Today which is the heart of what we all talk about, Public Diplomacy. And you can go back a century to the beginning of the u. S. Governments First Official formal messaging, world war i, john brown did a program about that last year. After world war ii and during the cold war we had education on cultural exchanges very much on the floor and today one of president obamas signature efforts, the Young AfricanLeaders Initiative is bringing hundreds of African Leaders to washington to meet with the president and others today and tomorrow. And then there is the social and digital revolution and media. And that is something which continues to unfold. We have an announcement most recently, i believe thursday is the latest iteration of the innovation in u. S. Messaging this time to attempts to head off recruiting by isis and other terrorists groups appealing to emotion. You may have seen that in the friday the New York Times and other papers. This is a quickly changing field and we have somebody who is known to many of you to discuss the field, whats happening tight and what hes doing about it. Our speaker is the new director of the edward r. Mur row center at Tufts University fletcher school. Many of you have known him as a journalist. Hes reported for the Washington Post from tokyo, the wall street journal, covered threemile island for the philadelphia inquirer. But today hes here to speak as an academic. He is someone who, if you go to the website most of his online biography is on page two of your program. But if you go to his by yo bio online, a new digital era. Lets hear about the new recasting from edward schumachermatos. [ applause ] gee its a great honor to be here. One thing you didnt say was i was an om budsman for the philadelphia herald. My friend was the editor of the herald and he hired me to do that. Thank you for coming. I hope for give me for looking like im going to the beach. You catch me between having been on cape cod last weekend and going off next. And i went off starting this trip thinking i had packed the pants and the shirt and the tie. So i woke up this morning and started pulling out of this crowded suitcase and couldnt find it. And so i was panicked and i thought oh my god, these guys are going to skewer me here, particularly considering what really started this what led to this talk today. And that was some concern about what fletcher is doing about Public Diplomacy and some worry that fletcher and maybe even me personally was leading us away from a subject i know thats near and dear to the hearts of many of you. So let me say the three things i would like to talk about. One of the education battles over Public Diplomacy and what fletcher is doing about it, secondly, some of my thoughts and fears about Public Diplomacy itself in todays digitally networked world. Adam made some reference about some of the things happening today. And third is to talk about some of the projects that weve launched at the mur row center and really i hope to get your advice, reaction and input on them. First the academic battles. Here in the audience there are two former state department morrow fellows who have been at fletcher. I dont know you personally. Great. And then lin, a fellow who was acting director. Thank you for your work that you did in your day. And sherry who came and introduced herself to me, got the first ph. D. In fletcher in Public Diplomacy. And anybody who reads knows Alec Henderson and hes taught for fletcher many years, hes retiring at this end of the year. Told me to look all of you guys up. So i owe it to him for my being able to know you. And i know there are others here who have study at fletcher and have a great interest in this subject. So, you know, fletcher is not abandoning Public Diplomacy. Let me just say that categorically. We all know the phrase i mean, its become particularly sensitive because the phrase is attributed to a former dean at fletcher who used it in the founding of what was then call the mowerrow center for the advancement of Public Diplomacy back in 1965. The center was created because ed murrow himself, as he was leaving usis, was going to teach at fletcher. And then he died after a very young age. And instead of murrow coming, all of his books and papers came to fletcher. And the center was founded in his name. What we have done is weve tried to reinvigorate the center and redistrict it for todays world. We renamed it called the edward r. Murrow center for a Digital World now. But it has the subtitles right, cyber, media and Public Diplomacy. Public diplomacy remains key and youll see as we go through today how. Because murrow was both a journalist and head of usis as we know. But this new name is kind of done to respond to whats the new times. Right . Kind of a digital revolution is taking place in the emergency dimension of cyberspace. The state department and governments everywhere are struggling with how to respond to the new international environment. Its our job we think in the academic world to sort of help lead the way. So we want to teach not just about the past but also where are we going. So as we look at that, what fletcher should do, theres a real honest fact of life about who is best, who does the most work and i know there are lots of folks here from lots of schools, from george mason, from georgetown, from hopkins, American University here in washington, and its great to have you here. But lets all face it. U usc is nurm ber one as teaching Public Diplomacy as an academic discipline. Its number one even though it began at fletcher. There are a lot of people that dont like to admit that, including the fletcher alumni. But its the truth. If thats the case what should we be doing both to respond to the academic environment and two, how can we best contribute to what the country needs, to what the state department needs, to what diplomacy needs, to what world peace and order need. What can we best do. Thats how we framed this. Not that Public Diplomacy was dead but what could we do. And the almost universal response from everybody, including inside the state department was what fletcher could do was draw on its real strength which was being an interdisciplinary school. So and being sort of removed from the washington battles, right . To be able to stand back and sort of look at where were going and try to see if we cant actually come up with something that would be of help. As we know, so much of the field right now is dominated by not Public Knowledge but by the Digital Field is dominated by the cybersecurity. Dominated by the military debate and not by the political social culture debate. And thats where i want to talk the Murrow Center. So but if you look at our course catalog, if you look at the Murrow Center site online, you will see that we have 20 courses that deal with Public Diplomacy in one way or another. Right . The course we dont have, but its there and we hope that we will have it we have state department fellows every year and we hope that they will continue as some of you have done, to teach the course on the practice of Public Diplomacy the course of the practice itself, most recently taught by bill. He was really good. People liked his course. I personally want to have that course. I think we should have it. But something has happened. Student demand for that course was not high. And i understand it. Because student demand for things in journalism is not high either. Its all part of the whole evolution of whats taking place in the world and in academia. You know, young people are seeing theyre coming at this from a different perspective from what we came at it with. And either we adapt to that or we die. And it doesnt mean that you do away with Public Diplomacy. Not at all. Thats not what im trying to say. I am trying to say that we have to be honest about one, the competitive environment and two, what the students want. Right . So but the courses that we do have are very popular. I personally teach courses on how to write oped pieces. How do you change the public debate. And in that course we go very much into, you know, int international biases and the differences between conservative societies and liberal societies and all of this kind of stuff. Really everything about how do you change the global debate. Thats what the course is called. We have other communication courses that do it from video angles and from public speaking angles and then we have other courses that have to do with how to you frame economic debates so that it has a policy impact. How do you communicate really difficult economic issues. Then we have courses on what do you do in terms of public when theres a natural crisis. How do you respond to that from a crisis point of view. We have courses on nature branding, which is a part of the element of Public Diplomacy, right . We have courses on negotiations and so forth. In addition to what i said, the history courses and everything, then there are courses on count terrorism that deal on those sorts of things, on social networks, digital citizenship and development. All of these things deal with whats part of the practice of Public Diplomacy. Youre shaking your head. Well come back to that. Okay. No. There is some debate about how do you define Public Diplomacy. We know that. Were never going to come up with one answer to that but ill come back to it. So its were dealing with Public Diplomacy but were trying to deal with it in a way that responds to the needs and the demands of the world today and of students, which then leads me to sort of the second area i want to talk about in general, which is this changing world itself. And what the challenges are. You know, is Public Diplomacy just what governments do . Or is it a national pop lakess International Exchanges in their whole entire. What society is doing. And we know that thats a long standing debate and lets not try to answer it here. But lets do say whats going on. And you know, as jeff cowan himself, the founder at usc with adam, the first center for Public Diplomacy at usc, right, as direct or no, pointing to you. In the back. As director led us, you know, into it led usc into the whole study. As jeff says, weve gone from really what was a monologue in government diplomacy to a dialogue, right, to you know collaboration. You know and real Relationship Building among nations. Sort of the general trends of International Relations historically in the world. And in the damage tall world what that means is the governments has lost the control over the message. So has the news media. Before the private news media and governments controlled the pipelines of information. In this world and within their countries. And they did for centuries, ever since the founding of the Printing Presses. That period, if its not over is coming to an end. With social media, everybody has a voice internationally and nationally. And some societies like china and russia try to control it but only to partial success. When anybody can compete with the the New York Times, the the New York Times no longer controls the news reporting on that. And the same thing for governmen governments. Whats what may be even worse about that loss of control is that the news media itself is facing existential crisis that could lead to its total collapse, frankly. And its because the Business Model for advertising does not work online. There was a time we all everybody used to complain that the news media responded to advertisers. Thats not true. Advertisers responded to the news media. The that was the opposite. Power was in the hands of the news media and the governments. Governments over here but over in the private dissemination of the information, power was in the hands of the private news media. Advertisers had to go to them because that was the only way to get to their audience. But in the Digital World they bypass it. Advertising is on google and facebook. The two of them get 75 of all of the ad market of all advertising goes to google and facebook today. You dont need cbs or abc or nbc to reach a public for your product. You dont need the the New York Times or the wall street journal or the miami herald. Right now nobody wants to pay for information online. A few of us here who are amongst a lead are willing to do so but the great majority of people here and in every country around the world do not want to pay for information. So we have an existential crisis. This is a media controlled over information, we dont know where were heading. And governments do not have the power to be able to influence it like they used to. So if we talk about Public Diplomacy, we talk about okay, how do we do Public Diplomacy in that kind of a world. Thats the big challenge. Not the say that the traditional Public Diplomacy persontoperson stuff is important, Culture Exchange is important, clearly all of that is important and clearly nations have to disseminate their own points of view on things, but thats, frankly, small compared to the much bigger challenge. So i kind of had this great fear, frankly, that we may be moving in a direction that really the last 100, 200 years are just a blip in history and were going back to tribal societies. Really, thats my great concern. You know, its a concern kissinger didnt state it that way. In his last book we talked about a world order precisely because of the digital revolution. As communication leaps boundaries, boundaries mean less. Add to that the globalization that comes from the economic friends, add to that the globalization that comes from immigration trends, you know you find and add to that about what everybody is doing about pushing universal values or what businesses are doing about pushing universal values. Nations are being less and less. Thats not to say that nations arent important but less important than they were in the past. If thats the case, if were moving to a world where nations mean less, it sounds very kumbaya that were going to be a great global world of peace and everything but we know thats not going to happen. Right . And so, you know, who is going to organize social welfare if you dont have national governments. We dont have a world government to bring some kind of world order. It would be nice some day to work in that direction but were not there by a long shot. And yet if governments today lose their power and lose any kind of a sense of sovereignty and of ability to control things, where do we go . Where do we go . What does it all mean . That is where i see the great challenge. For all of us. All of us to study. And were not. Were not. Were talking about who gets the latest cyberattack against the dnc and im not saying thats not important. It is. But who is really looking at what all this means, you know, for international order. For the International System and for the nation state. Some people are looking at it theoretically, right . But really we know very very very little. And i would like to challenge all of you in this room to try and answer some of those questions. And that we should Work Together doing that. And so let me tell you some of the projects that were trying to do with fletcher and ill open it up to questions from there. So one is reprecisely a Research Initiative on cyberspace and world order. Second is a more defined issue on Digital Trust. The first one is a very broad thing and im trying to get a lot of faculty members interested, just trying to get the faculty going and see whatever we can do for individual projects and so forth. We just started talking about it. The one of Digital Trust is a little more advanced and were talking to funders on that. And then the next one is what im calling a Global Platform and its very advanced. Im working with a design firm out of new york called charming robot. We will be doing our alpha launch in about a month. An alpha launch is really a glorified whats the word i want to say. Its a yeah. Its a pilot but instead of, you know, youre asking for people, for their opinion and their response on that kind of a thing. Its a focus group. A glorified online focus group. Maybe 100 people to get their reaction to it. I think were going to focus on Human Security and then expand out to other issues and Different Things on what will be a global comparison of experts on the same issue. We do not have today there is not a global news medium. A true global news medium. You can get the the New York Times anywhere, get the bbc anywhere, the economist anywhere, the wall street journal anywhere but theyre edited from their home market. Theyre not global. They frame their news and information from whatever their home capital is. Thats natural. Its the same thing with the times of india, its the same thing with the chinese press, the same thing with every every Nations Press does the exact same thing. What we do not have is anything thats truly comparative globally. So that we can compare what chinese are saying, what indians are saying and what americans are saying at the same time. And so were trying to see if we can crack that nut. But we cant do it with reporting but no, we dont have the resource to do reporting. But we think we can do it by doing analytical stuff, by comparing what experts in Different Countries are saying at the same time on the same issue. So can we pull it off . I dont. I mean we may fall flat on our face. But its a wonderful challenge. Let me say that one of the things i did a few years ago, i launched a chain of newspapers in texas, between the wall street journal and npr. And so it was great fun. We had four dailies. We had pearson, which was the Financial Times economists as our original backers and the Chandler Family out of california which is the l. A. Times, the larger shareholder in the Tribune Company came in as the second Group Investing in it. We went through 45 million and lost every bit of it. And you know, it was my project so i lost some too, i hate to say. But it was a noble project and id do it again. But we lost precisely because of the changing market. You know when we put the project together, it was a time when newspapers were essentially Printing Presses for money and by the time we hit the streets, all of that had changed. So but the whole concept of launching something and being entrepreneurial is a great challenge. This one will be of course much lower cost but we hope that we can make it work and we hope to make it work with the international partners. But advice that yall might have for this will be greatly appreciated. I may be coming to you to write things for it. And then secondly i am working with usc on a project on internet laws in latin america that we hope to do. And then the last thing, this is really something for this group, and in here im very happy to report that phil from usc who heads the Public Diplomacy at usc is part of a small Group Designing this and that is to redesign u. S. Governments International Communication strategy from scratch as if you had to start all over again. As we know, weve got this kind of creeky thing all put together with bandaids. Its a leftover from the cold war. If you had to do it all over again, how would you define how would you structure both the, you know, the strategy of the government and its infrastructure. How would you do it today if you had to do it all over again . Right . And so what we want to do is have a period have a group of eight or nine or ten working groups. We want to pull people from hollywood, silicon valley, from madison avenue and from here in washington to call and debate this thing and try to put the whole governments International Communication strategy within this greater concept of all of the digital and other communications taking place in the world. What should we do today . And we hope to have a whole series of reports and then one master report at the end. Excuse me. Yeah. So thats one where i really would love to call on some of you guy to help participate both with ideas and in some of the working groups. So with that let me end and open up the questions. [ applause ] thank you. Of course our speaker has asked a question also. Answers might also be welcome. Questions, comments . My goodness. Everyone is okay. Over on the side. Im gary. A fact check, you said 75 of ad money is on facebook and google. I believe you mean digital ad money. Im sorry, yes, i do. Youre right. And when you talk about global media, i always think of elliott carver, the character in one of the james bond movies who wanted to start a world war, so one of the things he did was control media satellites in asia newspapers in europe, satellites in europe. Who could model that . But is there any chance of some Media Company having that powerful worldwide in real life, not just in a james bond movie . No. Frankly, no. The Business Model just doesnt work. If the movie was tomorrow never dies and everyone thought it was modeled on merdoch. Ambassador quinn. I teach at the American University. Yes, i know you teach. Yes. Im astonished at one of the comments that you made which is that theres no interest among your students in the practice of Public Diplomacy. My sense is in the school of International Service that the question of practice is enormously important to a very High Percentage of students who seek particularly in the Masters Program to go out into the world, the world of government and beyond with tools that will enable them to get appropriate jobs and so forth. In the Public Diplomacy realm, we have no shortage, not enough people teaching for the people who want to learn the tools of the trade. How do you use the new technologies, how do you use the old technologies, how do you promote exchanges and so forth. And its quite astonishing is that graduate or undergraduate . Both levels. But particularly the graduate level. We have a big graduate program as you know. The Communications Program within that graduate program, theres high demand. So i guess my question is why are you students at fletcher turned off by what everywhere else seems to be a highly important subject . Thats great. Im glad to know about that au. I didnt know and one of the things i did want to hear, the experience at the other schools was. I can venture a couple of thoughts, if i might. But literally this is just venturing them and it only comes from me. This isnt an official thing at all. Other than the fact that when i say were committed to Public Diplomacy in general, im speaking on behalf of the dean. But i dont know about au, but at fletcher the average age of students coming in is roughly 28 years old. Theyre there 28, 29, 30 years old. People come with experience and have an idea of what it is that they want. And even those students who are interested in Public Diplomacy do not are not demanding the course on Public Diplomacy. They would rather have the different skills courses and the academic courses that are part of being a good public diplomat or just a good diplomat in general instead of having the practice course on public diplo diplomacy. I dont know why. I wish i did. I wish i did. And you know, we would still like to have that course. But we have to sort of, you know, in the competition for what courses you do in the budget you have, right, something we all understand, it hasnt made the cut. What we do want is that when we have a visiting state department fellow who knows about it, we do hope that person will teach the course. And were trying to even have a standard syllabus to have it as a base for anybody that comes in. Our last murrow fellow who was here last year came out of the field of Public Diplomacy but he didnt he just wasnt interested in teaching the course, though he participated in the student activities, Holding Workshops and panels, went to all of alans courses and was a constant participant in his course and other courses on Public Diplomacy. Its not that it wasnt represented in the terms of traditional Public Diplomacy practices in other courses, he did that and he was wonderful about it. Everyone loved it. He had tremendous energy. But i dont i wish i dont know if that is the real reason why we dont have it. But we just dont. [ inaudible ] yeah. We do a fair amount in Public Diplomacy. One of the issues you raised, how are other people doing it, other countries and institutions. Theres a demand to try to understand the complexity of the profession of the Public Diplomacy representative. Weve had many thesises on that. I spoke to a group of ukrainian diplomats that came up to talk about Public Diplomacy. Right before them came a group from greece and another group from poland. Constantly groups of diplomats coming through and we work with them. Next question from Bruce Gregory and it may not be unrelat unrelated. Yes. Bruce gregory, George Washington university. At gw we have three retired state Department Practitioners teaching courses that are practitioner oriented, academic courses and focus on the academic study of diplomacy and for ten years weve had a fellow, a Foreign Service officer teaching courses, undergraduate and graduate. The demand is there. And i guess my question goes to i think youre right. Students are the pay masters in the modern entrepreneurial university. I see that driving where fletcher is looking at the future. I appreciate your comments on the context for diplomacy. My question goes, Alex Henderson has been teaching for a long time, an endowed chair. You have plans to replace him at fletcher. And could you talk a little bit more about how you plan to replace bull rues eight years of teaching at fletch center. Yes, there are definitely plans. Theyre looking for somebody to replace alan now and they do want somebody of course the chair is all about the teaching of diplomacy. We all know that alan had a particular interest in Public Diplomacy, wrote a particular book about it. Held conferences and seminars on it. Has a great interest in it. So absolutely we hope to replace that role. Alan is staying on in an emeritus role and will continue to teach and be involved in all of those issues. Weve been terrifically involved in everything that were doing now. You know, including sending me emails this morning. So alan is the best. We all love alan. But the thing about bill rue is exactly your point. I would love nothing more than to have somebody continuing that course. The practice of Public Diplomacy, i dont know if thats the exact name but it with us the course dedicated to the practice of Public Diplomacy. Like i said earlier, it was recognized as a very good course and a very good professor and students who took the course loved him. I mean, you know, i run a center and i teach as well. But guys who run centers, its the academic dean and the Academic Council committee that oversees what courses you teach, right . Not a center direct. But as a Center Director who is interested in this i would love nothing more than to have this course. That would mean more students involved in the fields that our center is involved in. Now im very happy to report that ive just closed raising of a half a Million Dollars for endowment for student scholarships. Half of that is coming from cbs. Which has never been involved in the Murrow Center even though edward r. Murrows career, what hes known for is work at cbs. Weve established a relationship in the name of a former fletcher student who died about a year ago and was a legendary producer of foreign news inside cbs. So with that well be able to give scholarships to five secondyear students who will be writing their capstones on the murrow areas that i laid out, which is, you know, cyber, media and Public Diplomacy. And im really going to be looking for guys, students who want to do capstone projects in Public Diplomacy. So we want it. Believe me, we want it. Because we think its important. Our next question back here. Thing you. Thank you my name is lynn while. Id like to echo in part what Bruce Gregory said and what you just said. I teach a Capstone Course, a yearlong cures for students and have twiet as many enrolled for this fall as last year. Theres definitely a thirst for people who are interested in Public Diplomacy and communications to develop real skills by working with clients. So perhaps your Capstone Course under the Murrow Program can be so designed. And then at au, there are Skills Institute courses. What courses . Im sorry. Skills institutes, short term, two days which help people from across the university coming through s. I. S. For short term courses, ill be teaching one of those in january. I had a question about the last thing you mentioned in your remarks. That kind of the thing youre doing with the weekend workshops and things like that, were talking about we could do more of that. Thats a great idea. You might find a greater appetite for it than a year long course. Yes. Its more than focusing on International Communications but its part of Public Diplomacy, yes. Whats the timeline for that project and will you be able to provide any insights to the Transition Team in november . Funny you should say that. Arian huffington came up to speak at our graduation in may and i spotted a small group of people talking with her in a private room. So she came over to me and she said, what would edward r. Murrow say about donald trump. And i said, he would skewer him. So hes up there on the stage writing her comments and she goes up on the stage and she goes, she promoted me to dean, your dean of the edward r. Muff l Murrow Center and i asked him what edward r. Murrow would say about donald trump and he told me that she would skewer him. She did a tweet and a column. But there was such a response. Everybody kept saying not to talk after trump but to say gee whiz, maybe we should be doing something about what edward r. Murrow would say about difference things. Should we create some kind of a program and i thought that was fascinating. So i have been, in fact, batting the idea around to different people, including talking with the dean day before yesterday. But any ideas you guys have what we could do on that or do together really, because i think we i really am a believe ar working together. I guess that sounds like the other candidate. But the truth of the matter is were much stronger working tot than being jealous of our own turf. So i am quite open to any ideas you have and how to develop Something Like that. That would be great. Sherry mueller. Its my privilege to teach cultural diplomacy at the school of International Service at au and im quick to point out that edward r. Murrow started his career at the institute of International Communication. So one of my concerns as somebody who was there when the Murrow Program started and took the first two courses in pub luck diplomacy ever given at fletcher, how do you think and how do you see in the pan no by of courses youre offering some courses on educational exchange. Im concerned that that gets lost in International Media and yet students need it so badly to put the fragmented messages theyre getting in some sort of deeper context. How are you thinking about that . Yeah. You know, thats why we need the practice of Public Diplomacy course. To hit those issues. I feel some of that does get lost. Some of it. We have wonderful things on you know speakers coming in talking about dull churl diplomacy and that kind of thing. But the really focused teaching of it gets lost not having the Public Diplomacy course. Bill rues course did that. And i wish we could. We dont ignore the subject. We do deal with the subject of the school. But it doesnt come up in an organized disciplined way that it would in a course. We have lots of students involved with that and alumni. Im talking with alumni that wants nothing more than do do this project. I have the mike here. Retired Foreign Service officer. I would like to day the devils advocate either the government controlled the media before the internet or a oneway conversation had become a twoyear conversation. Ten years ago when i was teaching john brown was a speaker at my class. I think he expressed that idea early on. John brown raise your hand. I know your blog. Now i have a face. He also thank you. He also introduced the idea thats cool. Thats cool. Im sorry, go ahead. We shouldnt call ourselves, call the service the voice of america it should be the voices of america because we have so many voices in our Public Diplomacy. I would rather state that Richard Nixon never controlled the media. He used the word ka nip shun about the problems he had with the media. I remember as the kid seeing the public debate that led to johnson, how it was excoriated in the media. He never controlled the media. The folks that control the media live in to tall yarn areas. What we see on the internet and social media, there are a lot of voices i just dont think theyre important. I get mired in the muck in the internet. No one listens to themselves except themselves. They get captured by echo chambers and theres little debate a better debate we used to have in the image of the newsstand that had several newspapers and journals. What were having in social media has much less value. But where there is good debate in the internet, a lot of times thats one way. You have twitter where theres little content. You become a follower and you cant reply and you have good publications like the new yorker which dont allow responses to articles. Increasingly thats the trend. Just some ideas to challenge the one way to two way. Let me say i hope i didnt say that the government controls the news media. Its that there were two main pipelines, one the private news media and the other the government. In some places with the government does control but in this country and in democratic countries. You had a model before, just a model of information flows being controlled by the government or the private news media. Thats what has been broken down. Hi, rachel oswald, reporter covering foreign affairs. And in my free time i work for the National Press club. I wanted to respond a lit bit to what you said. I in my experience working on prez freedom, its been that governments around the world are moving much more decisively to crack down on the media voices and theyre doing it in ways that are clever and that are hard for the younger media voice to get around. Were seeing it not just in russia and china but also in egypt, in turkey, in vietnam. And so while i think the digital platform initially offered the potential to be destabilizing to regimes this is the same as where were setting, is that right now atookcy is winning because the media doesnt have the resources or the backing from the International Organizations and the strong countries like the United States to really resist these auto cattic laws. You raise a very good fear. We dont know what the long term will be. The chinese are doing a very good job at it so far. So will that last long term . We dont know. But you ie totally agree with you in terms of the way the situation looks today. And thats one reason why we have this project in latin america, to precisely to craft internet laws. The first thing were addressing is free press and free speech online. A question from a former colleague of yours from the the New York Times in madrid. Oh, heavens. He snuck into the room. I sure did. I followed edward at Madrid Bureau for the the New York Times and i got in a little bit late and i might have missed the optimistic part of your speech. But what about oldtime former journalists like us, foreign journalists who want to practice our trade. And according to the young lady who just spoke, doesnt look too optimistic. Yeah. Everything that ive said about students and their interest in Public Diplomacy applies to journalism even more. And before going to fletcher i taught at columbia Journalism School. And its and youre a journalist. Im sure yir eoure aware of thn the profession. Its harder and harder to attract Good Students into the journalism because theyre fearful of the job market. A standard fear. It makes sense. Even though people want they may have that calling for doing what paul and i did for so many years. Its a real issue. I mean i think theres a real concern. The the New York Times, i dont know if youve noticed but the the New York Times keeps selling off its buildings and properties as it keeps trying to find a formula to keep it going. And the same thing goes with newspapers across the country. The Washington Post brought in deep pockets behind it, which is great. But and the post has really taken off online which is wonderful. But its taken off in terms of the number of monthly visitors. It hasnt taken off in terms of actual income. No news gathering organization, none news gathering, i dont mean people who do just commentary or the was feeds of the world, none of them make enough money to support a newsroom. Not one. Not here, not in europe, no one in the world do they make enough money to support a newsroom. That is to go out and actually cover the news. Locally same thing. So so people try to go the nonprofit formula. Which is great but people dont want to pay the membership things, we although pbs is struggling. Npr and pbs are doing their thing which is great but theyre not making it online either. And so, you know, what do gryou do . If people want pay for it and you dont have an advertising model. We dont have an answer. Everybody says we have to have it, its got to be there. Youre right, the quality of stuff in social media is iffy at best. We all know how bad that is. But thats different from say ing that it doesnt exist. You know, its still the reality whether we like it or not. Everything you were complaining about a absolutely right. But what do we do . We dont have the answer for that. Will it be public media. Somebody from cpb was going to come on. When i was with npr i actually tried to convince the ceo at the time, garry them who before that came from sesame street, we should go international. We should lets start a little project, a gorilla project. But the board is dominated by the local Radio Stations and they dont care what npr is doing for somebody in turkey. They want to know what are you doing for my listeners in topeka. And that makes sense. I mean it makes total sense, right . I mean adam understands the way this works about you know tv and radio and audience. From the business side. And so you know, if people arent tuning in to voa and were producing all of this great information for npr and pbs, should we be distributing that internationally . Right . That was behind the attempt. I talked to bbc to see if we could collaborate with bbc. A lot of smart people want to do it, but to say you should do it and make it happen are two Different Things. Thats a perfect segue to the jeff rosen. Edward, you and i just missed each other at npr. Too bad. Im a former colleague and friend of john feltman who you worked with and many of us worked with. John is coteaching with me at this course in fletcher. Im about to rope him in to that project. Im about to go to a concert with him next week. And im also the former of npr berlin. This wasnt going to be my question at all unless you marched in and just talked about going worldwide. Youre absolutely correct. It was fighting an uphill battle at npr. They do still own a Radio Station in berlin, which is, im pleased to say, a tremendous success because it mixes both npr programs and it mixing locally produced material in a market with english is i dont know if youve ever been there but english and german are about the same thing in berlin and english is sort of winning. And its a tremendous success. Right. But garely nell and his private airplane are now gone and theres every new crew that comes in at npr, you know, youre absolutely right. Topeka, we might lose them. We dont want that pay and it used to be my great fear that one day in a budget meeting they would go quarter of a Million Dollars for berlin, thats the end of that, and it would be over because no cared what was going on in berlin. And if you saw it, there may very well be a model for what happens in berlin. We used to get requests from all over the world to say, could we have an npr berlin in hong kong. Could we have one, you know, in cairo. And of course it was like pulling teeth just to keep the one in berlin alive. There was nothing i could do about it and theres nothing anybody subsequent to me has done about it either. But i put it out there. I think you had an excellent idea. Maybe somebody maybe there are ways around some of this. But and i would also say that local funding has taken over in berlin and now i dont think npr can pull the plug based on money alone. Thats great. I dont think so. Thats great. Rse of my work i was frequently in missions in embassies and consulates abroad and working with the pao staff. And i just found a tremendous number of dedicated number of people who were really good at their jobs. They knew the local setting, the local media so well. And i was wondering because i dont know much about graduate study in Public Diplomacy. But would there be possibilities for your students, for the au students, for usc to take some foreign study opportunity and go work in some of these you know, really get down there on the ground and work at some of these posts, bring some of the ideas theyve learned from study and then bring it to see what really happens on the ground . Those are good points. Let me say about npr. It is available on Armed Forces Radio around the world. Number two, what you may not know is that they were negotiating i dont know where it stands today to be carried on like gm automobiles. [ inaudible ] international, to go international with it. [ inaudible ] didnt happen. Okay. Theres a direct satellite middle east and europe called [ inaudible ] i havent talked to the people at the bbc because the bbc is pulling back from around the world. Every year they keep retrenching. It is still by far the most believed International Source out there. But it would be it would make perfect sense at a time when the Chinese International broadcast effort was expanding with the russian expanding, the venezuelans were, theyre not now but the iranians are. You can get iranian tv throughout latin america you know in spanish, not in sppersi not in farcy. And on and on. Were pulling back at a time these people are all expanding should we be doing something about that. And considering the quality of content. Its great content. Shows who we are as people, both npr and pbs. You know, its there. Should we not make better use of it. But there also is a congressional restrictions. Its a big thing. But part of the project im working on will address that question. I hope that we can break some ground. Hi, joan bower. Im with actually the broadcasting board and my question is going to be about. But i also teach the Public Diplomacy course at hopkins. Ill echo everybody else. If you want to have some of my students, im really overworked this year. Theres too many people in that class. And its just its constantly like that. Theyve asked me if ill do it all year round. Absolutely not. Theres too many students in this class. Two things theres something about being in washington that attracts all ofguys. Well, they all think theyre going to get jobs. And frankly, a lot of them do get jobs. Thats one of my questions. My first question is what youre doing to liaise, i hate that word, the broadcasting board in terms of your overall broadcasting project. Have you been to the broadcasting board . Are you talking with us . Are you involving us . We have all the research, blah blah blah. My second question, and hold the thought. Your comment that the military was taking over Public Diplomacy. Oh, no, no. No. I didnt say it quite that way. But go ahead. Thats kind of how i interpreted it. We all know the military has a ton of money, which is one of the reasons i think personally there should be more study of Public Diplomacy to prevent that, or at least to meld those two areas. All right. I agree. Im sorry. I hope i didnt suggest that the military is take over Public Diplomacy, no. The military is terrifically active in whats happening in the online world. And in that because they do have more money, that poor little state of Engagement Center has 15 million budget or something. Two people. Its such a small budget. And they had to bring in somebody from the navy s. E. A. L. S. They keep reinventing themselves. But now their new reinvention is with a navy seal veteran, who is coming over from the military side. And the military has just been no comment actually. Been more active on that. Let me say something. Let me play the reverse devils advocate about all your students take Public Diplomacy courses. And i come from out of the journalism world. I never took a journalism course in my life. The only journalism the closest thing i took to a Journalism School was at the fletcher school. I was a student there. From the Murrow Center, from david halberstan. And it was about the medias coverage of the vietnam war. That wasnt a journalism skills course, right . It was about media. And thats where i got the bug and started working part time at the boston globe and things like that, and went from there. But i never took a skills course in journalism. I taught skills courses in journalism at columbia for three or four years. But i wonder if the teaching of Public Diplomacy isnt a little bit like the teaching of journalism in that i think its good that we all do it. Believe me. Im playing devils advocate here. This is not my secretly being against teaching Public Diplomacy. That is not the point. I promise you. But i wonder if were not better coming at it obliquely from all those Different Things that make up Public Diplomacy as opposed to teaching the practice. I just wonder if its really that necessary. And here i am. I teach skills courses at fletcher. I really think we should do more of them. I just throw that out as a to play devils advocate a little bit. As you had wanted to do. Bbg question. Oh, the bbg question. Oh, we will. And the guys that im working with, you probably know him, anders wimbush. He is no longer at bbg. I know, i know, i know. But were just starting. Were just in the planning phase. And of course there is no way we could do this without involving bbg, and we will go to bbg, no doubt. Okay. Im tom tuck. Oh. A former Foreign Service officer. When you caused a lot of uproar. I want you to know that. No, no, no. I think its great you did that. When ed gallian founded the Murrow Center, it was part of his realization at that time Public Diplomacy had become a vital element in the conduct of foreign relations. Yes. He found s. A. Chief of administration before he became a murrow dean that there were not enough trained people in the field to really conduct Public Diplomacy. And therefore, it was part of his effort to really create Public Diplomacy as a major element within foreign policy, conduct of foreign policy, that he wanted to have graduate Students Learning and getting information about Public Diplomacy so that they can be active in the Foreign Service in that field. And that worked. I mean, after fletcher was the first one, georgetown university, the usc center, and other institutions also became active in that field. I submit that fletcher as the first school to do this, and do it so well in the creation of specialists in the field that this should not be stopped. Yeah. And should it be continued as you concentrate on economic, on security studies, and therefore Public Diplomacy should remain a major element in the teaching at fletcher. We agree with you. And i think i can say that on behalf of the dean. I think i can say that on behalf of the academic dean and everybody. We agree with you. Im trying to tell you what our experience has been within the school in terms of student demand. Instead of wanting that practitioner course, really wanting all those other courses that feed into what they think feed into what makes a good Public Diplomacy officer. A couple of things like education and culture and things like that might get overlooked. I think that would be sad. But the regular diplomacy course does bring that in allens courses and things. It hasnt gone away, not even that. But the practitioner stuff, i agree with you. I think we need that. I think most people at fletcher agree with that. But im trying to tell you what our experience has been. And how we have found that a different approach to all that goes into Public Diplomacy seems to be more in demand among our students. Pardon me . [ inaudible ] i dont know how what the numbers were over the courses of the years. Im sorry. I dont know. Thats actually a good question. I should know better, if i came to talk about that. But i dont know. We always promised to have you out in time to make this a lunch hour. So we have time for one last question, and its going to be from someone who you followed, but youre meeting here for the first time, john brown. Thank you, adam. A pleasure to meet you. My pleasure, thank you. I just have for my since, i compiled this Public Diplomacy press and blog review. And one of the things that strikes me every day when i compile this is how Public Diplomacy overseas has become a very important activity and academic discipline. You name the country korea, china, india, israel, and there is a bit of an irony in, because your point may be well taken that in some ways Public Diplomacy is getting off the radar in the United States. Its been replaced by were such a smart power and so forth. My point being that i think in terms of getting students to study Public Diplomacy certainly there is an enormous demand overseas for people who want to study Public Diplomacy and the American Experience in it. So in fact, i would argue, and adam will maybe not disagree with me that one of the reasons as you put it usc, central and Public Diplomacy, as you put it, number one, is because theyve managed to attract so many foreign students interested in Public Diplomacy. That was the secret. Well, no, i think what you say about the International Thing is very, very, very true. One of the reasons, if we do the big International Broadcast strategy thing it is might lead to courses designed for an International Audience on not what the United States does, but what other countries should be doing. I have found interest in other governments on just that. And youre right. That there is tremendous interest around the world in the concept of Public Diplomacy. Some of that i suspect comes from the whole concept of selfpower or smart power, or whatever you want to call it. Call it what you will, it is Public Diplomacy. Well, thank you for your kind words about usc, which we were not expecting. Thanks also to our host the american Foreign Service association, and also especially please join me in thanking our speaker, edward moffett. Our next program monday, september 12th, 12 00 noon. Until then, were adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] each week, American History tvs reel america brings you archival films. Up next on American History tvs reel america, shooting for fbi policea 1975 training film detailing techniques for arresting armed suspect. Uses dramatizations and scenes recorded at a shooting range to show the use of firearms law enforcement