Transcripts For CSPAN2 Capital News Today 20100130

.. to changing circumstances. i am preparing this lecture and a bully assisted by alex. he did graduate work in a civic award in the same military story professor wassail likely. while there are many books about burke i almost you normally benefited by my friend potters remarkable at the naval academy for many years biography. potter do his own analysis of burke for many interviews where burke himself allies to himself to potter. both men of action don't have that capacity, sort of conflicts with decision-making. he possessed both. and of course my dear friend, evan thomas, in his magnificent ratings beginning with john paul jones and the wise men and all about the pacific as an inspiration and we're so glad you share the meeting. our story will open with a steadfast between the united states and the japanese navy over aquatica now in the solomon islands. we find ourselves in the southwest pacific in 1942 through 1944. in many of these battles, the japanese gave as good as they got. the new tactics had to be developed to defeat the powerful japanese navy. mander arleigh burke suddenly became to national fame during his service of battles with his destroyer squadron named them the little beavers. he loved the little beavers. he always loved those favors untracked sailors and that's why the lone star sailor down on involving avenue symbolizes that let that he has for sailors. burke was an aggressive combat leader. his standing orders were to attack an enemy contact without orders from the task force commander. in the battle empress augusta bay and cape st. george, he emulated among all people the strategy to defeat hannibal in the second punic war. here's how he described it to himself. the plan was based on hitting the enemy with one set of surprises after another. this is accomplished by turning to destroyer divisions in parallel columns. one division would slip enclosed under the cover of darkness, launched torpedoes and dark back. when the torpedoes hit the animals started shooting to the entire first division, the second half of the team was suddenly opened up from another direction. when the rattled enemy turned around a new unexpected attack the first division would slam back into it. i produced a start mean the tree. power in the battles the solomon islands to the japanese no longer held any initiative. the u.s. navy launched an island hopping campaign to the sensual pacific to the heart of the japanese empire. in preparation for this offensive admiral ernest king had determined that all surface commanders needed to have aviators, chief of staff, or vice versa. this order helped to defuse the growing rift between the surface and naval aviators. the command structured also resulted in admiral burke been sent as chief of staff to the prestigious mark, a pioneer in naval aviation. initially, burke refused. i will not go, i will stay with the little beavers he stubbornly said. [laughter] he did not want to leave. he didn't warn burke. in the first disagreeable meeting, he says their category, welcome aboard, take a shower and get some sleep and then come back up here after you sleep it off. it infuriated burke finally went back and got clean clothes, came back up, reporting for duty, sir, they grouted each other. that's the way it was for two weeks. and then it began to break in this relationship of great affection when he was finally approaching his death. but the two are different as you will see. by june 1944, the united dates invaded the mariana islands. these islands were critical of the japanese strategy because from their american b-29 bombers could begin a bombing campaign against japan itself. the japanese navy tour everything into destroying the u.s. invasion fleet in the famous battle of the philippine sea. even though the u.s. scored a victory, shooting down over 300 -- 300 escaped. it had been badly hurt by one aggressive carrier air strike. at the one time, when it was within range, the fleet was not sunk. japanese planes in the so-called turkish sheep shoot turkish satisfied the fleet escaped. burke believed because the overall commander admiral spritz was not aggressive enough in pursuing the japanese fleet. he adopted to play it safe to protect the invasion fleet. one of perks not to write in after reports of the battle. burke was blunt, criticizing admiral spruance. he asked the burke tone it down. don't you think you should go back and rewrite those last two pages he suggested? nosair, but i will. [laughter] he already knew that the commissioner left to sleep and when out and snoozed and didn't read his reports. so burke concluded, the enemy has escaped. he was badly hurt but one aggressive airstrike at one time when he was in range the fleet was not sunk when it could've been. the pacific war story now moves to the largest naval battle over in naval history, which is so brilliantly described by evan thomas. in his sea of thunder, i wish i could write that way. where he gets into the mind of the opposing commanders with this enormous research that he did, mr. ambassador, some in japan of them here. i don't know how he does all this and then does what he does at "newsweek." he's a genius. by october 1944, the united is prepared a strike. the strike would fulfill general macarthur's promise to return to the philippines. again the u.s. fleet was tasked with ensuring success of this invasion. once again, the japanese threw everything they had to be americans. the japanese divided their fleet to do three task forces. one was composed of what remained to the japanese one vaulted aircraft carriers. as the japanese no longer had enough training pilot to compete with the americans, this decoy fleet would try to wear the powerful u.s. fast attack are your fleet away. this ploy, this strategy would allow the two remaining japanese service tax forces -- it was a brilliant strategy. again burke and disagreed with the commander, bill hall's then. they were like both tied up with your ego and they could make terrible mistakes. that never happened to burke. by now, halsey was a folk hero in all of the papers like macarthur nobody dared challenge him. burke and mr. policy would make a serious blunder if he left unprotected the invasion fleet in order to chase what turned out to be a japanese decoy fleet burke argued that halsey had a chance to defeat the japanese decoy fleet and still tired south in time to deal with the japanese second task force, courageously to be played it smart. he didn't. the third smaller japanese fleet already had been destroyed. halsey neglected the tactical importance of the japanese carrier force and focused on the northern japanese fleet as the biggest threat. he was suckered. burke begged him to relay these doubts to halsey, but mr. grant, i think you are right but i don't know you're right. i don't think we ought to bother halsey. he is busy enough. he's got a lot of things on his mind. burke was despond end. during the night, report reached the u.s. fleet that the japanese senate force was heading for late today, senator task force was any delay takeoff to the unprotected streets vacated by halsey. their brilliant move was taking place. again, burke went to matcher to force the issue by contacting halsey personally to change course. matchers said to burke, yes sir riordan if he wants my advice, he'll ask for it. he replied as he went back to sleep. burke didn't sleep. his latest attempt to get to halsey here at burke played one less card, technically he had the operation control of the tactical formations of the fleet. and he was asleep and turned it over to burke so burke on his own honor defeated the fleet. he hoped to engage the japanese in night battle. and then say entr'acte fell back south and plenty of time to deal with korea. but halsey slowed his fleet. in the next while halsey shipped to worded decoy fleet, admiral carita is powerful fleet was causing havoc around late today. finally halsey realized he had been lured her to the decoy fleet bourque had been right. but then was too far away from the battle to influence the rest of the battle. but luckily the tenacious but almost suicidal defense of the invasion fleet escort carriers forced carita to withdraw before he could attack the transports. , save the invasion. burke felt that halsey made a critical error and that the u.s. had averted disaster only because of the miraculous defense of the outnumbered escort carriers and destroyers. his policy or mr. had listened to burke, but if they had. they would've had the opportunity to completely annihilate the japanese fleet and bring the war to a conclusion. this is one of the many might have been of burke. after late today, burke continued to work together in iwo jima and to the kamikaze onslaught against okinawa. they were together with great affection under the end of the war, however different they were because burke would work with people who were different from him. our story now takes as common now that we got to do is they need a sip of coca-cola to get us through the next scene. [laughter] our story now takes us to the period immediately after the war in 1949, captain burke, by the way when he was promoted to rear admiral, he attested that at the end of the war he said it won't be able to keep it. it's just not good and he had this habit of fighting promotions. that's strange. i never had that when i was in the military. i wanted to get them. captain burke was made head of the organizational resource and policy division in 1823. their burke developed the first long-range navy plan since alfred damon hamm. the flooding to be involved in what became the revolt and did he get into trouble. as you recall, during this time of bitter competition, we did not invite any air force generals to this meeting. [laughter] better competition between the different branches, the armed services, regarding which service would take her in her role in national defense. the so-called revolt was a controversy over the powers of secretary of defense. many senior officers were unhappy with the new austerity measures of secretary of defense lewis, johnson and a grace period of discernment. they publicly attack new service unification under the department of defense, sounds familiar. it was also an attack on reliance on atomic power as the country's first line of defense in the other two services. in about 23 burke was cast with courtney deason maybe suffered for its role in the national defense challenge for the air force nuclear strategy. he was no shrinking violet. burke boldly testified before congress, get a plan. he was traumatized and played up in the press and then characterized his anti-unification as secretary of defense. in retaliation, and defense secretary lewis johnson and navy secretary francis matthews removed burke from promotion to rear admiral. this was it for arleigh burke. his career was over. he and critique bobby got out the old planet and figured out where they would go next and were packing up. the vic uris solomon islands was packed out. meanwhile, back at the white house, a captain denison, bader and admiral, handed harry truman the list of promotions to rear admiral. and god bless him, he spoke up and saved admiral burke. he said sir, there is one missing. i think an injustice has been done. truman said, what's that? he says it's captain burke, arleigh burke. truman said, didn't i meeting down there in norfolk? yes, sir, that's the one. he is good. yes, sir. well, just write his name back and period on the promotion list. the old secretary of defense and everybody were shocked. rear admiral, arleigh burke was saved for this country. now, the irony in the revolt of the admirals however this remarkable career with so many turnabout that they did feel they have to give them a place to start it cool down. and a noncontroversial position would be defense research and development board, ironically. this position was another step in opening a new vista to admiral burke and introducing him and controlling him with technological and strategic solutions to naval and defense issues. creative breakthroughs, thinking smarter not richer. we need that today. the seeds were sown in this training for burke's monumental polaris breakthrough. well, when i moved back after the outbreak of the korean war in june 1950, the traveling doesn't stop your burke or the deputy chief of staff to naval commander naval forces far east and then as commander division five. after macarthur is truly brilliant and chant operation, which burke applauded and the north korean armies running back to the north, burke flatly disagreed with macarthur's strategy to pursue the north koreans to the oulu river, ignoring reports of chinese intervention. and as with a custom time he spoke up and challenged. burke argued that macarthur's should establish between one son in pyongyang and from that lined the u.s. army could continue to mop up north korean armies and if the chinese did intervene, be it in an ideal position to deal with it. but avoid, provoke. burke knew when to be aggressive and when to be careful. macarthur revived the idea he knew best. burke didn't. it's burke's advice had been followed, the chinese would have not intervened to want something new line today would be the border between north and south korea and two thirds of korea would be free. another burke what if. 1951, to burke's surprise, he would made a member of the united nations truce delegation, the purpose was to negotiate with a communist or military discernment in korea. as those tedious negotiations proceeded, burke became angered and frustrated by the fact that the american soldiers continue to die while we rankled over a few hills, later i had to go fight through those sales. and people died and we weren't accomplishing anything -- any development of status strategy was unsatisfactory. he learned a lot about the communist and those negotiations , particularly if he had to take a rare stop in the next room, come back and then take a new position had new on the line and do good negotiating position. but something else happened during this period. very remarkable, mr. ambassador. arleigh burke lived in japan. he came to that the japanese. that japanese guy came in and put flowers in his room and when he left every night, he thanked the management and they said she's done this on her own. he got to know your admirals and he became a powerful influence on the development of the early japanese maritime defense force. and when we sent up csis and when it came back from the state department he was leaving inside, you know, i've attended this conference is in japan. this was an 1970, you've got to open major efforts with japan. and it's for that reason we got together in these major congressional exchanges and later got to know dr. toyota who gave his japan chair and dr. anna mori was endowed the ad share leadership academy. in a real tired of this senator with your great country. after six months, burke returned to the united states and he became her -- let me say i wear my decoration from your emperor briley. admit it pertains of what csis has done with japan and your honor. after six months, burke returned to the united states and became director of strategic lands division. now after assuming this position, he boldly asked to see the president. you know, he's a rear admiral. [laughter] that didn't mean a dime to him. well, all right, they granted him 15 minutes. went on two hours. michael mullen forcefully laid at his observations about the communist and why this war, the whole strategy was wrong and later eisenhower moved to what dirk wanted. he was banging his hands on the table and the president saved him. it was just an amazing personality, german lessons. with his record of defense, the figured he had them tied. he was shocked when president dwight tauzin hauer were announced he would be chief of naval operations in 1955. he did. [laughter] this is not a good idea at all. there were 92 active flight duty officers senior to him. it was going to cause bad feelings and make his job impossible. furthermore, he had -- did they think he was a path he? he had a bad habit of speaking his mind and he was not going to change. objection to overrule he kept saying over and over in 1965. my gosh, how did you do with? [inaudible] the hard way. they added press attention and with this war expert -- exploits written up again you know on the many times, "time" magazine covered burke more than never. he was a true national celebrity and hero. as the 15th cnn, burke immediately set about doing cockade individual initiative and responsibility to ranks, take the initiative, thinking new, come up with new ideas. burke often said he could not command anything in washington. he could only influence. he could only aspire, he could only set an example. and all for a strong vision for national strategy and for the future seapower is admiral hand once had at the naval war college. shortly after becoming cnn now, burke was added again again with the president. the very president who had done this for him. this time it was over the issue of eliminating the peacetime draft. he believed that such a move would hinder u.s. facility to fulfill its defense obligations at that time. especially those of the navy. he disagreed with the secretary of the navy on this. he disagreed with the secretary of defense on this. and then he demanded to see the president. we are back at it, once again. in those days it was a privilege to be a cno. that's one reason we're still on this implication, mike. and from that president eisenhower, was the secretary of navy and defense sitting there angry. burke goes on and on laying out the reasons for his position. and mike is getting redder and redder in the face. and finally, after some time, take slams his fist on the table and he says, will keep the draft, meeting over, burke coming you stay back. burke had one, but he got a falling out. he says, don't you ever create a situation where with you or to superiors in of them i overrule them and disgrace them. never again, sets burke. yes, sir. the draft remains. well, burke figured he had one match but he figured he was through. and he began to get these invitations does that come over to the white house for drinks, come over and have a little discussion. they developed this fast friendship. ike with dina gettysburg while burke was here the senate. one of the last people you send for to talk to. now, we mentioned earlier how burke treasured the value of science, the cutting-edge, the narrow edge in victory like we know it that comes from those breakthroughs which are so key. and his greatest achievement as chief of naval operations was the development of the players. burke felt that such a nuclear harmed polaris designed to be prepared for some earnings would give the u.s. strategic flexibility in the cold war. burke contrasted this flexibility with that of the air force dependent on bombers operating firm fixed positions. furthermore, he argued the missiles and development were dependent on fixed lines and strides. he pointed out that polaris missile submarines could move anywhere around the globe with agility and from not just one designated decision. the polaris maneuverability could also replace -- and this really burned up the air force, the air force bombers launched outside the nation. needless to say, burke's strategies sometime got them to control retaliation, certainly greater agility was a devastatingly direct attack on the air force bomber and massive indiscriminate missile.err. now this is one fight burke didn't win, just as he did on the polaris, but not on the larger strategy. this is just as he had not won the argument on the alternate on the line in korea. the soviets constantly began to match the build of the decreasing numbers, strategic bombers, once escalation superiority was lost, we managed to assure destruction, which could have led i learned to nato and we play these games every year to a terrible miscalculation where we were using nuclear strikes for political standing, not think they might do a nuclear strike on boston as a political signal. henry kissinger challenged that at a conference we ran and csis in 1979, he challenged its undersecretary of defense. ronald reagan, jim watkins, admiral watkins was in the room when ronald reagan moved towards seeking strategic defense initiative as a flanking maneuver as a way out. burke has something going for him in adding agility, which we lost. in the strategy. he ended a second term as cno. burke stated it was obviously time for him to retire. ike would have none of it. it was his third time however and you was disappointed with himself and his own leadership. he opened up to me here at csis was a failure to the bay of pigs. he felt he had let himself down. he felt he had not performed the way he had performed previously. he went over this privately with me again and again. he would never write it up because he said he didn't want to hurt anybody now that it was over. he served as acting chairman of the joint chiefs during this period. he would be invited into these meetings, allowed to take no note and b. and criminal change made, no capability or allies whether this was a work of our operation were not. burke regretted that he did not go to president kennedy and blow the whistle. this is not going to work with all of these compromises. when he did speak up it was during that famous night in the oval office. when the bay of pigs operation fell apart. he told president kennedy that he had a destroy post cuba ready to file, which kennedy replied, burke, we don't want to get involved. to which burke responded, mr. president, we are involved. well, anyway, he was not allowed to fire and he never wanted to talk about it after that except privately. a revered admiral burke retired in august 1961. in his biography, professor potter describes 1962 hou first attempted to persuade him to join me in found in a strategic group is a part of georgetown university. i told the burke it might be called the center for strategic studies, bader added international commerce in my doctorate in history from georgetown, got the blessing of father edward bunn who thought i was an episcopalian. i came to know -- i came across myself very well. [laughter] i can't know admiral burke when my -- burke turned me down the first two times. i bet didn't bother me. i didn't have any experience. i was dating a navy junior who loved those white navies and not those west pointers would grade gold vitamins. she was a navy many times over, admiral sample was lost at the end of the pacific war puget for members of her family and she knows all this. so my wife turned me down the first two times. i got around the third time. [laughter] i figured i'd get burke on the third time and potter says ivo hook burke on the third go around. i burke on the focus on the need to foster a coherent national strategy. a challenge we face today. dubiously i'd were as staff director on capitol hill. i explained to burke my frustration with the committee compartmentalization or. i need the admiral's frustration with our part to mineralization in the executive branch. we both agreed that such mutual compartmentalization, both in the pennsylvania avenue was the enemy of strategic coherence. the enemy of the best use of our resources. burke said when i finally hooked him, if we can tackle that issue in this new center, it will be truly strategic. count me in. by working arrangement with burke was to be there at 8:00 sharp every morning. he had a notebook, schoolboy with all of his boards he was on four important corporate boards in his boy scouts that he was bleeding. give me his view another organizations of what worked and didn't work, carry over to ours. and given a runtime runtime of senate research, stay out unless he thought it was off course. our first meeting he said to me, something's very telling ten. -- he said dave, you commie arleigh, but i wanted wuornos to commie mr. burke eared a set admiral, nobody is going to college you mr. burke. why do you want to be called mr. burke? he said i'll tell you that there are a lot of big shots getting out of government who actually think there are big shots. they think the world is going to come to an end. that's wrong. they've got to remake themselves and i've got to remake myself and i mr. burke. he was mr. burke. nobody but that told you something about his personality. our first conference in the hall of nations at georgetown on his imprint. council on foreign relations meant to bring that great big vote, 1000 pages a lot yesterday called that, but it was a strategic awakening. the title of the conference among national security political military and economic strategist in the decade ahead. burke said you got to look ahead. nobody's doing that. we've got to have that in our strategy. and i think admiral mullen will agree when we locked and we've made progress of three departments and they're looking for years ahead in each one compartmentalized. furthermore, burke insisted on this conference that we bring together nation of security and national economics. sound familiar? burke quoted eisenhower who often said that those dealings with the daily near-term operational requirements could not look over and across the strategic horizon. now the 30 odd scholars at the conference she included some well-known older names like herman conquerors, escalation business, edward teller and younger figures like henry kissinger, james abstract shelley murray. he consisted we pull together the points of differences to find the issues. he said so often the problem is people jump to the problem and they're not looking at the issues from all angles and that's what it is to be truly strategic. later i worked with arleigh burke on the walter edge lectures at princeton. here he wrote it and spoke about the difference between power and force. he said that so many presidents, generals, admirals, ambassadors don't understand. he said that a if you mobilize perfect power, if you have the perfect battle you didn't have to fight. you gain the willing were direction without it through power, not with force. force always been the potential. csis grew throughout the 1960's as the vietnam conflict grew incrementally. we committed half a million men with body counts, incrementalism, light at the end of tunnel, burke was beside himself with his strategy, national security visor walt came over and we had the young president here and he said, the areas just over the horizon. we're about to break off here in the takeout. that was two weeks before attack. we had an after action on todd. there is a three-star general back from vietnam that came to that end he assured admiral burke that we have actually one in south vietnam because the infrastructure had been destroyed and burke said the general has not aimed at stop yet. using that the battle at washington and the president has decided not to run as commander-in-chief. burke do not maximum the pulliam of three to one psychological human factors, napoleon thought were three times more important than his armies. i was pulled into the assistant into the assistant secretary of state for congressional relations in 1970. he didn't like that, gave me an ultimatum to years to get back. and the ultimatum he wrote then i'm retiring in another year. we've got to make things really interesting again. that word interesting is the key to burke's personality. whenever he disagreed, with his superiors or his predecessors, his arguments were interesting and captured his opponent into what he was saying. he attracted them to what he was singing he made them think anew. this became his unusual quality of persuasion, which ultimately became the key to great leadership. burke was a magnet. i arleigh burke's funeral to face and a packed and apple is chapel in a very chilly day in 1996. he nearly lived to 95. prior to a step that would visit him for a decade or more. his retirement home, he lost his chronology, never his wit. as we sat in that packed chapel, several of you would have been there. there was one place on the aisle, next to the national security adviser. i don't think that would be president clinton because when csis was founded in the vietnam war there were people at georgetown as a student and i know that he would march against rotc marching against even csis even though we had moved downtown. about that time, the president of the united states comes down the aisle, get set to deliver the eulogy. she was right, magnificently with admiral burke. john, you were there with admiral burke fighting the battle of the solomon islands right along with them. what a great tribute from the commander-in-chief. our story ends here, except that he's the godfather of this institution, that john now so splendidly leads. arleigh would be so proud of john. csis, our counselor here, one of them said when we honored him on his 80th birthday, csis was the first institution in washington that sought to be truly strategic. why not? arleigh burke was truly strategic. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] >> i would not as i say our panel, it doesn't seem right to call this distinguished group a panel. every one of them is such a singular leader in america and were so proud to have them here. you got copies of their resumes. i'm not going to go through introducing anybody by personal background. because i think that would be done again this afternoon. but let me just take t opportunity to save a sincere thank you. please everybody sit down in a sincere thank you to admiral mullen, to admiral ann rondeau into the secretaries john warner here at csis for being here. evan thomas is a fabulous author and has captured the spirit of these times and probably the most gripping of ways. we've asked them to take the leader. adam, can i turn it over to you? >> event. david, wonderful speech. shouts the question, when do leaders, simply military leaders and the civilian control system disagree, dissent, challenge higher authority? i want to ask that of each of the group and let me first-ever to admiral mullen. would arleigh burke survive today? [laughter] >> i guess in the way david captures them so well he would figure out a way to do it. given those that he routinely challenged in the description i think of the word interesting and how you would draw individuals and even as they got not and even at that level and clearly want to hear from him again. i suspect he could. and that he would have figured out a way to adjust to the circumstances that exist today and very much so. >> can you address the larger question of when particularly of military officer in this control system, when and how and under what circumstances, what are the rules of the road unchallenging higher authority? >> well, actually i think not unlike what admiral burke did in the sense that in discussions that would be routine with your boss, your civilian boss and man does when you disagree and feel strongly about it, even as we can now right up to the president and it's not just me, although i have routinely more access to the president and the other chiefs. certainly they have the option. and that it's done privately and it's done in a way that i think in a timely fashion, if you will. and that you have a president. you know, on the other example is i think that or they are tied to white dave was talking about is the bad i've senior individuals who want to listen. even if it maddens them, they were also willing to listen and i think that important for anybody at any senior position of military that you want to listen and having that opportunity opportunity, give advice and present a couple examples he didn't win them all and i'm sure that he marched off and did whatever the senior civilian leadership said enough so we do now. and so, both opportunity certainly i have it and i had with president bush and president obama and i think it's very important part of our system in the opportunity to do that. and when the president makes a decision, we're on. >> clematis pickup at the last person. what's the line when you don't go any further? how do you know when you're supposed to salute and keep going? was that moment? [laughter] >> i really think that as you have thought the problem through, as you have tried as david mentioned about arleigh burke has made the arguments interesting. they you would've explored those areas and have had a thorough setting of your position. and in the society and in the system in which we work, when the civilian authority makes a decision, that's it. i think you can't go in superficially. you have to about the problem for yourself, but when a decision is made, at some point it is contrary to your sense of honor or your ethics, then at that time you other options. >> at one point, at least one point, admiral burke basically went over the heads of others in the military, they never took him aside and don't do that again. can you imagine a circumstance in which you are a senior military officer, military offers more senior to have gone on to the president and say no,. under what circumstances might you do that? you talk about honor and ethics. can you be a little bit more specific about a moment in which you think your senior military officer has just got a run? >> not to dodge. i mean, i think it has to be driven by the circumstances that you are in. the issue that you're dealing with here it in the receptivity of your arguments as he put them forth and menu as an individual has to make that decision. and i do not believe that anything fits the mold because of the many facets of every issue in the complex nature of what we are dealing with. >> for me ask just just one more question. what do you tell your subordinates about this? do you discuss this together when you're wasting your admirals and talk about the limits of dissent? are these conversations that happen at the highest level? [booing] i think it's very, very clear that the expectations of civilian control in military is unquestioned. i think everyone that is subordinate to me understands the strength of my convictions in that regard. i do believe it is important as a senior that you foster the opportunities for your subordinates to feel comfortable and free and have a meal for discussions. as opposed to having been held in check and then trying to reach everything at a final moment. and i think that in the ability to have that organization comfortable coming forward, that there is an expectation that opinions can be offered, positions can be taken and i think that that is for the best of the institution. >> admiral roughead, you are a teacher at the national defense university. what do you teach about this whole obligation and duty or limitation on speaking to the power so to speak? >> let's bring burke as our example to the institute of question. burke absolutely able to constantly reframe the problem. were reframe his mind around a new problem. and so the notion of strategic reframing is an intellectual predisposition that you have or that you learn. and so what we do at mdu or what any of the defense education entities seek to do is to help us to reframe where we have been do something more that we should be thinking about. so what burke was able to do and what we seek to do in the spirit of burke is constantly seek to reframe mindsets and mine friends about the issues in front of us. what burke was able to do was to be able to be comfortable speaking eight, ten, 20 years out. we do that as well. it's about setting the mindset and the mindfulness about what you are given in the environment. if i might say though, also the chairman, eisenhower was a leader who also knew what he had. and so the respect -- the respecting of the mind of the leaders who were subordinate to you is also part of this. so burke was allowed to be burke. and one of the key things that we seek to teach is to be respectful of the intellect of those who are junior to you because they may indeed have an insight or a reframing that you don't have. and so every good leader would seek death. but we seek to reframe and to teach the ability to be comfortable in the environment. >> senator, you have been watching this balance for a long time. talked with a little bit as you have watched over the years of whether you think the modern military of the balance right on its willingness to challenge the civilian authority or to challenge even within the military their own superiors. do you have a sense of how that balance is? >> let's go back 41 years when i was privileged to be in the pentagon in the navy secretary. we used to get in the rooms with the cheese and larry would always start and we would listen to one another. i want to know your opinion. that was the same thing i was interested in. i stay with a deep sense of humility to be secretary of the navy. but maybe i could likely return to the first question of the chief partially answered over here. but first you, david abshire, well done. he stayed in the navy, good boy. as long as i've known you, you've made one mistake in life. rather than west point you should've gone -- [laughter] i want to go back his many years. i have gone to the six late in the mediterranean and i've met burke. burke have a protocol. when you join the navy secretary, he would send a little note, now is that i like to meet you and you'd go over and see them in his home with his lovely wife and i swear i first got to know him. so we were out on the sixth fleet and i did a little research with the aid at that time his name is tom haberer. he later became the chief of naval operations. but this one incident might've cost of not. i found that the ship that burke had in his squadron was still part of our active fleet. so i went aboard it. he transferred me permit cruiser over to the ship. and as a custom i/o is went down to the engine to the operating ship. and i was just with the senior chief down there. there was no chief petty officer down there operating at. i said, do you think you could drive this thing at 31 like burke? he looked at me and he looked at the other chief and he said, you bet yeah, you know what. i said, crank it up. and he looks at me and he says i usually take my orders from the captain, but you're the secretary? civilians authority controls. [laughter] this was a true story. it was an exhilaration of when that's the implant went full thrust on this cruise and the rotating powertrain. so i've got i better get back up to the bridge as it's going to be a little destination. i got up to the bridge and i have this program that i knew where burke was. and i called them from the bridge and got the ships there and we were standing there. i got among the phone thinking he'd need just exhilarated to know that his chip. he's right to dirty one knots right now. .. six years will list serving and what he was able to accomplish and it's one of those things i looked at that and i was wondering how i was going to even come close to matching up to anything like that to be able to accomplish so much in that period of time, and i used it from that standpoint. from the civilian control peace, i guess i'm much more driven and informed by a current times and by current times i would say the last 20 years or so and my goal as a leader is to be strictly a political, strictly neutral and in fact the state of the union earlier this week i had many comments about the chiefs when we stand up, when we don't stand up and the aftermath of the president's speech, but the goal there who literally is to certainly respond in a way that is supportive of those national security and military issues but other than that stay completely neutral so amongst my colleagues and actually with my juniors i do talk a lot about the need to stay, be completely a political and where that is different from arleigh burke's time is i think in the situation where there is this seeking of news, the fast exposure to the media certainly the media is always looking for the kind of differentials to in many cases sharpen issues were about where i think it has gotten out of bounds is quite frankly when we take off and there is tension between those who have worn the uniform their whole life and they take off and there's tension between free speech which is nothing i certainly would ever take off but i think in ways it can be very difficult to understand certainly i frame a lot of this in terms of the farmer in peoria whose riding because generally speaking they are still called admiral or general on the one hand and on the other hand they were training in that regard many of our young officers in particular, but not exclusively that it's okay to speak up and it's okay to disagree publicly and constantly and i worry a great deal about that in terms of the a political position that the military is in and so actually one of the things i have asked admiral, ron had to do is address this issue. actually in all of the war colleges because i do think we need to make sure we have a right and -- pledge your both encouraging them to speak about the same time saying watch it. >> but they have to do it correctly and the treasurer here is the apolitical military and it is in my view what we have to i think in short regard and retain at all costs in this democracy and it goes back to who we are, who we work for, very clear civilian control and win as i think the admiral said when we disagree and against a point of ethics or morals and when we are actually working for someone and they don't have confidence than it is for only choice is and to speak up but quite frankly it is to move on. >> let me ask you more specifically and you've been asked about this before the recent example like this when it got in the news was general mcchrystal and how do you think he handled that? >> i don't want to -- [laughter] how do you think he handled it? [laughter] >> actually pretty well. >> it was a very difficult position obviously very early in his tour in what was certainly if not then but rapidly becoming the most visible four-star position in the united states military and it was one that was made much more challenging because it was public, and actually one of the things, and this is part of us growing as an institution, growing as an individual and general mcchrystal and i talked a long time about moving into the four-star realm. it's different and he was going to do it on the world stage and that is a challenge, so all in all i thought he did handle it well. it was a very difficult -- it made the challenge of the review that much more difficult and certainly i would have preferred to not do it as publicly as we did and we all learned a lot in that regard and certainly i would hope in a further strategic reviews we can avoid that particular model. [laughter] >> admiral called me ask a question of the navy. by tradition, the captain of the ship has tremendous of 40. in the old days complete authority. but even today there is a tradition of a cabinet of the ship having all this authority and when he gets on land yet he's got to learn how -- he's not admiral, like nelson putting his spyglass and say i can't see the signal. how do you balance of this tradition of authority and authority?hority on a ship with what do you tell them? >> as you pointed out one of my favorite burke quotes, and i identify with a great deal is you have the autonomy on the ship and as he pointed out going to see used to be fun and then they gave us radios. [laughter] and i think that even translates up in the current connectivity that we enjoy. but i think for me and one of the great things about the navy and something of a place tremendous value upon with all who serve and wear this uniform and burke articulated this himself and that the navy is a culture of command, it isn't a culture of staff, and that simple concept makes us who we are. the willingness to step forward when something needs to be done, the willingness to accept accountability, which is often times judged to be a bit extreme and the navy but that is what our culture is, and i find that culture of command translates to the shore as well because it is about the willingness to take on the hard things, the willingness to lead and most importantly when things are good or bad you accept the accountability, and so i do not see a distinction. i see it as a great strength of this service and i am extraordinarily proud of the men and women who live that culture. >> let me go back and ask you this question again because you are in a position of having served a long time from a wonderful perspective you're dealing with the military. do you think that there is a evolution here for better or for worse on military willingness to stand up to civilian authority either good or bad? is it fairly even direction? >> i found particularly the individuals in the military that to get the flag and in the general rank in the army, they know at that time to accept and be very candid. throughout my career in 30 years in the senate of was on the armed services committee regular contact with senior officers and i always had a policy very often to lead the aids in the room and sit with that officer but none of my own staff and just exchange views. i found a very productive and i'm sure i've had with you and you in my office on that basis. by the way i remember when you came to the cno i ask you when i was a secretary did we ever meet and do defiantly said no and you said you added this, i was a lieutenant on the online, this was during the vietnam war. you said i did everything i could, i never wanted to go there. but what goes around comes around. ul that now. [laughter] but i've got to tell you, the american citizens should be grateful for the young men and women who all volunteer to come into these ranks and work their way up to give their lives together with their families and when they get there it has always been my experience whether it is in the senate the five years i was the navy secretary. >> rondeau, let me ask the same question. d.c. military getting more or less willing to stand up to or to challenge or for better or worse civilian authorities there in a trend? >> i think the question is framed interestingly because it is at the edge. i think that young people or older people i think that what determines the leader who can do this responsibly is intellectually curious and one who is able to ask questions of him or herself and their environment so this is not some image of the first act. you go about your professional life and ask questions. you try to understand and to try to analyze, and that some point you come to an aggregation point where you say this does not make sense for this is a better way and to come to that in an analytical, mature professional manner and by that time you also have understood where you are on point. then you go through the chain and if you bring it up to the leadership and usually the leaders are going to let you hear that because he fought through and have done a very good job of that. so our job is when we are educators is to try to help the individual officer or sailor or airman, soldier, marine to get their so they can come to an analytical understanding of what is going on. once you do that, your boss, your leader is going to be grateful and for the most part they will help you carry the argument and they may even help you she did better so that it will be successfully argued. so in my mind this is not about the edge point when you must take on somebody at some point of adversary. it is about being compelling and good and competent and coherent so that everybody else is then compelled. this was burke's gift and a gift of good leaders to be able to do that and know where you are intellectually so the intellectual curiosity of a young person today is to understand. the access to information is without precedent. our job as leaders is to help them get there so they feel as though they are being heard, so that we are listening. this is about a conversation and not just about being at the edge or the adversary. if that is happening and it happens every day then you have a healthy military and a healthy mind. >> these fine officers are managers. but bottomline they are all commanders and foremost in their minds at all time is the fact they are responsible for the life of those in the ranks. their decisions put them in harm's way. their decisions direct them to perform those duties. that is a special burden none of us in private life or politics or business or whatever. we don't have that. that is why we still they give it their best. let's take time for a couple questions from the audience. >> there are mics. now's the time. yes, ma'am. >> i have a question for admiral roughead. this experience with the military to bring in an offering relief, how we might be to get out faster? >> i think there are. as you may recall there will be a couple of responses similar to this, the tsunami of 2004 in the pacific the earthquake in pakistan and so we're always looking at how we can do this better and the experience in haiti whenever that may be we will have learned much from how we respond, how we stage the types of skills and equipment we may need and i think that is one of the great things about not just a humanitarian relief for anything else, that the military has a wonderful culture of learning from our past and mistakes and we are willing to expos things that perhaps were not done as well as we would have liked and analyzing why that happened and how we can be better. we are constantly renewing and re-examining ourselves. >> any thoughts so far as to what he might change? >> i think that the, one of the things very important to me and what we've been working on for several years post-tsunami is the continued integration of non-governmental organizations and our military forces and other agencies. we have come a long way. i think that we have to continue to work on that and pitch into one of these relief operations of this magnitude it is not one entity that will hold the whole thing off. it's the integration of that. mix all and we've been working closely with his organization and there are going to be a lot of opportunities to continue to develop those types of relationships and protocols that allow us to come together more quickly. >> can i just comment, i have been both intimately involved and i think the response has been remarkable given the suddenness to the scope of it and the ability for us to mr. resources and get them there in the mass that is required as opposed to individual piece and i did, i thought some of the most remarkable stories were some of the rescue units. there was a rescue unit from china which got there in 33 hours out of beijing. the israeli hospitals i got there and all of those are an important part of this and we had units, we had our coast guard was magnificent, literally as right after the earthquake. however it is taken much more than that to get some structure in place to be able to handle the scope and volume of the tragedy. and it has come in many ways as a result of assistance in indonesia and pakistan and even katrina here where you couldn't get their fast enough. you never can in these and yet, and i will do as an example, the comfort which got there in record time. you can't been a 1,000-foot ship and with all of its people. i would like to be able to do that based on previous experience comfort of their in record time and look what she's doing now and that is one example getting the forces on the ground. so we clearly will learn and are much better than we were but from my perspective the response has been magnificent from ngos, usaid, from our government and other countries as well in addition to the men and women of the military. >> i'm from the voice of america and have a question for admiral mullen. under this deal of leadership and what you consider a charter of course in a complex situation towards a destination that has been determined by the commander in chief what sort of factors you have to consider and i will give you to to talk about, one is don't ask don't tell and the other is relations with china because the taiwan arms sale announced the last couple of hours so how do you try to balance this commitment to taiwan and the decision that is made with the imperative of remaining engaged with china? but now that i talked about china don't forget about the first point i made. [laughter] >> i would actually be happy to answer the second question and i will answer the first question tuesday at the hearing. [laughter] >> fair enough. >> the issue from leadership perspective with china is one that i and others have responsibility from the military to military perspective and opportunities as has been the case with many countries. i actually find it a little bit ironic we are talking about ed morrill burke who put the program in place, and i literally last week was in moscow in negotiations with my counterpart with respect to the start follow-on treaty which has an awful lot to do with of the vision he had even though he didn't win all of that which speaks to the decisions we make and how long they last. sometimes we think of them in the short term. so i try to think about how i handle myself and approach this from the long-term perspective. after you are here in washington for a while there is an of virginity to look back in just tomorrow and what does it mean? the reason i bring that up in her china particularly is my thoughts are very much not even close to just the senior leadership perspective because i really want our younger officers to meet each other. because that's the future. that's going to be the relationship. that's what we lost more than anything else in pakistan when wishing to become sanctioned them for 12 years is the man agreed officers who are not generals who don't know anything about the united states so i always have that in mind even in the discussion earlier in terms of in both accountability and being a political. half of my mind goes to our young ones so that in the long run that change can be made and i feel good way with china. and i will save tuesday's answers for tuesday on don't ask don't tell. i certainly recognize the question and i understand this issue is moving very rapidly. >> i would like to make a comment [inaudible] i think what is so overarched is the civilian military and burke understood this as the power of ideas and i want to take two examples, one who john with my navel had because i served on the board of the naval war college and then my army at on a visit i had privately with david petraeus. but here are two cases of the whole change of strategic tactical doctrine won by the penn saver they tried to constantly sync as he went to history petraeus went to the lessons of iraq both learned, both got their acolytes. davis petraeus described how they got the bosnian, the puzzle they put together out at leavenworth. i remember mentioned at the white house petraeus was at leavenworth and they want to bring him back and he said are you in the penitentiaries and i said no. [laughter] i would say he said that in the white house now, last administration. but the man got his acolytes and then became assistant secretary but before that were going to the naval war college, the chairman of the foreign relations committee john became secretary of state and when they came into washington there was a coal strategic vision and the move into the pacific and the only reason, the only thing we had prepared in a world war i with the navy to support the army over there was due to this one guy and his thought process and the acolytes. petraeus did the same and they change the mindset in the way you fight in a symmetrical war. i told him this is very similar, very different, and then when you get into this it blurs civilian military. people are moving forward on ideas and doctrine and of course the other things i've said in the book, civilian george marshall, a great secretary of state as well as defense and national security advisor, this mix is good, this military experience mixed with civilian, state department has learned to appreciate that. we need engineers, former for stars and usaid today and so forth. but i think this has been a wonderful session and really we are indebted to all of you. i think we better rabbit -- raptors this up but all i think you all for being with us and echoing the one and only admiral arleigh burke. [applause] >> it's always a pleasure to get with you. sprick i would like to get together and have lunch sometime. [inaudible conversations] in the nation's capital and across the country listen to seize the radio. in washington at 90.1 fm and done x retial, channel 132. it's also a free application for your iphone. c-span radio, covering washington like no other. the congressional intertek bachus advisory committee held its sixth annual conference this week. one of the topics discussed is the state of the internet. we will hear from representative rick boucher and brian roberts of comcast ceo to lead a discussion on copyright issues and internet privacy. this portion is two hours and 40 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. here we are meeting not in virtual space but in real space. my name is jerry berman and i am the chair perhaps for life of the congressional internet kokesh at eis recommitting. as you know we work with the congressional internet caucus and all of you to try to educate each other and policy makers, some of your policy makers, and the world about the internet, and we started this 13 years ago and the issue at that time to of them, could we get a congressman to connect to email. well that was a tough one. we were going door to door saying here's how you do it. the second thing we were concerned about, and it was fundamental was that policy makers from whether you are republican or democrat or independent that the internet faced policy issues but it was very important that whatever your solutions base is that you understand the technology. now we were presumptuous kafta think we understood the technology. that technology we would say at the time was a network of networks that was scalable. in other words of was global and was different than any other medium. it wasn't too way, it was multi networks connected, it was global and a new platform and we were looking at it at the social level how was it going to affect our lives. we knew that it was a vast open platform for innovation and speech and association that unlike any other medium it allowed a new kind of equality of status where people could connect and innovate. they did not need permission. they did not have to ask anyone to get on and was transformed in the sense of the computer was the great collectors of information and may be a research tool and as a privacy advocate it was a danger because it was going to centralize information and allow for surveillance. with the internet did by connecting the computer to and to this network was turn the computer into a communications tool. it became a communications device and we can go on from there to say now the internet is the computer but it's also the mobile phone and television set and we have this enormous collection of media. we would say yes it is a global medium but now it is over 1 billion people using it and it is started out as an appliance and now it is a necessity. everyone has migrated to this and that means everyone from citizens to corporations to governments to new firms and education. they are all part of this connected nation which has no boundaries. now we've seen the enormous innovation and all of those innovations make communication easier, they bring people together and allow for more freedom association and more connectivity. and the internet has its critics that it is a new form of bowling alone. people are connected or people are twittering their time away but if he went to the technical fair last night he would see applications that said we can use the internet to deal with alzheimer's disease. we can use the internet to demand side monitoring savitt you can conserve energy. we can use the internet to create new forms of jobs. we can use the internet to was reading a new kind of experience. you all know this and it is the exciting transformative nature of this global network of networks and the social space. when i speak to you and my passion about the internet is that we are stewards of the internet is yes, it is a technology of freedom and it is a technology which is based on code. what code is law but the law makes the code and the policy architecture of the internet where there is free and open and protected by the first amendment or human rights in china or whether it is open to everyone to connect and do things on the internet where you can have an identity all rests on policy debate and that is what this is about. where are we on that debate? how are we driving the internet toward to keep it open, innovative and free and that is the whole discussion and we know that when everyone comes to the internet al qaeda is on the internet, cyber pirates are on the internet. we have to deal with content and protection of content for anyone to be a publisher and sustain themselves but we also understand that new kinds of creativity are going on. i could go on and on but the importance as you look at the framework, the debate, the discussion is as a supreme court said in ruling that the internet was entitled to the greatest protection of speech even more than newspapers was it was a never ending ongoing conversation and that is where we are trying to promote and the state of the nec is the capture of a policy debate that's ongoing, a lot of the issues remain the same from speech to copyright and this afternoon we have a platform on global free speech which i want to know is our first judith krug panel. it is dedicated to her, she was one of the founders of the education foundation and passed away, she was a great advocate speech. she would always be sitting there at this conference. she loved the internet and loved its potential and worked with me in civil rights and civil liberties challenges to keep the internet open so i just want to mention that panel this afternoon in her name. now what i want to do is introduce when i talk about the policy architecture of the internet i want to introduce my good friend and colleague and representative rick boucher from virginia. he's an original founder of the congressional internet caucus many years ago. we've been working together from the start. he used this as a platform to drive the discussion and frame the issues. he's now the chairman of the subcommittee on telecommunications and in the commerce committee among other judiciary committee's but he is trying to make the internet open to everyone, free, secure, protect privacy, protect speech and innovation and commerce and see how it frames as part of our global economy. i always mention it and it's very important that we started out as a research network and when people were thinking of it as an information highway, rick boucher understood the internet which was barely mentioned when we brought the telecommunication laws of 1996 that this was something new and we wanted to change it from a research and worked in a port for everyone that had to get rid of the use policies and allow commercial traffic on the internet which was an enormous stimulation and said everyone can connect and that was an enormo founding principal among the fundamental principles of the internet and gives me great pleasure to introduce boucher to you today. [applause] >> excuse me, one housekeeping. comcast will be here about five to nine and we are going to get the questionnaire. if you have a question form, staff is going around, tim and others and they will collect your questions and present them for the dialogue that begins. sorry. thank you very much. >> jerry, thank you for organizing once again for your advisory committee to the internet caucus today's state of the net conference and i just want to take a moment at the outset to commend the tremendous work that over the years jerry and his associate, tim, have done in making the internet advisory committee a vital and functioning part of our continuing dialogue within the congress to make sure members of congress and their staff are constantly aware of the pros and cons of the critical issues of the day that affect the internet and general telecommunications policy. the internet advisory committee posts throughout the year in conjunction with the congressional internet caucus a series of forums and these are normally held during the lunch hour on business days in congress, they typically meet in one of the congressional meeting rooms in the capitol and they are among the best attended forums any of the various caucuses within the congress sponsors and during the course of the forums, the key presenters pro and con on the critical information technology policy issues of the day are there to offer their presentations and answer questions that the attendees will pound and they are truly informative. through the forums sponsored by the internet caucus advisory committee we are carrying forward the basic function of the internet caucus which is to make sure the members of congress are well informed about the critical policy challenges that will affect the internet and that when they make their judgments they do so on a solid factual foundation and i can't say enough about the excellent work that jerry berman has john and tim working with him has also done in order to promote those forms and organize them and make sure they are well-publicized and attended and they truly do make a tremendous difference in terms of the quality of policy making that we are able to put forth in the u.s. congress. i want to take just a few moments this morning to welcome each of you and thank you for attending the annual state of the nec conference and review with you briefly the agenda that we have for 2010 for the subcommittee on communications and the internet one of the subcommittees of the house energy and commerce committee and i have the privileges as jerry indicated of chairing that subcommittee. we have an active year ahead of us and by and briefly going to preview that for you and then i have the privilege of introducing our featured presentation, the conversation with alan murray and brian roberts this morning. we have an active legislative agenda and we also have a separate oversight agenda and i will talk for just a moment about the key components of both of those agendas. on our legislative agenda you may note that last week we reported from the subcommittee legislation that will require a comprehensive inventory of the wireless spectrum. this inventory and analysis will be performed jointly by the ntia and fcc and these agencies and our legislation are charged with the responsibility of looking at the entire wireless spectrum and determining the current use and also identifying possible components of the spectrum that could be candidates for reallocation for commercial use or possibly could be candidates for spectrum sharing using some of the new and very efficient spectrum sharing technologies in order to maximize the efficiency of spectrum use. we provide one year for the agencies to conduct this inventory and when it is presented along with its recommendations, it will provide a highly useful blueprint to the congress for taking steps to ensure we will be able to have the spectrum available for the applications. i would note last year for the first time the number of homes that do not have a land line service but have so phones exceeded the number of homes that do not have self owns the plant line service for the first time and the disparity will continue to grow as more and more homes become wireless more and more people use mobile applications and the applications in current use require ever greater data rates and and with this particularly mobile video which now has become a component sunni popular wireless applications so even though we will be deploying for g technologies and similar new technologies, and that will provide a great benefit to the wireless users the freedom that offers in terms of spectrum availability will be fairly short-lived. the crunch will come soon and we are going to need new spectrum within a matter of just a few years in order to meet the growing demand for wireless services. this inventory will give the blueprint necessary in order to achieve that goal. other second legislative priority is a comprehensive reform of the federal and universal service fund. this month, the contribution factor for long distance revenues allocated to the universal service fund went from 12% to 14% so 14% of long-distance revenue now must support universal services and the current system is simply unsustainable. the demand for universal service funding increases and that demand is being imposed upon an ever shrinking revenue base. the universal service fund is supported by interstate and international long-distance revenues and because of technological innovation and business models such as the packaging of local and long-distance minutes by the carriers that revenue base is shrinking and so a change to come and it must come soon. a comprehensive reform of the universal service program is called for and four years ago i introduced, along with my republican partner, congressman terrie the first comprehensive universal service reform. we have refined that measure through comments received from interested parties over the intervening years and we now have a discussion draft that has been broadly endorsed by the stakeholders upon which our committee had a legislative hearing in the late months of last year. during that hearing it was revealed that the principal stockholders, the people who will contribute to universal service support and receive support from the universal service fund have endorsed this measure. on the contribution side of the equation the net contributors and universal service funding we have the endorsement for this comprehensive reform from at&t and verizon. in the center companies that are pretty much balanced in terms of their contributions into the fund and recede from eight we have the endorsements of quest, frontier and other midsized companies and on the beneficiary side, companies that primarily receive support from the universal service fund largely the world carriers. through their trade associations we also have endorsements. now this has been a classic divide hysterically and never before have the companies a lined on both sides of the divide, the net contributors into the fund and the net recipients from the fund come to the common terms and endorse a single legislative reform proposal. they have endorsed this bill. and i think it gives the critical base of support necessary to move this measure now through the house of representatives. we control expenditures from the fund and reduce cost, for example, by moving to competitive bidding for the wireless services receding universal service support. we put a cap on the entire high cost universal service fund. we take other steps that are designed to promote efficiency and the use of these moneys and kunkel cost. we also expand the contribution based from the interstate and international revenues that are the sole contribution based today to intrastate revenues and any provider of a network connection and so as we are controlling cost we are also expanding the base for revenue. we make another series of important improvements in this bill. we effectively transition the universal service fund to broadband provision and we do that in two ways. first we say that immediately upon enactment of this legislation the carriers that receive universal service support may use such part of their universal service funding as they choose in order to support their broadband services. under the current law they can't use universal service fund to support a broadband. they can under the provisions of the bill. that this step number one. step number two is brought a. it says after five years from the date of enactment any recipient of universal service funding as a condition of continuing to receive universal service report must provide a broadband throughout its service territory and so at the end of the five years we will in fact have a transition of the use of the fund fully broadband. it can be used also to support regular telephone service and retire the debt that has been incurred by the carriers and purchasing switching equipment and other facilities necessary to sustain the basic telephone service but at the same time this fund is fully going to be used in order to a, a broadband and intact broadband provision throughout the service territory will be required as a condition of continuing to receive universal service support. we had a legislative hearing on the discussion draft in the subcommittee late last year. the next step will be a markup of legislation which i will be introducing along with mr. terry and i think other co-sponsors and we hope that will happen soon. ideally that would happen at a point in february at the latest i hope that will happen early march. another legislative priority is the renewal of the satellite home viewer act. the license that enables the importation into local markets of distant network signals to homes that cannot receive a network signal delivered over the air from the local broadcast station will expire on february february 28 and in order to prevent millions of homes from losing their access to network tv it's important that this law be renewed and we are on track to obtain a renewal. we now have agreed upon versions of the satellite on the were act reauthorization house and senate. we've been working with our colleagues in the senate to obtain approval to a common text we have that now and are in a position to attain the renewal. we've been working with the leadership in both house and the senate to identify an appropriate vehicle to which this renewal legislation can be attached the mad work is proceeding and we're down to one or two candidates at this point for that vehicle and we do anticipate well before february 28 we will have the real past and signed into law. soon i'm going to be circulating in partnership with republican colleagues cliff stearns, george radanovich, joe barton and our democratic colleagues on the committee a discussion draft of legislation that will provide a set of privacy guarantees for internet users. our goal in doing this is to enhance the confidence that internet users have that their experience on the web is secure and in providing that a greater level of security drive more electronic commerce traffic and not in any way impede electronic commerce. so what we are seeking to do is replicate and reflect in the statute the current best business practices with regard to targeted advertising. we do not want to disrupt targeted advertising but we want to give internet users a sense that they know what information about the this collected canned they understand how that information is used, and then through a combination of opt in and opt out opportunities have control over that information collection and use and by providing that information at that degree of control we think we truly will be giving people a greater sense of confidence that there privacy secure. we've been working with interested stakeholders and we are very close to having a discussion draft to circulate in we do we would welcome your comments and encourage you to make your views known and share your good ideas about this measure with us. later this year, it is my hope we will be putting forward legislation and we are working now to develop the early concept for this that will provide a national set of consumer protection guarantees for the users of wireless services. in doing that we would also preempt the state's from having consumer protection standards with regard to the subject matter that would be the subject of these federal consumer protection standards. the wireless industry needless to say is inherently mobile for millions of users i think it is hard to determine which state has the greatest relevance in establishing consumer protection rights for that particular user an individual can live in one state, work in another state, carry out most of his or her cellphone use pda on the road so what is more relevant in terms of providing consumer protection for that kind of user. if there is an industry that argues for a national set of consumer protection standards as opposed to state by state standard making i think it is probably this industry. it is the poster child for an area where national standards are necessary and it is my hope that legislation we will soon structure will put in place a truly meaningful set of national consumer protection standards and then have that be the standard that provides consumer protection for internet users. we are consulting with industries, we are consulting with consumer groups in both the fcc and state enforcement authorities and we hope to have legislation ready for circulation in the not too distant future. so that is our legislative agenda. it's pretty ambitious. it's going to be a reasonably short which slid if you're given the fact that we are in session fewer days in 2010 than we were in 2009. but i think this agenda can be accomplished and we are going to be working very hard in our subcommittee in order to achieve it. now we also have an oversight agenda and i will briefly describe for you the key elements of fact. we will be having a hearing very soon potentially february on the standards that have now been developed by ntia and the world utility service for round two of the broadband stimulus program. there will be one additional funding round but will occur during the course 2010 and new standards different from the standards that govern the round one, grants and loans have now been developed for round two and we will be having a hearing shortly focusing on those found to standards. i was pleased to note that recommendations that were made on a bipartisan basis on the subcommittee when we have our oversight hearing on around one have been in large part adopted for round two. we need to score a emendations. first what i viewed and i think many of our subcommittee viewed as an overly restrictive requirement in round one for the making of grants by the rural utilities service to be eliminated and that standard was for any community to the maximum grant amount it had to be no more than 25 miles from a city of at least 20,000 people. and when you look at the map of the united states, most of the entire eastern part of the u.s. was excluded from the maximum grant amount because of that particular standard. including many communities for rural districts and economically challenged places that could be totally rent by mountainsmilefry of 25,000 people of having to represent some of those communities. so i was quite concerned and on a bipartisan basis expression of concern about that standard was expressed. that has been eliminated from around to. another major concern we expressed was that rural communities in round one had to apply and be rejected by the utility service before they could be considered for grants under the ntia grant making program and ntia has the larger share of the $7.2 billion stimulus fund than does the u.s.. and so that requirement has also been eliminated for the ground to and it is possible up this point for a rural applicant to apply to both agencies and simultaneously be considered by both agencies and a board can only be made by one that consideration can be given by both and that is a positive change. we will be reviewing those changes and others during an oversight hearing again hopefully during the month of february. we are working to set a date for that in fact very shortly. we also will have an oversight hearing on the fcc's national broadband plan after it is presented in six weeks' time and probably the date for that will be march. that will be a subject of great interest i am sure to all of the members of our subcommittee as well as the general public and we will give the fcc an opportunity during that hearing to explain the various provisions of its plan and answer our questions. and next week on february 4th, we are having an oversight hearing, the first of four that i think will be scheduled in the congress on one of the largest media acquisitions proposed in american history and that is the acquisition by comcast nbc university. and that leads me into my next for a pleasant task which is to present to you this morning's feature presentation. and for that presentation, we have two very well-known guests and i want to thank both of them for taking the time to join at our annual state of the net conference. it is my pleasure this morning to introduce to you alan murray the deputy managing editor and executive editor on line for "the wall street journal" and brian roberts the chairman and chief executive officer of the comcast corporation who, together, will engage for your benefit and the conversation. .. is. >> brian roberts is the chairman and ceo of comcast corporation the nation's leading multi channel video distributor. under his leadership comcast has grown into a fortune 100 company with 23 point* 8 million customers and 100,000 employees. comcast content the network includes the entertainment, the golf channel, the tv one come and regional sports networks. he is a member of the board of directors with the telecommunications association ready served as chairman for two consecutive terms from 2005 through 2007. also i would mention that i recall very well that during our debate in the middle 1990's on the telecommunications act of 1996 that he was chairman of the 10 ctia. >> waiting and numerous awards for his leadership investor magazine named him one of america's top ceos for the sixth year in a row. may 2007 he was presented with the cable industry higher day's highest honor vanguard award for distinguished leadership and october 2006 he was inducted into cable-television hall of fame. he just happens to be at the forefront of one of the largest telecommunications and consolidation in history. the proposed combination of comcast and nbc universal. it is a pleasure to welcome them this morning and please welcome to the annual state of the net conference, alan murray and brian roberts. [applause] >> i hope they are here. [laughter] >> thank you, mr. chairman. very much. thank you for that introduction and all of you for getting up early in the morning to be here. brian roberts had a pretty amazing year last year, he turned 50 and completed a triathlon and became a certified it ceo mobile with the deal to acquire nbc universal. you must feel pretty good. >> we completed the triathlon but not the merger yet. we're waiting regulatory approval and that process. it was a great year. >> that was your midlife crisis? did you have been a while the extra marital affairs? [laughter] >> this is exactly the place to discuss all of that. [laughter] adjust to kick us off on a lighter note, steve. who turned 50 the year before said you really have to manage that otherwise he will wake up and have a crazy midlife crisis and think of a coal. i never thought about a triathlon i was lying in bed serving the net i said there is a triathlon in bally. maybe we should go to that great four seasons and wouldn't that be great quote she said if we go to bali, let's go to bali. was not what you do day triathlon on the exact day of my birthday june 28 there was a triathlon been a philadelphia. [laughter] so having lived in philadelphia all my life if you have taken the train, the thought of swimming in the schuylkill river was so disgusting that is why it chose to do for my midlife crisis and it would say beautiful day. >> but the bad news is since you completed the deal with nbc universal, there has been the almost freefall of controversy over jay leno and conan o'brien. conan o'brien was paid $40 million plus, your money, partly, to leave the network. jay leno joked the other night he thought he was left on the titanic prepare you cannot be too happy. >> i missed all of that. i was away over christmas. obviously this is a new space in a tough business that has an incredible incorrect -- implications on decisions that are made. it is a frustrating period of time because we're an able legally to be involved. there is something called gun jumping rules and we are an observer and the only thing. >> you cannot talk about it. >> you cannot talk about there have discussions about it so we read about it. but i am looking forward. it is a great coming together i am sure we will get into that more but there are many great things happening at nbc universal. there is nothing more you can say except there will be a thorough regulatory review and needs to me and should be and will be. but it reminds me in a creative in denver -- endeavor that is cable programming channels, but that you don't want 30,000 people to go for too long. however expeditiously that can occur is important to the company. >> how quickly? >> that is out of our hands. traditionally nine 1/3 to 12 months. >> before we leave jay leno behind there were press reports before consummating a good deal you quiz to jeff soccer pretty hard why he made the move to prime time for leno? >> leave it at that. it has been very well documented back when the move was made people anticipated this might be one of the outcome is. it is what it is. >> do care to comment on the future of some of sucker? >> we have said he will be the ceo for the company reporting to steve. i a thain and steve is going through the process to meet the key executives and we have one year to get to know each other and i am optimistic when we get to day one which is hopefully not too far away we will have a full plan that will be exciting and answer all the questions we are learning about write now in realtime. >> let's talk about something you can talk about, why would comcast want to own a network? the network business is not a great business. ge itself in valuing the business who that the affiliate's were worth nothing and put a o on that. >> they never did it that way. that is something some of the stock and a list of follow comcast or followed ge have talked a little bit about. that is if the values that everybody placed on the aspects that is not a lot of value or maybe as low as o. you have to step back and say do content and distribution and go together? that in itself is controversial. and there are many examples of companies that come to the conclusion that they don't. when we go to see our investors come as i would talk today, we look at two questions. first-come a do they belong together? second come and do we make a good or a bad deal? what is the prospect? on the first question comes at myself, steve burke, of leadership believe this world is changing so fast, this conference when we get into the internet, it is impossible for people to predict exactly what will happen. we would not be sitting here right now. we would be pursuing the next great thing. the move -- world is moving at an exciting way fast pace and i think content will be at the center for a big portion of what consumers want to do with technology as it evolves and we ever dreamed possible. if it is legal and not by reduce pirated come until you will flow to content. as a distribution ring company, our world is changing very fast as well. i don't think we're going in with the unrealistic expectations so we say assumes zero cinergy. >> do you believe that? >> walstreet initially on acquisitions means how many people can you lay off? i think that is a sad reality and a sad commentary wide it is like to run a public company into a deal if you cannot write to that. >> and summary people did not get started so that what wall street hates has less stress for washington because there are not so many obvious overlaps in. with the gulf channel could chairman mentioned in the introduction and a few other cable channels we're not a top of 30 rated cable channel on any of them. nbc universal has terrific scale. one thing they have done extremely well under death and she leadership is transform themselves from a one channel company, nbc to wear today nbc universal, 80% of profitability is not from nbc or universal but all of the wonderful cable channels. they have many in the top 30. we're looking forward to get the benefit of the scale for our smaller niche channels so nbc sports associating itself with the golf channel is incredibly exciting possibility. taking a startup channel with g4 and partnering with sci-fi. it with the distribution and content tsai there are 4,000 movies on demand we now have something around 15,000 races on demand and 20,000 reese's online on demand. when we say to folks what is the number one complaint? rather then find reasons to say no we will find reasons to say yes to find movies on demand. there are many opportunities but they contributed all of their assets we bar $9 billion she takes the cash takes the cash we have put in so not a huge bed day and take that money and pay off the been the, their partner the rest of the money ge will put back into the core infrastructure ge capital businesses to help things going 40 the combining company will have more cable programming it will go at 80% to higher than that, a focused management team with steve burke and comcast that all we do is the media's space. ge is a 49% partner and say we want you to be so motivated to do a great job, in a growth and value you create in addition to a 51% ownership you get an additional percentage of the increase in the value which i never heard a public company structure were that occurs. we have all of the incentive to find a the cinergy and not by eliminating jobs but creating and investing in focus. i don't think we can be more excited. >> of course, one of the concerns in this city that you have to address and next week is whether that scale, that is where the problem is combining distribution and content. that you will use your content to favored distribution channels. >> what i will say and what we have said previously, when a vertical integration occurs, which this is what that is. 95% of comcast is cable-tv broadband and 100 nbc is content. we're not in the same business. of view smaller channels but 95% is cable. we don't have a newschannel4 news outlet like nbc news or no duplication of voice and the national market. there is no traditional media consolidation worries. >> the issue you put your finger on come with a competitive issue, normally and a vertical dealer when pepsi buys the vertical bottlers they determined there will not distribute anybody else's brand, one would rely on the antitrust law. in our particular case in addition to the antitrust laws there is a specific law congress anticipated in 1982 called program access and program carriage rules and said it is okay to be able to channel distributor to own content but if you do you must make the content available to your competitive satellite carriers and a phone carriers on a nondiscriminatory terms. anybody who is unhappy can go to the fcc with their case work and they will adjudicate any disputes. and addition to antitrust laws if we wanted to say cnbc is no longer available to direct you become a that is against the law and if we want to monkey around that they were unhappy they could complain about it with a dispute resolution mechanism. there is a very specific log that actually applies to us when time warner owned time warner cable. i think we are on good ground that that concern has been thought about and addressed to focus on it. that should given the beginning a fair amount of comfort that the question you're raising is actively policed by the sec. >> also the nature of your business going forward is that you will be spending a lot of time here? >> as you heard and we have been active year for a long time and i have been doing this job since three got out of college it almost 30 years. [laughter] >> i look forward to returning. absolutely. >> says comcast have the expertise, going back to the network comment to fix what ails nbc? they are in fourth place, they used to be in first place does comcast bring expertise? >> let me take two seconds to step back. what i did get out of college in 1981, my dad is 89 years old and will turn it 90 and is at his desk right now working. he started comcast in tupelo mississippi out of philadelphia in 1963 and was 40 years old. in 1981 we had 20 million and revenue would be complete this transaction we will have 50 billion in revenue. i start by stepping back. only in america at it is a fantastic dream life that i have had in business. knock on wood, somewhere we have not had the kind of reputation the tax effect companies have had where integrity is the hallmark of the company. as we start to take on a new endeavor, there was a time we bought at&t broadband people said you are tripling in size in taking over for at&t, one of the great names, how can you presume to do better than they would do? we ran in the core business suit was easier to answer with certainty but in fairness and i think the conclusion ge came to that this is not a core business. maybe it was 10 years ago but today it is not part of the business is changing and it is a full-time endeavor. getting more deeply involved with cable, and new forms of electronic to distribution is the future of ribisi universal. -- nbc universal and they have competing attention for their funds. i give jeffrey immelt a lot of credits. it starts with the seller. they made a hard decision that maybe it seems easy now but i don't know, to change the direction of their company. and for our company, we felt that this would transform cover reinvent themselves all the time. if you start at 20 million in 1981, that is one modus operandi. we are very fortunate steve burke president of our cable company just relinquished the job to neil smith to is the ceo of charter who worked for eight o o and affect consumer foods industry internationally with a great career. he will focus the cable company and steve will be the coo was at both companies and will dive deep into finding in promoting and creating a culture at nbc universal different than she much more decentralized and standalone with a long-term perspective. with a 50% opportunity to improve in addition to what we earn with a long-term plan to buy it all. >> the answer is yes? >> we're optimistic and hopeful. by the way the structure of the deal, i know this is not an investor meeting but my answers don't change. you have to be consistent. the price that we buy the other 49% is the fair market price. if it goes up, it goes up but if it goes down because we have a llc job the price goes down. that was a very important part of the structure of the transaction as direct 1/2 to correct you said only in america could you or your father can build up of a media empire. i am told it can have been an all-star yes. >> [laughter] fair enough. >> i think they are american citizens. >> and there is a british stop on the way. how would you compare this deal to the one that did not happen with disney? >> we look forward, not backward. >> just look back for a minute. [laughter] we have one-hour. >> just for you. there was a moment in time where the disney stock was $20 per share. ultimately i am a finance major from the wharton school i start from the business perspective. obviously look strategically espn has been a terrific -- terrific business and is a general has done incredibly things and family channel was a bad deal now it looks like a great channel and disney was firing wonder if the right after 2001 theme park attendance was at a low. like a shareholder revolt revolt, founding families saying we want change coming to a vote coming up and somehow there was a discussion between parties involved on a back channel basis of said maybe now you have at&t you like to put the larger companies together. reit openly throughout that idea and they said no thank you and quickly we said we are not in the business to go out disruptive and overpay but today is 30 or 20 not others have done as well. i think it is the best. we did find a good fell you point*. but back to the day, we are making a bet to just us back then it is easy to say everything would get better after 9/11. are we got the bottom? it will happen how long will it take? it is fundamentally a bet on america. and in my opinion, because most revenues seven b.c. universal seem to be domestic come my a great opportunity but all of those primary businesses are but a bet on america having a growth of recovery of internet expansion, television continuing to be an important part of our lives. that is not for the faint of heart. it is not without its risks and the same goes back to the strategy for us, that is slightly different but the essence of what disney had with cable channels and movie libraries that we can use technology to excel rate for the consumer, access to all of that i think is still very true today. >> let's turn to the internet. you have questions cards on your seats if you have questions, right to the morale and people are walking around collecting questions. you have said you see the internet more as friend and foe. i imagine every time you say at your fellow at executives roll their eyes. how do see the internet more than friend and foe for your business? >> if we were just a television company today i think we would look very different over the last 10 years is one of the most competitive business of there. cable-television. direct tv is the second largest dish network is the third and spending more money in recent history to build something and just to name the principal players. along came the internet the industry made a tough decision to invest in fiber optics before anybody want to, to have more channels to keep up with the competitors also because we were sure of the internet. in the late nineties bill gates said you have a bigger business of data and video and i pretty much said if you believe that will you invest? one month later he put a billion dollars into our stock never had to buy any microsoft products but just his own statement to get broadband going. today, we have a fantastic business we continue to invest in and we talk about that and it has transformed the company. then off of the broadband platform we can launch a phone business now we're the third presidential phone company from a standing start four years ago. the internet, for us, has brought growth businesses by adding connectivity to customers for the next great thing, maybe great then television or the same as the pc in the homes been a change hats. you are talking about distribution but talk about content. jeff zucker has talked about digital pennies for digital climbs by which if you take somebody who was watching television and move them to a computer screen the advertising value goes down by 90% or more. and makes it tough to make a business out of. >> people are searching for are there ways in comcast and time warner, are there ways to give the consumer an extension of their usage? the same thing happened with on demand. when we launched on demand for a while companies said equated minute. we don't get paid. we knew that consumers wanted it. they what would they 1101 to write now and if we extend that out of the home and on to other devices, it is the same philosophy. how can we find each company have its own answer to satisfy the need but in case of content of your spending $400,000,000.2 make a movie for "avatar" you not just say here this for free. different businesses are trying to grapple between windows, the pricing, do not just have it be to go from analog dollars to digital penney's whatever the quote is a. >> you have your fantastic fantastic, but it is only available if you pay for cable service? >> no. there are thousands and thousands of videos available if you are not paying but if you want to watch to blood from hbo the number one show they are watching on their computer then you have to be an hbo customer that is a relationship we made with hbo morale it can be on your tv, -- on demand on your tv or on demand on your pc. i don't see why we have not made it better for the consumer to consume the content. there is a show like the office that you can watch on comcast on demand or watch it on fanned cast on your pc and not have to be a subscriber to nbc's from a guy can get access to fantastic content on who lose? >> that represents 40% and we are 3% of the loop content comes through fancast. they are a much bigger supplier than we are the. >> does hulu.com makes sense? cable works because you have subscription revenue and advertising revenue. doesn't make sense to give away valuable content over the internet? >> honest answer is i don't know today. they own 30% or 32% or somewhere in that range of hulu.com. it is not a controlling stake. i have not met the team that runs it yet or have not had the opportunity until we are complete with the process it is like the first question, we don't anticipate saying we have a change of what they are doing and they are trying to figure out what they have been doing so far as a user and observer, but it took the broadcast content and said that is being broadcast in the air for free and coming over cable, it does not have to sources of revenues so we need to get an additional 18 soar an additional marketing promotion man o' war relationship with the consumer that likes this point* and we have to figure out how to monetize it. >> gettelfinger did this to different than what the industry has been trying to figure out. >> increasing the the conclusion is that the winners are the people who have more than one sense of revenue and not solely dependent on advertising. >> if i might die will broaden your question what attracted the. >> i am totally used in the people answering the questions that i asked. [laughter] >> the first time i have ever been accused of that. nbc and reverse the outcome i tried to say this a few times, it is not right today just about nbc or universal. if it was just those two businesses it would be a different company it is usa, msnbc, cnbc, oxygen, sy fy, all of that is the kind of business is you are talking about with their revenue sources. no question that is why you go back your first statement whether the zero valuation for all of us that it grew up in a different time period, i think that is a fair statement. nbc is worth o? pic xyz channel. it is worth a billion dollars, something. there will be changes necessary that have to happen to try to keep it lybrand. most of the television audience is terms of one show at a time is very popular broadcast television. it is an opportunity for us but i don't want people to lose perspective that this company has transformed themselves to be a lot more than one. >> is there any reason not to turn nbc into a cable channel? >> we said we do not want to. there is a good reason. there is a good broadcast audience. when you look at sunday night football verses money night football and when it went from abc to espn come of the audience went down. to those of us who are connected you cannot understand that any more. but there are people who are connected or who turn on the dial and they want to watch broadcast, but to my kids come as 16, 19, i think that world will continue to change over time but with this transaction, we wanted to take the fear right off the table there is a vibrant goal for national broadcast television and we intend to keep nbc over the year free channel. we have local affiliate's and frankly, the theme we can add because there is not a lot of companies saying that is a business to want to go into. we are excited and shows are created locally. we are a local company and comcast in the local systems has made investments to differentiate ourselves with our customers as being in your community and living here and being part of the five of the community and i don't think there's anybody else trying to do that right now. >> i have other questions but what is clearly the big story of the day the apple tablet a lot of mystery surrounding and nobody knows what it is, is it a notebook computer is it the iphone that does not fit in your purse and "the reader" with poor battery life? what is this creature that will be unveiled this afternoon? will it change your business? >> we should have this conversation tomorrow. [laughter] i am with you. we will answer those great questions apple is on a tear the design sensibility is second to none there is incredible respect and trying to find ways to accelerate what consumers love, and our job is to work for that it will work with whatever it is that you want in your life. they never tell anybody anything until they do with then they wonder the same answer. >> from the public perception, apple, comcast all and end of the spectrum of everybody loves what apple does the buffeted don't know what it is in cable companies are traditionally not favor companies here in philadelphia how do feel about that? >> that is one view. that is a realistic assessment national and regional we hired a san francisco ad agency a couple years ago right in the heart and they said we think the things that you have innovated you do not get enough credit for and have not told your story will be enough. on demand is the greatest product in the world. correct me if i am wrong, something on the order of magnitude of 14 billion television shows on demand out of about 15 million homes. in the three and a half years murray and all i toned -- itunes downloaded in the united states over time. for all of the noise coming the average show is half an hour. we have something approaching a couple hundred million per month and shows been down loaded. we went at 5,000 choices come a 10,000 choices we rolled out two years ago by project to infinity which is where we are taking our platform, that unlimited choice unlimited devices, mugabe will help enable that to happen. with you give us the credit for that as a consumer the way you do to apple, that is the mission. win broadband came along the first time i met to the ceo of google, they said 80 percent of all google searches go over broadband. if there's not a broad band from comcast in those days, there would now be eight google. today we're 80 percent rolled out on 3.o. the next generation we do the same answer from broadband. new-line to give you the best is and fast as experience 200 megabits we have even seen 1 billion megabits her second in and out of your house. we will help renovate that. how we tell our story to the consumer we can do better or improve service. one of the key goals of comcast is to listen to the customer and show up on time and fix it right we have little boxes to have a box? it broke. immediately comcast is in bad shape. we have to test those better. at the end of it all, i think we're helping to unable as much change as any company and hopefully will not feel that way about us in a couple of years. >> a black turtleneck and bluejeans? [laughter] >> steve jobs is that it level by himself with everything he has achieved. >> you are in washington, how were you planning to respond to pressure from nbc universal and other copyright holders to restrict the legal peer to peer file sharing? >> the key word in that sentence is illegal. whether peer to peer, just make the question what do we do about illegal and then go to peer to peer. we did something and changed our practices that was well discussed, our goal is to manage the network. >> it was blocked? >> it was slowed down. >> was out a mistake? remicade huge uproar and we changed it very quickly and we worked with internet engineers and the engineering forum and again we realized that is not the right solution. with the transparent conversations we're having with levying groups rican up with a different scheme that accomplishes the same goal with a 14 million customers to use and many hours per day and does not have any of the problems associated with that. that said, the whole question of piracy, we will now be on both sides of that question. the content companies and i believe the distribution companies need to focus and realize that the future to be able to enjoy what we have today requires, a real focus on finding ways too not violate people's privacy and somehow not violate copyright. if we can play a constructive role, we will be more focused than ever to try to help. >> back to the first part of the answer do you believe in net to neutrality? >> of 70 stating principles publicly as an industry and as the company, we don't block websites, we don't try to do anything too not have it open and free internet. the question that i think that is implied is to why think there needs to be governmental laws about at and how far should that go? that is probably where we might have a difference of opinion. >> what is the definition? >> some definitions of neutrality, regulation and in this space talking about apple, there is nothing prohibiting apple from doing anything and everything they want you do. look at two google 50% of all video going over the internet is youtube if not more. all of the search, these are fabulously successful companies the internet is growing at 50 or 60 per cent per year, an explosion and and and of us want to get in the way of that innovation and a question you have to ask yourself and i think chairman is doing to the right to and the fcc is doing an excellent job as compared to other ways in the past, which is to have the open transparent process but whatever by the way in and have the rules apply how broadly should they go across all sectors of the space. can be a constructive participant in the dialogue and what should it fix? over the history of the internet there are two complaints formally filed on the isp and one his what we talked about and was changed before the fcc took action. part to a renovation for my business is business models is there anything in the new concept they think with net neutrality keeps you from innovating so you need to for a strong business going forward? >> i would say it is always the fear of what somebody might do. i remembered vividly a conversation with microsoft's when they started with the xbox live. and if for some reason we would not one tech stocks life customers to play. again, we said why would we do that? for my son that is one of the main benefits are broadband. that goes back 21 of the first questions about the internet being friend, inhofe go. it is still the best during parts of the company will invest in the internet and have a superior experience from anybody you can choose from in d.c. we have plenty of competition. point* motivated. but if there is a really bad clout kangyo over but then all street dries up capital spending because you are regulated before you can print it. i don't think that is the outcome propose nor what anybody would truly hope for but some would do things. >> will comcast new p8 -- look to seek compensation from google for using your content? >> until we get in there, i think he is seeking compensation for his media of the "wall street journal." i do not know if we have a culpability from the print perspective. i will defer that if you don't mind. we will have answers it is just a matter of when. >> on cyber security, should congress take additional measures to protect the digital infrastructure? >> i think it is a great question to watch. and probably have serious experts on terrorism but when i have the chance to pick the brains of mr. gates when he invested in our company and i said think down the road what should we think about, cyber security in tomorrow's world is important probably as physical security has been in the past. to people who think of the problems, i am glad the focus by the administration and others is to put more attention on backed. >> and you are a domestic business you're not directly involved but how would you feel about china and to goal and cyber freedom? >> these are things that we have to have strong views on. it is interesting i met a young man who just applied to the wharton program and i was interviewing him. considering whether to recommend him. he said he wrote his essay on that question. he went to a class at war to end on business ethics. the question came up two months ago. all of the americans in the audience said this is an easy call, i don't you dare since her you were doing but one of the reasons i want to apply to work 10 is the diversity of the students if there were a couple of kids from china who raised their hands and said you don't get it. our country is in a different place, we need america's help to get better and these are our rules and we are evil thing but don't walk away from us. i am glad people are thinking and talking i do not know the answer that is easy to walk away that might be right but i think what that showed to me it is complicated and i am sure they're trying to find ways, how do we engage with china and not just walk away? that cannot be complete the right to either. you have to have some core values. that is a tough one. >> at the conference earlier this year or this month kumbaya. >> by the way i recommended the kid that he would be that focused at this young of and a g.o.p. gets in. >> as the company spent a lot of time talking about focusing on a 3d tv? how important to do you think that will be for your business going forward? is it a band with a challenge? >> a band with challenges a good opportunity. that means somebody once something and untypically that is a good business opportunity. not always but usually. everybody that saw 3d this year was more impressed than any time before. "avatar" obviously changed the movie expectations the price points. >> who made that movie? >> "wall street journal" parent company i believe. it is a real risk. now there is a brash to develop television the first time i saw high-definition tv was $30,000 in tv -- tokyo. i said i would love to have one but today it is $700. the thing that is exciting is that it starts at $700 at the most. they say 10 or 20% more. it might not be that much. that means it will be zero very, very soon. we will have 3d enabled devices. you will not even know you paid for it will just we enabled like blue tooth. i remember seeing the blue tooth section and why is that different than infrared? it is a whole new way now all of a sudden we want a device with blue tooth. the question is do you want to sit there and wear glasses four hours per day? i don't think so. i think for a while it will be a big event. pay a premium with a premium experience and they will spend more money to make the event, unique, you will not do what all time. high death was a transition to make for all content all the time and it would take 10 or 20 or 30 years to happen. i am not yet convinced we want to sit here all day long and have a 3d experience. you do eat chocolate sundaes for breakfast lunch and dinner. maybe some day but it bodes well for the content business and why we want to be on both sides and comcast will have the best offering of anybody out there. >> can you talk a little about the innovation in the advertising business? you have been leaders in trying to figure out the degree to target advertising where you nashville somebody would have a good target market and also interactivity with people in their homes. how quickly will that happen? are their privacy problems people in the room need to be concerned about? >> there is more information that people need to be concerned about and i think that is the appropriate focus. not just advertising besmirches, all layers of the web i think they have to be cognizant and at the same time, there are many ways as you pull consumers they want to relevancy in their life for me, this phase of life i don't want to see any more diaper commercials. >> not part of your midlife crisis? [laughter] >> i would like, i think consumers want to get to more information but the google success is all about relevancy. on demand success, 14 billion orders out of one company that only services 24% of the households, to be able to do more than all itunes downloads, tells me it is what everybody wants. they want to go deeper when they push the button and say take me deeper purpose other house to be a great way to do that with television come back technologically we do it now all on demand. and. >> to maine and not communicating? >> 12th and later instantaneous is not a to our download. right now. with the mydb are you can cause one experience and go in deeper and come back and have recommendations and if you look at what has happened on the pc with the amazon, if you like this book or would you like the others? if you go to movies sir netflix part of the popularity is how great they know you and your case. have you thought about this? that technology is crashing. that is cloud computing come a smart proxies, a smart tv, a tablet, whenever it's maybe is the consumer expectations. >> is it technology? privacy concerns? a combination? >> a fact of a device that is not on your tv today more powerful or smarter device. the only way i can describe that is if we go back to your home or desk and imagine working on a five-year old pc he would feel you go back in time 20 years. the old keyboard, the wrong program, the wrong graphics. agreed need to find a way to be monitored all the time but the pace changes so fast. even two years ago he would not buy them they are twice the speed and half the price. that will happen to connected tv and the box and it will be a very exciting 10 years for the consumer. but the last generation for us did not have that technological capability the way the next generation will. >> final question. as you pointed out you were in the interesting situation running a company started by your father. i can imagine that is an advantage or disadvantage. how does it work to be in a family business? >> it is different for every family. i think that i have been fortunate. there is a 40 year age gap between my father and myself. when i was 21 starting in he was in his 60s. so from the beginning i wanted to go fast and he was happy to let me. i have been working for my dad coming upon 30 years and i have never had a bad idea. [laughter] at least he has never told me that. he is such a great mentor he would say that is interesting but we would not do that. [laughter] >> have you thought about this way it is 180 degrees opposite but he has this same man as when he started the company added is a great lesson that there are many different ways to manage and lead. for most you would say one has to go and one hast use it day you cannot go we says we have to do it this way. that never happened. he was happy to push but we get to a critical moment like nbc universal and that moment of truth. where it is little

Related Keywords

Vietnam ,Republic Of ,Leavenworth ,Washington ,United States ,Turkey ,Philippine Sea ,Oceans General ,Oceans ,Beijing ,China ,Russia ,District Of Columbia ,Princeton ,Massachusetts ,San Francisco ,California ,Cuba ,South Korea ,Georgetown University ,Haiti ,Moscow ,Moskva ,Pyongyang ,P Yongyang Si ,North Korea ,Japan ,Philippines ,Tokyo ,Germany ,Wharton School ,Pennsylvania ,Philadelphia ,Boston ,Virginia ,Indonesia ,Solomon Islands ,Taiwan ,Mississippi ,Denver ,Colorado ,Pakistan ,United Kingdom ,Maine ,Iraq ,Israel ,West Point ,Iwo Jima ,Japan General ,South Vietnam ,Vietnam General ,Capitol Hill ,Bosnia Herzegovina ,Americans ,America ,Chinese ,Turkish ,Soviets ,North Koreans ,Bosnian ,North Korean ,British ,German ,Israeli ,Japanese ,American ,George Marshall ,Intertek Bachus ,Shelley Murray ,Evan Thomas ,Henry Kissinger ,Arleigh Burke ,Burke Arleigh ,Ronald Reagan ,Ngos Usaid ,Cliff Stearns ,Neil Smith ,Davis Petraeus ,Steve Burke ,Harry Truman ,David Petraeus ,Frick Boucher ,Jeffrey Immelt ,Al Qaeda ,Joe Barton ,Alan Murray ,Judith Krug ,John Warner ,Jerry Berman ,Jay Leno ,Anna Mori ,Michael Mullen ,Jeff Zucker ,Ann Rondeau ,Ernest King ,John Paul Jones ,Francis Matthews ,Alfred Damon Hamm ,Brian Roberts ,Edward Bunn ,Dwight Tauzin Hauer ,Morrill Burke ,