the "washington post." >> brown: plus, we debate the president's overall approach to the nation's economic woes with economists heather boushey and douglas holz-eakin. >> ifill: betty ann bowser reports on how spanish television soap operas are leading the way in health education. >> "cross roads" tackles just about every health issue affects latinos from diabetes to asthma to alcohol and drug abuse. >> brown: and margaret warner updates the latest tensions in egypt, one year after the revolution. >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> brown: an american woman and a danish man were free today after u.s. commandos whisked them away from their pirate captors in somalia. the operation unfolded in secret, even as president obama made ready to address the nation. the first hint of action came in the president's cryptic greeting to defense secretary leon panetta, just before delivering the state of the union address last night. >> good job tonight. good job tonight. >> brown: the president said nothing else during his speech, but confirmation came several hours later. u.s. navy seals had raided a site near adado in central somalia. they freed two aid workers who'd been kidnapped from another town, galkayo, three months ago. at the time, american jessica buchanan and her danish colleague, poul thisted, had been part of a project to clear land mines. today, they were being reunited with their families. emerging accounts said the seals parachuted in, and took the sleeping pirates by surprise, killing nine. there were no american casualties. vice president biden praised the operation, this morning on abc. >> it just takes your breath away. their capacity and their bravery and their incredible timing. >> brown: the raiders were from seal team six, the same unit that killed osama bin laden at his compound in pakistan last may. the president approved the somalia mission on monday. in his own statement today, he said, "this is yet another message to the world that the united states of america will stand strongly against any threats to our people." there've been other raids against somali pirates in recent years, to combat their hijackings of ships at sea. the piracy problem is part of the larger lawlessness that has gripped somalia for decades and left it a broken state. and we get more on the operation and the situation in somalia, from tom bowman, npr's pentagon correspondent and peter pham, director of the atlantic council's africa center. he just returned from a trip to mogadishu last month. wasserman-schult welcome to both of you. tom bowman, first, back up, what's known about the original kidnapping? >> well, this happened last october, two people were killed. they were both working far danish demining organization. one of them is an american, jessica buchanan, 32 years old, from virginia. and her colleague was a 60-year-old danish citizen and we're told president obama kept a close eye on this since last fall and over the last week we're told this whole thing ramped up. there were indications that jessica buchanan had a serious health problem. she had a medical condition, we're not sure if she was out of her medications or whatever but they knew they had to move quickly. it was serious enough. they also got actionable intelligence about the precise location of whether they were being held. they decided to go in. >> brown: peter pham, we refer to pirates, criminal organizations. what's known about this one or the designation generally. >> well,... those categories are somewhat transparent and flexible in somalia. we're dealing with criminal organizations that will take whatever they can as a target of opportunity. if maritime targets are available they're pirates. if human victims are available, but it's the same business model. kidnapping for random. whether at sea or on land, preferably westerners whose governments or families are capable of generating hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in ransom. >> reporter: what was the pentagon saying about this particular group? >> the group, they're calling them common criminals. they's no sense they're linked to al-shabaab, the terrorist group in somalia. again, there's no indication also-- i know the f.b.i. has been working on this case-- as to whether there was any ransom request for either of these hostages. >> brown: is the raid itself, how was it carried out? what from what kind of bases? what kind of personnel? >> we're told two dozen seals from seal team 6, one of the most elite commando units left djibouti on a c-130 aircraft, parachuted into this encampment in northern somalia and shots were fired. they killed nine of these criminal, alleged criminals, whatever you want to call them. they grabbed the hostages, no casualties among the seals and the hostages were in pretty good shape and they left by helicopter and went back to djibouti. >> brown: and they grabbed some of the kidnappers? >> we're told it's not the case now. >> brown: oh, i've seen it moving around here. so right now it looks like none? >> we were told by the f.b.i. there were several who were apprehended but the pentagon is denying that saying no one was apprehended in this case. >> brown: you were just there peter pham. what is the situation with the government? they're unable, unwilling to deal with these criminals or pirates? >> well, the idea of a somali government, the so-called federal transitional government of somalia is a legal fiction that makes it convenient for us to pretend that there's some governing authority there. in actuality, it functions not like a government, it's notoriously corrupt and it doesn't do anything. it barely has a food hold in mogadishu and there only by the grace of a 12,000 strong african union mission whose bianca solorzano purpose is to protect the government from its own people. this is why these criminals-- whether they be criminals on land or pirates-- carry out their enterprises, because there is no effective governance in these parts. >> brown: after a number... a series of piracy on the sea, there was more of a concerted effort by the international community. is that having an impact? >> that's certainly having an impact. piracy continues on the seas but certainly the pirates are having their style cramped by the patrols along the coast so they've turned to other targets of opportunity. and unfortunately people like jessica who were working to help the somali people in demining present themselves as targets of opportunity. >> brown: in a case like this, you referred to the team, this is the elite team and, as the president said, the same team that got osama bin laden. >> same organization, not necessarily the same team. >> brown: that's what i want to ask you. different personnel and personnel from different military and intelligence? you refer to the f.b.i.'s involvement. >> we're told the f.b.i. was involved but this operation was done by seal team six. again, the same organization that took out osama bin laden. a lot of times in cases like this what they deal is if they have enough time they'll build a mock-up of the operation, the buildings, the encompment they're going into so they know exactly where the doors and windows are, where the tents are so when they go in they already know exactly where they're going to be going. we don't know if it happened in this case. often times that's how they do it. a lot of training and preparation goes into this operation. >> brown: you said in this case one of the determining factors was her health. so was it... how much do we know about the preparation and the reason for the final go-ahead from the president? >> we don't know a lot about the preparation at this point. people i talk with at the pentagon and elsewhere say we don't even have any pictures yet of what this place looked like. they're calling it an encomp some that would lead you to believe maybe some tent there is, probably not any buildings. but... so we don't know how much preparation time they did have before they went in. what we're told is that in the past week or so the situation became dire because of her medical condition. they knew they had to go in and get her. >> brown: do we know if they had any help on the ground or what the situation is on the ground where our guys coming in have any assets on the ground? >> we're not sure about that. but in cases like this in the past with the about raid against osama bin laden they would have spotters on the ground watching the compound. we're not sure if that objected in this case. >> brown: there are other people still being held, right? >> yes, we have over 150 seamen who are being held by pirates along the coast for ransom. we also have a number of kidnapping victims. there was another american out there, michael scott moore, a journalist, freelancer, who was kidnapped just a week ago from the very same area in north central somalia where jessica and the danish citizen were taken from several months ago. >> brown: are these actively... i mean, do we know the situation? is there ransom being asked for? is a search on for them? >> i presume certainly the governments involved are keeping close tabs on this and trying to ascertain that there's a haven certainly in light of the successful liberation of these two captives. we also have to be concerned that those holding these others might react against them or perhaps even possibly sell them. what often happens in somalia is one group will take captives but they will sell the captives on to a group better able to extract ransom, better connected or better able to hold on to the prisoners. >> brown: all right. peter pham and tom bowman, thank you both very much. >> you're welcome. thank you. >> ifill: still to come on the "newshour": state of the union rhetoric and reality; economic promises and pitfalls; medical prevention comes to the telenovela and a year into the egyptian uprising. but first, with the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: syrian government forces launched a new assault overnight, in a key central region. the opposition said the military stormed districts around hama. at least seven people were killed there and elsewhere. amateur video showed military tanks patrolling hama. activists said shells had exploded throughout the night, and communications were cut off. meanwhile, the russian foreign minister insisted again that moscow will block any u.n. sanctions against its longtime ally. >> ( translated ): we cannot support the proposal to give retrospective blessing to the one-sided sanctions against syria by means of a u.n. security council resolution, as these were sanctions that were declared without any consultation with russia or china, or others. this is simply a dishonest approach. >> sreenivasan: russia has called for talks between the syrian government and the opposition, in lieu of sanctions. the u.s. federal reserve today offered its strongest assurance yet that interest rates are not going up. the fed announced its benchmark rate will stay at record lows until at least late 2014. chairman ben bernanke said it is based on reduced expectations for economic growth this year. >> that is even if the economy were a bit stronger, the very low interest rate we currently have would still be valid, still be appropriate. and so for that reason unless there's a substantial strengthening of the economy in the near term i would think that it's a pretty good guess that we will be keeping rates low for some time from the fed announcement helped wall street come back from what had been a losing day. instead, the dow jones industrial average gained 83 points to close well above 12,758-- the highest since last may. the nasdaq rose 31 points to close at 2,818. indiana moved a major step closer today to adopting a "right-to-work" law. the republican-controlled state house passed it after democrats ended a boycott. the bill bans unions from requiring workers to join, and pay dues. it is expected to face little opposition in the state senate. indiana would be the first state in the union-dominated rust belt to adopt a "right-to-work" policy and the 23rd overall. the u.s. house enjoyed a rare day of political unity, as arizona congresswoman gabrielle giffords formally served her last day. she resigned, to focus on her recovery from being shot in the head a year ago. the three-term democrat entered the house chamber to a standing ovation, and hugs, from colleagues on both sides who cheered and wept. a tearful speaker john boehner accepted her resignation letter. and florida congresswoman debbie wasserman-schultz, read it aloud, on giffords' behalf. >> amid all that was lost on january 8, there was also hope and faith. this past year, it is what i have often clung to-- hope that our government can represent the best of a nation, not the worst. faith that americans working together in their communities, in our congress can succeed without qualification. >> sreenivasan: a number of lawmakers paid tribute to giffords, including one who called her the spirit of bipartisanship that we should all learn from. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to gwen. >> ifill: we look at reaction to president obama's big speech in three parts. beginning with this report from "newshour" congressional correspondent kwame holman. >> reporter: the president was on the move early this morning, taking his state-of-the-union theme of economic fairness on the road. first stop: cedar rapids, iowa. >> no reason we can't restore that basic american promise that if you work hard you can do well. america is not about handouts. it's about earning everything you've got. i know if we can work together, we can build an economy that gives everybody a fair shot. we can meet this challenge. >> reporter: back in washington, members of the u.s. house today were talking about what was and was not in the speech. >> last night during the state of the union he spent exactly three percent of the speech talking about debt and deficit. we have $15.3 trillion of debt. it is a major issue for us. >> last night obama offered congress a plan to rebuild our economy, proposals focused on manufacturing, innovation, infrastructure and workforce training. proposals i and my colleagues have been moving to pass. >> reporter: the president's long list of proposals, including immigration reform and mortgage help for troubled home owners, are unlikely to be acceptable to congressional republicans this election year. and mr. obama's potential rivals this fall also gave his speech the thumbs down, from out on the campaign trail. the president, for example, had said last night. >> anyone who tells you that america is in decline or that our influence has waned, doesn't know what they're talking about. >> reporter: but today, in orlando, florida-- near disney world-- mitt romney said that's fantasy land talk. >> if you really think that things are going well in this country, that we're on the right track and his policies are working, well then you better vote for him. but i think on that basis if we ask the american people if they think things are going well or not so well, and he wants to get the votes of those who think things are going well, he's not going to be president very long. >> reporter: romney's rival newt gingrich took on the president's tax plan, campaigning in miami. >> he had a very clever political promise that everybody who earns $1 million pays at least 30% taxes. which sounds perfect on the surface but it's classic left wing demagoguery. it would effect creation of jobs, would drive capital out of u.s. it would force people to invest overseas. >> reporter: back in washington, the senate's democratic majority leader harry reid insisted republican leaders aren't speaking for their followers. >> the only people in the country, the only republicans in the country that don't support this are people in the republican congress. republicans in the country think it's a fair thing to do, that the rich should contribute a little bit to solving the problems we have in this country. >> reporter: as the debate cranks up, president obama will stay on the road tonight, leaving snowy iowa for arizona, on a three-day tour of five battleground states. >> ifill: now, where the president's state of the union speech hit and missed the mark. glenn kessler writes the factcheck column for the "washington post." he joins me now. so, glenn, these big speeches to joint sessions of congress are by definition full of glittering political generalities. how do you tell... how do you begin to measure what's true and what's not? >> well, i take what the president says or what any speaker like that, particularly if they throw out facts and figures i try to go and look at the source of where have that fact and figure came from. particularly in a case of the state of the union address. it's very much like the prosecutor's case in a final argument in a trial. he's going to make his case and so he often will skip over things that are... that don't support his case and so that's where i come in and try to provide some additional context or the facts as they may be. >> ifill: well, help us isolate three particular things he said in the speech last night and provide some of that context. the first we're going to take a look at is what he had to say about where the united states stands in its war in iraq and its dealings with the taliban and in afghanistan. let's listen to it. >> for the first time in nine years there are no americans fighting in iraq. (applause) the taliban's momentum has been broken and some troops in afghanistan have begun to come home. >> ifill: he also said that osama bin laden is dead, something which is clearly true and something which he mentioned at the beginning and end of his speech. but as you parse just that part where he talked about afghanistan the taliban and iraq, what's right and what's kind of right? >> well, i mean, he's correct that, obviously, u.s. troops have left iraq. the question is, you know, what have they left? and you can look at the way the american troops departed. there was an effort originally the administration made in order to extend the security agreement and then they were either unwilling or unable to extend that agreement and that's why the troops left. he is able to say he fulfilled a campaign promise, but at the moment iraq is in a very unstable situation. >> ifill: american contractors are still on the ground, aren't there americans still on the ground? >> yes, there are americans still there, too. there's a huge state department presence as well-being protected by those contractors. so it's troops but, you know, combat troops but there are certainly a lot of americans there. >> ifill: is the taliban broken. >> he said the momentum was broken. again, it's one of those very carefully phrased statements that they put in these speeches. there was an intelligence assessment by intelligence agencies that was leaked earlier this month which indicated that the intelligence community felt that the war was at a stalemate. and so we have a very tense situation with the government in afghanistan. >> ifill: let's go on to the question about the economy. what's the problem and what's the fix fix? here is part of what the president had to say. >> we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. it's time to apply the same rules from top to bottom. no bailouts, no handouts and no copouts. >> ifill: where to begin. how about the no bailouts part? >> well, he obviously did have quite a few bailouts at the beginning of the presidency. he now says he won't have any bailouts. it was strange to me that actually later in the speech he celebrate add bailout which was the assistance to that the treasury department gave to general motors and ford. i thought both those statements were kind of confusing and didn't make a fair amount of sense. he also talked about outsourcing, an economy weakened by outsourcing. it's unclear how much the u.s. economy was... economic crisis occurred because of outsourcing or what president obama has done about it. >> ifill: do we know what he was talking about when he said phony financial profits? >> that's a bit of a mystery to me. >> ifill: okay. let's move on to the third one because one of the central arguments he's been making and he had warren buffett's secretary in the first lady's box last night in the state of the union is that there are people, middle-class people, who are paying less in taxes than multimillionaires like warren buffett. this is what he said. >> right now because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. >> ifill: i want to ask you about that but i want to correct one thing. it wasn't ford that got the bailout money it was chrysler. ford passed up. just wanted to clear that up. but let's go back to talking about it is. it true that people who are middle-class are payingless in taxes than their millionaire bosses. >> yes, there are obviously some examples of that. the examples that i've found are few and far between. i mean, he gave that statistic there and said one quarter of millionaires. what that means is if you look at the data that's 94,000 millionaires versus tens of millions of ordinary americans. now, there are in general the same data will show that on average people that earn more than a million dollars pay on average about 30% of their income in taxes. so he's taking a small example and making it a political case. but the way he makes that statement it sound like it's a bigger problem than it really is. >> ifill: so one of the things the president does at these speeches is he says "we will do this, we will do that." but he was speaking to a famously divided congress. to what degree can the president accomplish some of the things he laid out last night without any kind of legislative buy-in. bipartisan legislative buy-in. >> many of those things will require legislative action, so it's a kind of call to arms for his... for his political supporters. i went back and looked at how successful he was in implementing his ideas in the 2011 state of the union and it was a pretty meager record. many of the things he proposed were never enacted into law. >> ifill: for example. >> well,... >> ifill: i didn't mean to put you on the spot. sorry. >> go look at my column, i had little xs and checks there. but to be fair to him is that he... i also looked at in the 2010 a year ago and he had a phenomenal success record then. virtually everything he said he was going to do actually passed into law but that's because it was a democrat-controlled congress. >> ifill: funny how that changes. glenn kessler, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> ifill: finally, we turn to the president's broader view of the economy and some of the ideas he laid out last night. for that, we check in with a pair of economists with very different political points of view. heather boushey is a labor economist at the center for american progress, a liberal think tank here in washington. and douglas holtz-eakin is an economist and former director of the congressional budget office. he's now president of a conservative policy group called the american action forum. so, heather boushey, is the state of the union getting stronger as the president said? >> well, certainly it's stronger than the day he took office. when the president took office we were losing jobs at the pace of about 20,000 a day. we've certainly pulled out of that and now we're seeing job creation month after month. now i'd be the first one to tell you that it's not enough jobs. we certainly need to do better. but certainly it's in a much stronger state than it had been. >> ifill: what do you think about that, doug holts-eakin? >> well, the president made an excellent case for his campaign but didn't talk about the state of the union. i think most people were disappointed by that gap, the fact that the rhetoric was closer to campaign rhetoric than undertone of finger pointing and blame. the problems not discussed, the most important problems we face. the large debt we have at the moment projected to grow larger, the sources of that debt, entitlement programs that genuinely need to be reformed and the fact that the deep fairness issue were not the fairness issues he chose to highlight but the fact that we have a social safety net that will not survive to the next generation of poor and elderly and in the process of it failing we will burden the federal government with red ink and the economy the potential failure and that's what we'll saddle our children with. that's the preeminent moral issue of this day. that's the state of our union and the president is running for reelection. >> ifill: heather boushey, you heard the yardstick which is doug heultz eakin put out there about the death and social safety net. what are your yardsticks about that? >> i think the great thing is the president was hammering home the message that the middle-class is the engine of growth, he has a plan, a practical plan he laid out last night to put the support and strength of the middle-class at the front of our economic vision. and so it's true that we've been through a very rough patch here, we've had this great recession, an economy that failed in many ways over the past decade and he's trying to reverse those policies and put us on a stronger path. so the kinds of things he's implemented and that the previous congress put into action over the past few years are moving us forward in that direction. >> ifill: let's walk through the claims the president made. he has said many times, his administration has said, that were it not for government intervention the auto industry would have come to naught. why is that not so? why was that not a good thing, what the administration did? >> i think the key is... number one, and it's reflective in the president's speech last night is a very backward looking view of the world. we're worried about our future and the people who don't have jobs and how we're going to find them and how our children will be educated and he's building an economy built to last but it's built on a vision of the past. a vision of big government and high taxes and big unions and the policies that he's talking about, the ones that are supposedly going to help us, are both internal inconsistent. i think a big problem... >> ifill: can i just ask you specifically about the auto industry. >> what he said was no bailouts-- they got a bailout, the taxpayers are still on the hook for tens of billions of dollars to g.m. and ford. they did, in fact, go through bankruptcy. it's not in fact that had they not bailed them out they wouldn't have gone through a bankruptcy they avoided, they didn't asoid it. so they got the pain, we have whole divisions of g.m. that are gone, those people are out of work, they got a bailout and somehow he's claiming he saved the american auto industry. ford got no money, hyundai has never laid off a worker in the united united states, toyota, honda civic factories, there's an american auto industry he never touched so the claim is exaggerated and doesn't reflect what happened. >> ifill: let me ask you to respond to that but i also want to ask you about job creation. that's another big claim the administration makes and says it is future oriented when it talks about the proposals last night. >> well, you know, certainly the reverse of what happened in the auto industry was an enormous success. we pulled them back from the brink and now they're hiring folks again and that's a great thing. one of the things the president did in his speech that was i think forward looking was that he focused on manufacturing. out of the box he said we need to focus on making sure that we make stuff here in america and that we're supporting that industry and i certainly disagree with doug that that is a forward looking agenda. we need to be a country that again focuses on policies that support the kinds of businesses that make things. we can not have an economy that's just built on finance alone, that was the kind of chip that got completely out of control in the 2000s that led to the disaster we had in the economy over the past cup of years so i think that that focus on making sure that we have a strong manufacturing base and that we support innovation and industries here in the united states. >> ifill: let's talk about tax policy because the president said there would be a payroll tax extension. i want to know whether you think that's true. he also made the comment that we were just discussing about the buffett rule which is finding a way to make the tax code flatter. let's start by talking about the payroll tax. there was bipartisan applause. people were noting. but it seems to me like the devil's is in the details once again. >> so i don't think there's any disagreement that we need to extend the payroll tax for a full year. what has been a source of disagreement is the way in which you do it without raising the deficit. i expect those differences to get ironed out. this is fundmentally a political issue. >> ifill: do you agree with that? >> i hope they get ironed out. i think the that one thing the president didn't talk about last night that is typically paired with the payroll tax cut is the extension of benefits to the long-term unemployed. we have record high numbers of people who have been out of work and searching for a job. as you said, the devil is in the details and... but i hope they continue to think of unemployment insurance as a piece of that. fill. >> if we could go back to the tax policy... >> ifill: that was' what i was going to ask you. >> this is where the rhetoric and reality don't add up in the speech. the president says "i want tax reform, it's imperative we have a tax code that's fair. we need tax reform." most people believe tax reform means lower rates, broader base, simpler code, everyone has to pay their share. then look through the speech and ask where's the strategy. over here we're going to have a buffett rule not well defined and consistent with the facts on the ground. over here we'll v a new tax for multinationals not well defined at odds with every other country's around the globe. a special credit with manufacturers around here. >> ifill: so you're saying he's making the tax code more complicated. >> at every step and consistent with who he thinks deserves money and doesn't. >> well, certainly at least on the personal income tax frame i think he's been very clear that he wants to make sure that the wealthy pay their fair share and the buffett rule, making sure that people earn more than a million dollars pay a minimum tax, that's certainly... there's a lot of clarity there and there's been support for that among democrats for quite some time. making sure, as he said, that everybody gets a fair shot and people pay their fair share. >> ifill: the president also talked briefly about housing concerns last weekend. he made a proposal that there ought to be a way for people to refinance their mortgages but there wasn't a lot of detail. did you get any sense of what that was about? >> i don't think we have a lot of detail yet. i haven't seen a lot of detail coming out yet. my understanding is there's a lot of folks out there who want to refinance, take advantage of the low rates but can't because they don't have that 20% down in their home and my understanding is that the plan is designed to help those folks be able to take advantage... >> ifill: with government money. >> i don't know the details on it. >> ifill: what do you think about that? >> i think he said two things last night one of which i think was empty politics, one of which could be damaging. the refinancing looks empty. they say the budget cost will be about $10 billion. there's a $700 billion hole in the housing market, $10 billion is nothing. i think that was good political positioning, won't make much difference. he also created a task force, as if we didn't already have an f.b.i., department of justice and s.e.c. and a millions state attorneys general and he did it as a moment when we were finally seeing the state attorneys general and the servicer industry come to an agreement and basically say we're going to put this behind us, we'll agree on our liability, the a.g.s were going to stop 2 t prosecution. this gets in the way of the process, it mean we don't put our policies behind them but prolong them and it could be damaging for the recover. >> ifill: after tomorrow and last night, closer to agreement on any of these things or farther away, heather boushey? >> between... >> between heather and i. >> between us? somehow i doubt that. >> (laughs) >> the state of the union is a speech to congress and this congress has been incredibly challenging for this president. they have not agreed to do any of the things he put on the table and importantly none of the things to focus on job creation. >> most disappointing thing to me, some of the things we saw last night were three years old which means they didn't go through when democrats controlled all of congress, they're certainly not going to go through now. >> ifill: doug holtz eakin, heather boushey, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> brown: next: romance, drama and some very direct messages about health care. it's all part of a spanish- language soap opera that takes its viewers well beyond the usual storylines. "newshour" health correspondent betty ann bowser explains. >> reporter: it's a sad day for alicia. she has just learned she is dying from colon cancer. alicia's boyfriend don juancho is overcome with grief. he knows if she'd sought medical attention sooner the prognosis would not be so grim. this tragic story line is all part of a unique spanish soap opera called "encrucijada: sin salud no hay nada" or "crossroads: without health there is nothing." it's romance and drama and tears, but there's another powerful sub-text-- how to take better care of your health. actress juloiet ortiz plays alicia. >> we're trying to get people related with this character and feel like its such a shame that we lost her just because she didn't know in time what to do and how to take care of herself because she could have saved her life. >> reporter: spanish soap operas or telenovelas are one of the most popular forms of entertainment in the world with an estimated audience in the tens of millions. but the latino audience in the u.s. has very high rates of obesity, diabetes, hiv, and asthma. more than 30% of american hispanics also have no health insurance. when executive producer jesus fuentes came to the united states from mexico city he was struck by how little hispanic people knew about health care or how to access the system so he came up with the idea for crossroads. >> soap operas are very powerful to deliver our message. the challenge was to add medical information to that to create a message that people can believe in and not trying to oversell it. >> reporter: fuentes turned to denver public health consultant cristina bejarano for help in shaping the message. >> we say cancer, we mention the word cancer but we try to define what it is so they understand in a very, very simple way. >> reporter: and bejarano works in other messages as well. >> i'm like, oh, here's my chance to talk about nutrition. to the plate the size it should be, to model portions, to model protein, fruit and vegetables, to have orange juice and water, to have different things, so we're modeling the food that people should be eating. >> reporter: fuentes says crossroads is also trying combat a latino cultural mind set. >> it's very common like i live my day just for today and i'm going to be fine. i just need to go to work to get money for my family and what if you get sick, i'm not. i'm fine. everything is going to be fine like we don't think about a future, we just don't plan. >> reporter: u.c.l.a. primary care physician dr. michael rodriguez works extensively with hispanics in the los angeles area where crossroads is shot. and he thinks it could have a significant impact. >> it can make an enormous amount of difference. some of the studies that have been done looking at the relationship between viewers of telenovelas and behavior have seen big changes. for example when telenovelas have focused on cancer or leukemia, the amount of people who are donating or registering to donate for bone marrow and other things go up from the single digits to hundreds. >> reporter: "crossroads" tackles just about every health issue that affect hispanics from diabetes to asthma to alcohol and drug abuse. and it dispenses advice on how to enroll in medicaid. fuentes and his staff think the show is having a positive impact based on the calls coming in to the show's 24 hour a day hotline. they received 2,000 calls in the shows first season. >> they are getting the message as far as behavior change. it was very specific. i've been trying to eat more fruits and vegetables. i am finding out more about where to apply for medicaid and i'm talking with my neighbors about the information that i'm learning. >> reporter: fuentes is able to produce "crossroads" with a grant from the colorado health foundation which is also an underwriter of the "newshour." right now the show is seen only on univision in colorado, where 20% of the population is latino. but "crossroads" has steadily been building an audience which now numbers about 15,000. fuentes thinks he'll soon be able to bring the show to other television markets around the country because the message is getting through. >> a girl that went to the station with her mother and she said you know i used to be la chiquis and she showed me her hands and she was all cut but i got inspired and think i'm going to be better know and i want to live. if somebody can be healthier, can save lives, that's the reason we are doing this. >> reporter: "crossroads" second season premieres in february. >> ifill: finally tonight, the egyptian revolution, one year later. margaret warner has the story. >> warner: hundreds of thousands of egyptians flocked to tahrir square to mark the onset of the 18-day revolution that drove president hosni mubarak from office last year. people waved flags and chanted, but unlike a year ago there were no army troops or police present. for many, this was a celebration. >> ( translated ): i came to celebrate what has been fulfilled from the goals of the revolution, i came to celebrate the downfall of mubarak and his corrupted people around him, i came to celebrate freedom. >> warner: but others, from the secular forces who sparked the revolution, protested against continued rule by the interim military government. >> ( translated ): this is not the anniversary of the revolution, it hasn't ended yet. >> warner: in fact, the political divisions were plainly evident-- liberal, secular egyptians massing on one side of the square protesting, islamists on the other side, celebrating. for now, it's the islamists who've won political power. in egypt's newly elected lower house of parliament, the long- banned muslim brotherhood now holds the largest bloc. along with other islamist groups, it controls nearly 70 percent of the 508 seats. hangovers from the mubarak-era past are adding to the tension. a trial is still ongoing for the ailing former president, for complicity in the killing of more than 800 protesters last year. today, some demonstrators said there could be no progress without justice for past wrongs. >> we want the revenge for the people who died a year ago and we still did not get justice or anything, slow justice is unfair, the people who died need the revenge, we need the revenge >> warner: amr moussa-- a former arab league chief hoping to replace mubarak-- said the military needs to loosen its grip more quickly. but he also looked to the future. >> the change is the hope of all citizens, we cannot continue to live and we should not live under dictatorial regimes or with the rule of oppression and telling the people what to do and how to feel. egyptians are expecting to elect a new president, later this year. for more on the state of the egyptian revolution, one year on, we turn to two long time middle east watchers who just returned from egypt. martin indyk , former u.s. ambassador to israel, served in the state department and on the national security council in the clinton administration. he's now vice president at the brookings institution. and tarek masoud is an assistant professor of public policy at harvard university. he's a specializes in islamic political parties and their role in governance. welcome to you both. professor mehsud, beginning with you, what's your assessment of the state of the revolution today? >> well, i think we're right in the middle of a democratic transition in egypt. as with any kind of transition there are some things that are very promising and there are other things that are maybe a bit discouraging. on the discouraging side one year after the revolution that overthrew mubarak egypt is ruled by the military. and that's a far cry from the democracy for which so many have fought and some died in tahrir and other squares around egypt. also discouraging is the fact that many of the economic grievances that animate it had revolution remain in place and some are getting worse. but then on the positive side egypt just elected a parliament for the first time in egypt's modern history actually seems to represent the will of the egyptian people. and though some might be discouraged that that particle system dominated by islamists who are not liberals, it's nonetheless something that's really extraordinary. so this is a time of intense die dynamism in egypt. a country that for the last 30 years hag stab nant. we don't know where the revolution will end up but there's promise as well as peril. >> warner: martin indyk, i saw you nodding your head. bring in what we saw today, the islamists on one side and the liberal secular moderate forces on the other. what does that tell you about the state of play? >> politics have broken out in egypt and there are people now, particle parliamentarians who represent the will of the people, who have legitimacy, they have a real state, particularly the muslim brotherhood which won the most seat bus not quite a majority they have a stake in converting square politics into party politics. getting on with the stuff of that politics which is electing a speaker which they've now done, a muslim brotherhood speaker. and then engaming in a negotiation with the military about getting the military out of the government, this interim government and establishing powers for the parliament and the presidency >> warner: one of the major points of disagreement was how quickly does the military need to step out of it. now, you faulked to the players. what is your sense of the balance of power between the brotherhood and the military? >> i think there's a common interest among all of these parties from left to right in getting the military out but i think muslim brotherhood after after 80 years in the wilderness is red for pragmatic compromises with the military that some of the others-- the right and left-- will not be prepared to make. i think they're talking about cutting a deal with the military about protecting the military's interest, which is for the liberals in the game unacceptable, particularly the revolutionary youth. >> warner: you're talking about the prerogatives and perks. >> right. then the question of who will be the president. the muslim brotherhood is not running a candidate but the suspicion is in the air in cairo. the muslim brotherhood and military are going to deal for a... to elect a candidate who will be beholden to them. in affect their marionette, as one of the liberal leaders said. >> warner: weigh in on the historic nature of the brotherhood being long repressed and where you think... do they have a consensus on where they want to lead this country? >> you're absolutely right. as martin mentioned, the muslim brotherhood is an organization that was founded founded in 192d though its fortunes in egypt have ebbed and flowed over the years, it very much was in the wilderness so this is a kind of intensely emotional moment for them to actually be almost although not quite in the majority in parliament. in terms of where they want to take egypt i think that their primary focus is as martin said on getting the military out of power. and though there may be reasons to be discouraged that the muslim brothers represent such a large portion of parliament. so egypt has never had a parliament and that is full of a variety of groups that are evenly matched. in the mubarak period you had a ruling party that dominated, now you have islamists who dominate. this is discouraging but at the same time if you have to cut a deal with the military to get them out of power and to make them feel secure enough that the deal will stick it actually might be useful to have a party that dominates the parliament because that's a group that the military could trust to follow through on promises. that's where the brothers are focusing. >> warner: very quick followup to both of you. what about the secular moderates? the ones who sparked this revolution a year ago. they have less than 10% of the seats. do they have influence on the course of events? tareq mehsud? >> well, they have about 20% of the seats, the liberals, and it's worth noting on the muslim brotherhood list there are about ten or so liberals that were elected, including individuals from amman neuro's party, amman noor being a prominent liberal. so i think the liberals are present in parliament and they didn't doe as well as we thought they would have done but that's because the debate about politics was tilted in the muslim brotherhood's favor. there was talk about what's the role of religion and once you make that the national conversation islamists are poised to win. but as the conversation moves towards the economy, to jobs, to deepening egyptian democracy, the liberals have a real chance. >> warner: martin indyk, how much pressure does the worsening economy put on all these political players. we haven't even mentioned the fundamentalist islamists. >> there's one number they have to think about, and that is 87 million. 87 million egyptians that need food and jobs and housing and that is really playing on their minds because they don't have oil like the iran iranians had like the iraqis have to fight about so they all have to focus on the fact that now that they're elected they are accountable and they have to make... meet the needs of the people. so there's a striking pragmatism that one heres from left to right amongst the elected parliamentarians that they have to focus on putting bread on the table. >> warner: martin indyk and tay reck mehsud, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> brown: again, the other major developments of the day: the u.s. navy's seal team six staged a dramatic overnight rescue of two aid workers in somalia. the pair-- an american and a dane-- had been held by pirates since last october. and to hari sreenivasan for what's new on the "newshour" online. hari? >> sreenivasan: thanks, jeff. we tried a few new things with the state of the union address and explained one of those cool new things. here with us our new political editor. so you have this google hangout with a group of people watching this address. how does that work? >> well, anybody that has google+ can use it. it's the concept of a watch party at home where you're watching a speech on your couch except you use it from your laptop. we gathered history professors from new hampshire and new orleans and then some voters from iowa and new hampshire who appeared on the newshour broadcast, some journalists and then i was the host and we just discussed the speech. there was a little bit of technical error on my part as we got the hang of it but it was fun keying up what the president was going to be saying and talking through during applause lines about some of the big lines that he'd had that would be memorable later and then analysis after the speech. so it was a lot of fun. >> sreenivasan: i remember one of those folks was walking around with his laptop. >> it was definitely the magic of technology made it happen. we had a lot of imagine wick technology. this translate project that we put together is interesting. >> sreenivasan: we're working with universal subtitles to include our viewers in a large translation project so right now if you go to the web site and look at the state of the union address or the republican response you'll notice that it's actually been captioned many nut pl languages and that's thanks to a volunteer community that has basically emerged from nowhere. so if you would like to participate in that volunteer team you can join the newshour's team, you can find information about that on our web site and these google hangouts, we'll keep doing these, right? >> i think it's a good way to capture the spirit of the nation for something as big as a national address or later when you get to big battleground states. you can bring people e in to our newshour community to talk about the issues that are driving the day that we want to hear from them about. a >> sreenivasan: and we could not have done that without a huge number of people at the newshour. our team, we want to thank them and you, christina. >> thank you. >> ifill: and again to our honor roll of american service personnel killed in the iraq and afghanistan conflicts. we add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. here, in silence, are 21 more. >> ifill: that last photograph showed army staff sgt. jonathan metzger in a marine uniform. staff sgt. metzger served in the u.s. marine corps, prior to joining the army in 2006. and that's the "newshour" for tonight. on thursday, judy woodruff has an update on the no holds barred republican presidential primary contest in florida. i'm gwen ifill. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: and the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh >> this is "bbc world news america." funding for this presentation is made possible by the freeman foundation of new york, stowe, vermont, and honolulu. newman's own foundation. and union bank. >> at union bank, our relationship managers work hard to know your business, offering specialized solutions in capital to help you meet your growth objectives. we offer expertise and tailored solus