument we have made to them, facebook in particular, is ander build a set of apis a business that allows us to manage business on your platform, or pay us or your content. Give us the tools to allow to build a business there, or treat it as a closed cable system or something and pay us for the content. Is such that we dont have a huge amount of leverage, even the New York Times doesnt has an amount of leverage to make a profit. Lumping them together is not necessarily always helpful when we have been trying to understand the economics of the ecosystem. They are going to have to hire people. You cant solve things with an algorithm, they have to realize that. Also think there has been a positive. Cnn, in many ways is one of the original disruptors, no one had done the news model, like cnn they changed everything in the business. This is like the next iteration of that. There would no there was an argument about a shakeup. Why did we miss brexit . Trump . We miss if we spent more time looking at the conversations taking place outside of traditional media, there may have been more life to what was going on. I think this is a solid tree lesson it solitary lesson in that. I cant really be too specific in this, but no matter what business you are in, it cant be a principal we dont care about the truth. Whatever it is you do, the truth has to be important. You cant say if it is a lie, we will live with it. Be a basis of a business. Examples uple of a couple of answers. Early newspaper business in my career, even small ones pulled about 12 profit every year. They sold classified advertising. It was an embedded financial part of the Business Model that never went away. People say did the internet kill newspapering . It isnt dead, but it wounded it. Ruinedist and ebay american newspapering. It gave everyone who went down to their local newspaper to pay 15 for three lines of type two sell their dreams, puppies, golf clubs. That took 40 out of every newspaper in america. Within the course of about two years. Sustaininess model can 3040 loss of revenue in two years by no means by which to replace it and maintain the same standards, size, and scope . The answer is zero. That is a business reality, a competitive reality none of us can do anything about. It israel. That created smaller news its is real. News, it wasmaller becoming less robust. Ofn there is no coverage local community, everything masquerades as a partisan issue at the national level. There is no republican or Democrat National orientation to whether or not a bond is left in your community to fix the water pipes. If there is no local journalist to tell you about that, it feels like it. Loss of revenue, ambition, and scope at the local level was filled in by some of the phenomena we are talking about. Google,aptation, facebook, and these other large falseies have created a impression about the relationship with their user. My children have already figured this out. The relationship with me isnt about me, it is about you, what you learn about me, and what you sell about me. The great future for journalism is to say our relationship is different. You subscribe to us, we tell you about your world. Thats it. Subscribe to us, we will tell you about your world. The Balloon Festival in the springtime, or about a civil war in syria in its seventh year. We will tell you about your world. Thats it. You fort going to mine the rest of your life, sell everything you have purchased, everything you have downloaded, and give it to other consumers. We will tell you about your world. There to thisget adapted world, the stronger we will become a the better off we will be, the more we will be able to push back against fake news phenomena. I was smiling at what he said about how can allies be the basis of a business. That is what we heard from twitter. They are quite happy to have allies on their platform and business to be sustained on the basis of that. My question is you mentioned indicators a couple of times to help you understand what has come from professional journalism and what hasnt. Trying to be positive, looking ahead at the potential solutions. One of the things suggested to us in the meetings that we have had, i understand you have an information consumer report. It is an independent Rating Agency. Do you think the idea of an independent Rating Agency for information and news outlet so that it would show facts it would measure facts against fictions, report against opinion, have identity and information . The equivalent of a nutrition label on a package of food. Do you think that would work so that if there are poor ratings, it would make them change their behavior . I would start with something more simple. The simpler thing would be dealing with brand suppression, the brands that are attached to news stories get minimized. Data,he scraping and the they get very confusing to users who are not working really hard at figuring things out. The platforms could work on andng brands more prominent have more brand equity for users. Then you get to should there be a capacity to determine the week from the chaff in terms of professional News Organization, i think there should. While it is described as some impossible task, i dont think it is. There are already line drying in the journalism business. They get credentials to some things, and organizations who cant credentials to get other things. You could have pretty basic and encompassing standards that relate to do you actually higher journalists . Respond,our ability to do you respond to comments and directions . There are a number of Different Things that could be developed tahat would not be very difficult, particularly for companies with resources like google and facebook to apply and determine the fashion a News Organizations from the nonprofessional. You can be encompassing. Pain journalists is a big one. Can we trust the independent platforms to do that taste on their behavior . There are various decisions on how there is a group called the trust project, there are other folks looking at in dictionary quality. There are a lot of ways you can get to that. Credit then give extra whohe algorithm to folks are professional journalist organizations. That would mean getting rid of garbage, or censoring, but it would give more opportunity for readers to get reliable journalism. With us and working other News Organizations to try and attach signals that essentially give us sense of authority, as well as looking at the relevance of information. They are willing to open source it and make it more widely available to other platforms. Whether that works in a social environment, it is about the connection between individuals and has less to do with surfacing a particular piece of information. I think that is an open question. There are only short points. I hear that you are optimistic in the future of journalism and good reporting. The wholeverse, reason why a lot of it has gone down is because there simply isnt the appetizing to put into the newspapers and provide. The advertising has been drawn on social media as we have been hearing all week. 20 of worldwide advertising is on social media. How are you going to tackle that . Just refleet. Just just briefly . Is the we have seen ability of social Media Companies to provide advertisers with incredible detail to allow them to target in a way weekly have never seen in a way which we have never seen before is a major game changer. Imeant to add to that meant to add to that. To advertisers want advertise there because people are looking at it. So may people looking at what we have heard try to get the most hits, which tends to be the least reliable and the most potential to be fake. This business is changing quickly. It isk a lot of hits one of the counterintuitive things. They can be empty calories, as far as appetizer concerns. Advertisement cents. It is the beginning of a new session. Warner, is inme the process of trying to merge with at t. One of the primary reasons why the Big Companies are trying to do that is to combine the data one has and content that the other has to put together a kind of offering which is a long the same lines of social Media Companies. At the highest levels, they understand they have to try and provide some kind of similar metrics. This is completely opposite to local television, it is about how Corporate America responds to this major shift in the plates of the advertising industry. Companies will be prepared to merge and Work Together to reinvent themselves in order to respond to that shift. That is really where the answer starts. It will break down from there. Suggestion which would be put together gently for the New York Times, all you journalists link up with facebook, twitter, and google, and provide this highpowered, highprofile journalistic content for the engineers. There are efforts on the advertising side to put together something called trustx, which aggravates polyp quality publishers into an advertising exchange. It commands a higher cost per thousand, rates for thousands. You typically get problematic advertising and things like that. At the end of the day, it isnt that scale. Whether it is broadcast organizations and mobile carriers, or other News Organizations trying to pull together to create an ad market of their own. That provides perhaps a partial answer. I think we just did our Earnings Call today and announced that we now have 1 billion in subscription revenue on a pany that is 1,000,000,500 1. 5 billion. That is in certain quarters part of the solution. There have to be alternative sources. Thats the relationship i was talking about. Thats the relationship model for the future of journalism. BeDigital Advertising would another seven hours of airings hearings. If you think the News Business has been disrupted, you should talk to people on the buy side of advertising and see how different the world was 1520 years ago. The place where you can build optimism about news and journalism is the audience is bigger than ever. There are more people consuming more news than ever. They do because they can. They have access to so much more. That is something to build around. Ultimately, there is a lot of work and thought being put into subscription models, thats a big part of why we have been asking google and facebook to facilitate subscription through their platforms. They are experimenting with but have not yet delivered on. That could go a long way to, instead of getting in the way, help solidify it. The people do want news, they do value it. I think there are some positive things. I think we have to express a lot of concern about the future for local and community news. The relationship with the reader will be there. Is going to to pay be an open question for a wild. For a while. I agree with the models of the established as this is changing to the result of the power of tech. There is certainly something of interest to the community. The community is taking in things like dixie fox deal disney fox the. Fox deal. I am a working journalist, i have a deadline. I have to leave to get back to the white house. Thank you for your time, i appreciate it. A couple of for questions. Was very interested in what you said about the mood. When he strikes me about his the monopoly situation that we have. 60 cebook and having facebook and google have 60 of u. S. Digital, and 2 of total global 20 global. Someone mentioned antitrust. Is this monopoly situation allowed to develop . I will pass on that. There is a court case on it. [laughter] it is all about data. If you are in a data business, does that lead to a potential natural monopoly . If you have a little bit more data than the other guy, does that give you huge advantages in attracting ad dollars . Is there a natural monopoly there . I think there are a lot of academics and research on not. Research on that. They want analysis to whether traditional views of antitrust, consumer benefit in the u. S. , is applied in data centric markets. Know where that will end up, ultimately. It is true that when your advantage is the data, if you have more than the other person, you have a lot more. That is always going to be true. Ini think there is something the question of data. Without portability, you tend to get into a situation of lockin, where the biggest establishment cannot be dislodged and competitors cant gain a foothold. If i cant move my information to a better service, and i have to wait for everybody else to gradually adopt it, the chances it will take hold and present some sort of competition to these large players is minimized. Depth as to my whether these are better. Width from antitrust or not, and the differences between european and so forth. The data issue and not simply the command of a owns it and whether or not it is portable is part of a lot of this. Christmas in. Chris matheson. You addressed this, to an extent. That the overall desire for news and information has grown . You said you felt it had. Is there an element of optimism with the overall desire for quality journalism as opposed to other forms of news is growing . You demarcate any of that by demographics of society. We have some data about demographics on News Consumption. Is there used to be trucks about people dont consume news anymore, young people dont consume news. You dont tear any of that now because it is so ridiculous. Part of that is what is happening in the world. On nationalocused news stories, u. S. Presidency, other things. Recognitions a wide that people will always remain curious about what is happening in their world and community. There is a lot of data because so much news and information is available, it is consumed a lot. It is consumed differently than we consumed it as young people. It may come in a facebook feed with beach selfie, cap video, and Syrian Civil War on the newsfeed. People concern people consume massive amounts of media. That is something you can potentially build a future on. Customers,lacking this is a business in which how you make money from creating beenty journalism has incredibly disruptive and broken. We have to rebuild from the ground up. I agree. If you are going to spend a life in the News Business, you have to be optimistic. There is no way otherwise. I think there are a lot of grounds for optimism. In terms of News Consumption, there are people entering the business. There are other people who wanted to get a variety of jobs. The diversity of people try to get into the business, these are. Normously encouraging trends i also think it is rim sized to big brands reemphasized to big brands to reinforce what your brand can be, investing in journalism, quality journalism. That is resonated, it has been proved. We also proved a good Business Model, as well. There are a lot of good things happening right now. News consumption is higher than it has ever been. People think of the old Times Newspapers as a 24 hour news service. These things are viewed as digital propositions. They are platform agnostic in terms of how they are consumed. The key thing is they are being consumed. That is a great cause for optimism. I would agree with that, and say that because there is such a bleed between news and other forms of information, because the cat videos are thrown in ath headlines, and because lot of factsbased information in newspapers, weather, sports scores, they are no longer there. There is an enormous obligation on us to actually explain what we do and help able understand the difference between how different types of information are gathered, how information works. We have been working hard to be more transparent and give people a sense of how we build our our jobs and not assume that is well understood. You, that concludes our question time. I think you for your efforts. Think you for your efforts. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] allen we have more like programming coming up tonight, a look at congress and the renegotiation of nafta. John happens school of advanced international studies. Live coverage starts at 4 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Be with us tonight for a discussion with several africanamerican women , including april ryan, on experiences in covering the trump administration. George Washington University hosted the event earlier this week. You can see it starting at 8 00 eastern here on cspan. Has a panelght discussion on u. S. Immigration policy and the human totals of border crossings. The university of michigan Forward School of Public Policy hosted the event. You can see it on cspan two. Weekend on American History tv on cspan3, sunday at 10 00 a. M. Eastern, the west point center for oral history graduate anna carlson talks about growing up Kenneth Carlsen talks about growing up and his service in vietnam. We go to this bunker and it had a viewpoint where you can see what is going on in the calm that base. You are watching the rockets coming in my wife and son are on one side are you. Explosions are going off. Miss arkansas said it looks like the fourth of july. I said no it doesnt. People are dying when those things land. She started crying. At four clock p. M. On real america. With the upcoming Winter Olympics, a look at the film rebirth of seoul, korea. And the film on the eighth Winter Olympics in california. They are causing plenty of unexpected excitement. They were underdogs, now they have upset all predictions by winning this game. They earned the first gold medal ever won by a u. S. Team in hockey. On the 00 p. M. Eastern presidency, scholars explore the relationships between president s ronald reagan, george h to be above, and Mikael Gorbachev during the end of the cold war. In 1989,ou look back then you look at bush and gorbachev in 90 and 91. From gorbachevs point of view, bush is not measuring up to what reagan had been. Watch American History tv every weekend on cspan3. Sunday night on afterwards, black lives matter cofounder with her book when they call you a terrorist a black lives matter memoir. As we created black lives matter, we knew we had to get people on board. We also interrupt when people try to go up black lives matter. Insured it wasnt coopted. Challenging people in our own movement, people we love to not say our lives matter, do not use it to say other communities matter. It was to really focus on black people and be ok and be allies and solidarity with like people. Then we took it out to the world. Afterwards sunday night at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan2 boss tv. Cspan2s book tv. New york times Staff Photographer doug mills talks about the photos he took while covering president trump. He enjoys having this around. Having us around. Constant comments about fake news and the media. He enjoys having this around because it drives his message, the news of the day, which he can do and does every day. Having us around really allows him to do that. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspan. We took a look at the best refraction by the house 24 hour action by senate leaders. From todays washington journal, this is about half an hour