politics rather than consequences of the stalemate and when there are so much spin and talking points, how do we get the facts? we'll look at the challenges and importance of fact checking and explore whether a growing focus devoted that intersurprienterpr making a difference. we'll talk with a report's author about the administration's crackdown on whistle blowers and its impact on journalists and news and commercials you can use in just six seconds. >> how much news can you possibly fit in six seconds time? tune into cnn right now to find out. >> we'll climb the vine. the vine. and find out why a growing number of media outlets, businesses and politicians are using this social media app. i'm frank sesno and this is "reliable sources." we start this week with our crosshairs focused on "the new york times." on october 5th, this breaking news headline on the "times" website. u.s. says navy seal team captured shabab leader in somalia. only problem, the story was wrong. when the "times" updated the story it said "the s.e.a.l. team was forced to withdraw before it could confirm it killed the shabab leader. the "times" says early coverage accurately reflected initial government accounts. next, this past thursday after a meeting between president obama and house republican leaders, the "times" reported that obama had rejected a republican proposal for a short-term debt limit plan. the white house said no specific determination was made and many republicans told cnn the president didn't reject or approve anything. the "times" stuck to its story saying it was "factually accurate" and did not require a correction. said the "times" it was clear the white house was not going to accept the republican proposal as offered. finally, the "times" may have tripped on itself over the thursday story that a cia warning on suspected nsa leaker edward snowden slipped through the cracks when he worked for the agency in geneva and he was returned home because of those concerns. a cia spokesman said while we were unable to quote on the assertions in today's "the new york times" story on edward snowden, the primary allegation of the story is inaccurate on multiple levels. on saturday the "times" reported cia disputes early suspicions on snowden but the paper stood by its earlier report saying they quoted two senior official with direct knowledge of the episode. joining me to discussion all of this and to discuss whether the gray lady has gotten a black eye, ramesh ponnuru, tell noir cliff joins us here and joe concha from new york. i got to start with you, joe concha. i'm not going to bury the lead. congratulations. you had a baby when? >> friday night 9:26 p.m. 6 pounds. there she is. cameron. got beat up in delivery. 6 pounds, 14 ounces. hence the pink tie you see today. we're sticking with theme here. we couldn't be anymore proud. thank you so much. >> congratulations to you and all the best on the journey of your life i promise you that. let me bring you back to the journey we're on here which is looking at the gray lady and what seems to be problems over the past eight days. how do you explain it. >> i would love to hear margaret sullivan explain this, frank. she's "the new york times" public editor. the public editor is a publicly identifies errors and omissions and reports them to the public saying we got this wrong here. i haven't seen one article from margaret sullivan saying we may have made a mistake here or if he made a mistake, here's why. the whole reason why you hire a public editor is for a pr move in light of the jason blare fiasco. where is margaret sullivan? if you're going to have a policeman on your editorial staff, decisions weren't made at all this week. >> i want to make this clear and i'll make the point as i turn to eleanor clift. we invited margaret sullivan and others from "the new york times" and they were either unavailable or declined. eleanor, the thing most disturbing to many when you see this thing is attribution to officials. american officials. hanging stories, very important story, moved in real time and cnn for example did not report that the al shabab leader, somalia story, that he had been killed in its initial reporting. does that trouble you? >> anybody that's reported in washington understands how difficult it is to get people on the record. american officials is probably the broadest term that could be just about anybody. so i think -- i'm always instructed to try to get the attribution as narrowly as possible and to give some indication of the motivation behind whoever the sources are and so i think, you know, i'm inclined to give "the new york times" the benefit of the doubt. they are about the only news organization that still does really deep reporting. and on the so-called error with the reporting of the budget negotiations, i have been covering that. you know, i think maybe they shouldn't have said flatly the white house rejected it but they were never going to settle for a short-term thing that took them right to the holidays. you know, is that wrong or right? it's a case of nuance in that case. >> i want to ask you this because this is what the "times" said it clarified that story on the obama rejection. it was clear the white house was not going to accept the republican proposal as offered as we did further reporting we updated the the story and presented a more nuance account. this comes in the middle of very sensitive negotiations. people can take a headline and run with it. politicians and posture and maybe even change a position or does it not matter? is this just part of realtime journalism now? >> i think all media institutions make mistakes. the associated press made a much bigger blunder this past week. you've got to correct them. you've got to be up front with leaders. >> you think it looks like they're pulling a fast one meaning what? >> what they're saying is, well, okay, so the administration didn't really explicity reject it but it basically rejected it. they conveyed something stronger than the truth. >> joe concha? >> i looked at the usage manual as i often do, one rule they have in there is anonymity is the last resort. it seems more and more at "the new york times" you hear from u.s. officials and unanimous sources say. that leads to one problem. the other is twitter. we need two editors in every publication. one for standard newspaper which they all have but then we always see again and again a tweet going out that they want to pull back. unfortunately it's like toothpaste. you can't put it back in the tube. we saw it a couple weeks ago with chuck todd with navy yard shooting. he put out a tweet saying it was wrong. did chuck todd have to go with the same test so i think this is twitter striking again and a race to be first instead of to be accurate. >> this is one of the big problems. a race to be first whether you are tweeting or on the air or writing a blog or a story. you have so many demands as a journalist now. you're at the daily beast. you do this. do you have someone editing every tweet, every story, every word that you write? >> nobody edits the tweets as far as i know. >> nobody edits your tweets? >> no. i say to myself every day, eleanor think less and tweet more. i don't tweet enough. >> scary. >> you have to trust yourself and i don't do it. i tweet fairly irregularly but in today's world we are encouraged to tweet to get our stories out there and promote our colleagues and if we're analysts and pundits, we should get our thoughts out there. i have never done anything or said anything that's career ending yet. we're all about two steps away from that i think. >> the cliff is closer. >> you got to be your enown editor. >> on twitter you have to be your own editor. it's a medium that rewards speed even more than all of the other ones that we're on and there's no time for an additional layer of checking. if you can't trust yourself to edit yourself, don't get on twitter. >> there may be a whole new classification of job here. joe, i want to come back to you something you said a moment ago about officials and trouble you have with officials. what eleanor said a few minutes ago and when "the new york times" is up against here, erasing the clock. a huge story. fact of the matter is if you are going to report in this town, you will report unnamed officials. people say protect me on this. use the information. i don't want you to they will anymore what building i'm in. are you saying "the new york times" shouldn't do that. >> i'm just saying it's happening more and more it seems. that's part of the race to be first. one more thing i want to point out is there are more media wat watchdogs than ever. conservative news blogs there to catch "the new york times" it will be in the crosshairs because they are seen as liberal in some circles. any time you tweet or get something wrong, it used to be you issue a correction and maybe some readers write something to the editor and it gets in the editorial page. now you make a mistake and everybody sees it. it's reported and usually some sort of motive is attached which may have not been the case here. that's where we are in 2013. you make a case, people are going to know about it. >> we've done our bit to help promote that agenda here as well. we want to make sure that what went wrong and explanations around it. when we return, the partial government shutdown and the debt ceiling fight as media focus on politics of the stalemate. are they having too much fun with the republican food fight? ? 18 percent? 20? new purina one true instinct has 30. active dogs crave nutrient-dense food. so we made purina one true instinct. learn more at purinaone.com ♪ hooking up the country whelping business run ♪ ♪ trains! they haul everything, safely and on time. ♪ tracks! they connect the factories built along the lines. and that means jobs, lots of people, making lots and lots of things. let's get your business rolling now, everybody sing. ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪ make my mark i wawith pride.ork. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars. man: [ laughs ] those look like baby steps now. but they were some pretty good moves. and the best move of all? having the right partner at my side. it's so much better that way. [ male announcer ] have the right partner at your side. consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. go long. you work. and you want to get an mba. but going back to school is hard... because you work. now, capella university offers a revolutionary new way to get your degree. it's called flexpath and it's the most direct path, leveraging what you've learned on the job and focusing on what you need to know so you can get a degree at your pace. and graduate at the speed of you. flexpath from capella university learn more at capella.edu >> it was another week of griping and dwrgridlock as democrats accused tea parties in the house of holding the country hostage and republicans firing back by accusing president obama of refusing to negotiate to reopen the government. as the week wore on, the countdown clock to a debt default also grew shorter. on thursday the beginnings of a deal appeared to take shape. >> we begin with progress on day 11 of the partial shutdown. president obama and congressional republicans are starting to work together. >> now to the latest on the shutdown showdown. there appears to be movement to get the government back to work. >> like that shutdown showdown has a ring to it. how has the media done covering high stakes back and forth? ramesh, first to you. how have we done? >> as eleanor said earlier it's a complicated and fast moving story. i give reporters some slack on it. i do think that the atmospherics the media used about the shutdown have made it seem like more of a crisis atmosphere than it actually is. i think that's disserved the public because it has made it harder to see the impending debt ceiling problem which really could serious. when everything serious, nothing is. >> eleanor, a bit of a circus here? overplaying the seriousness as ramesh is saying of the partial shutdown? >> it's political entertainment definitely. it's also very serious. i think there's been a quiet consensus among the media the shutdown will roll into the debt ceiling. you can't separate the two although i understand that some people on the right would like to separate the two because they are really getting a lot of heat for flirting with default. >> joe, i think this is something that i really want you to take on with some seriousness here because it's fine to say that this is all about politics and it's a partial shutdown but when you talk to people who are actually not working, there are people at the nsa not working and people at the agriculture department who are not working and people who are supposed to crank out data that said hog futures and they're not working. there are real jobs not getting done here. >> that's true. i think the reason why this isn't resonating with the american people on that aspect as much is because when you woke up with the government shutdown or partial government shutdown started, my garbage was picked up. there were police down the street that made arrests the way he always does and lights still work. from local perspective, people didn't feel the shutdown. >> we turned this into a political circus, maybe people don't realize what's actually happening. >> here's the thing though. the reason why the media goes the other route which is who is winning and losing is because what's the most popular show in america these days? reality tv. it's all about creating villains and good guys. if you are on one side, ted cruz is a bad guy. other side, harry reid and president obama is bad guy or jo boehner is a bad guy. that's easier to sell than trying to explain what this means for the nsa. >> i would suggest getting out of washington or northern virginia bubble and reading some of the headlines in newspapers. remember, they still exist around the country. you see headlines everywhere about the absolute devastation this is having in local communities and people suffering everywhere. >> devastation? >> yes, devastation. economic devastation. >> give us examples. >> around the national parks, small businesses that are suffering. >> how many national parks are there in the country? >> there are a number of national parks. you know, it's that old line. if you're not suffering, it's not a problem. other people are suffering. it's devastation. and the white house every day is putting out the latest briefings they're getting about the fallout from this and the one that they put out yesterday was about cdc and the programs that are being cut back. you are looking at salmonella outbreaks. they can't get epa to come test. they say they are shut down. it's only a matter of time before kids get sick. this is -- and the ripple effect of this is only going to get greater. >> shouldn't the media and stories be spending as much time focus on these things eleanor is talking about than what john boehner is saying to the tea party? >> you have to cover both dimensions of the story at the same time. i would say that we had a 21-day government shutdown in 1995 and 1996 and it didn't prevent 1996 from being one of the best years in american history. let's report the problems but let's not inflate them. let's not make it sound like armageddon is happening. when sequestration started, there were lots of stories about how devastating it would be. it would be a national calamity. most people barely noticed it. there's a danger of the boy who cried wolf problem where i can guarantee you there are republicans congressman who are saying to themselves, the press said sequestration was going to lead to ruin. it didn't. they said shutdown would destroy the country and it didn't and now they are saying a debt ceiling default would be the same thing. why should i believe them? that's a profoundly erroneously way of thinking. this kind of coverage fuels it. >> joe concha, as our media watcher, i want you to weigh in but i want you to let me know how you think the media has done on this other story which is the debt ceiling. >> if you want to talk about coverage as a whole it goes from government shutdown to debt ceiling. look at the president's press conference on wednesday. not one question about health care.gov and the design of that. it doesn't work. it wasn't ready to actually be rolled out. people signing up. how many questions -- how many people have signed up? nothing from the white house press corps. none of the national correspondents for abc, nbc, cbs, fox, were called on that. the president was going from a list given to him by jay carney to other people that had nothing to do with obama care or affordable care act. if you want to ask me how has coverage been, there's a failure during that white house press conference and the fact that no hard questions were asked about the original reason for this government shutdown which was either to fund obama care or at least delay it, nothing was brought up. we're losing sight on exactly what has caused this in the first place. >> joe concha, fair point. while we're at it and gave "the new york times" a hard time a little while ago, let's do a shout-out to them for today for a good and specific story on the problems and even the failures that the obama care is having in opening days and the very deep computer glitches that are imperilling the whole system. you can check that out. after the break, holding politicians feet to the fire. their words any way. are news organizations and others doing enough fact checking and does it have any impact at all? a new study holds out hope. at's♪ ♪ hooking up the country helping business run ♪ ♪ trains! they haul everything, safely and on time. ♪ tracks! they connect the factories built along the lines. and that means jobs, lots of people, making lots and lots of things. let's get your business rolling now, everybody sing. ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪ progressive direct and other car insurance companies? yes. but you're progressive, and they're them. yes. but they're here. yes. are you...? there? yes. no. are you them? i'm me. but those rates are for... them. so them are here. yes! you want to run through it again? no, i'm good. you got it? yes. rates for us and them -- now that's progressive. call or click today. congestion, for the smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the buses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution into the air. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment. well. fact, fiction, spin or substance. a growing number of media outlets and news organizations are putting a higher premium on fact checking. it may be producing some results. joining me to talk about the tricky waters of fact checking, in new york, kathleen hall jamieson. with me in the studio, john sides, associate professor of political science at george washington university and ginger gibson, congressional reporter for politico. john, i want to start with you. new report looking at this fact checking, whether it has any impact, what's it say? what do you conclude? >> it's the first ever real world fact checking experiment. 1,200 state legislators were divided into nine different groups. it outlined the kind of things that might happen if it were to catch you saying something untrue. and then the researchers went and looked to see how many of these legislators had actually said something that local media said was in fact half true or worse. they found that legislator that had gotten these letters warning them that they might do this to them were less likely to make inaccurate statements than those that didn't get the letter. >> maybe it works. kathleen hall jamieson, as i ask you this question, i want to put up factcheck.org that's become a commanding presence in the political process throughout the presidential campaigns. it's prompted response from some. what evidence do you have that factcheck.org has had any impact on the facts as engaged by our political leaders? >> in the 2012 presidential campaign, governor romney made a claim about how many jobs he had created while he was at bain capital. he was pushed back by fact checkers that didn't see evidence to justify the claim and he modified the claim. the obama campaign was arguing that romney had outsourced while he was at bain. pushed back by fact checkers and they changed the claim to say that bain outsourced. that would be after romney had given up day-to-day control of operations. it does tend to happen when fact checkers agree and they stay on it and representatives from the campaign are asked about it when they come on programs such as cnn. >> ginger gibson, you're up on capitol hill for politico reporting. when the bomb actually lands, right, and someone is called a liar or they fail, the pinocchio test, puts up two or three or four after he fact checks them, someone goes running out of congressional office with their pants on fire? >> no. their press secretary when it is the other guy who is called out will blast out those as a press release. most of the time they will ignore it. >> someone is called a liar or exposed to fact check and you're the reporter, you ignore that? >> it becomes the other guy using it. >> if someone is wrong -- >> as a reporter who covered the campaign and covers the hill now, these fact checks are great for us. sometimes when the claim keeps getting repeated, we can point to them in a story and say they've been deemed untrue by multiple fact checkers. and that's how we use it. we call attention to things that if we're not doing fact checking but we know not to be true, we can make the call. >> you have done work on political polarization in washington. more polarized than perhaps the civil war. there are issues of polarization even in fact checking. who do you fact check? who decides? what metrics do you use and what sources do you use to decide if someone's pants are on fire or not? >> one thing that needs to happen is garden variety kinds of information should be ignored. i think the real challenge is that when that kind of misinformation gets news coverage and only gives incentives to politicians to continue to do this kind of stuff is the real big issues and chronic kinds of misinformation about the president's birth place, about what's in the affordable care act and what's not in there and these are issues that media needs to check on a regular basis. >> i came on this program probably about a year ago because over at george washington university we started something calls face the facts usa. i'll put a picture up of that. the idea here was not to call people out and say you're wrong but rather to put out facts where we knew there was a lot of confusion because social science shows that people are not inclined to take a fact check where you are waving your finger saying this candidate or this political leader is wrong. you might process information if it were coming from a trusted source without the finger wagging. what do you make of that? >> i agree with that as perspective. good journalism does that. it creates context for viewing information. much of what is said in politics isn't factually inaccurate. it's misleading. it requires context. sometimes it's deliberately taken out of context. good journalism does that well. your program does that well. we also know that there's a way to fact check that increases likelihood that you hear the correction. if you hear the correction if you can reframe up front and you can communicate. >> what does that mean? >> you are talking about communication. so you are not inside the frame of the visual itself. we deal largely with ads. if you put the offending add on the screen and create a visual structure that puts context on top of that, likelihood that individual process is deception before correction goes way down. we know that from a study we did in 2012 when people say they have gone to fact checking sites in presence of controls, they get the answers to those questions about the deceptions more accurate than they did otherwise. that's an important finding. >> ginger, very quickly to you in ten seconds. neil newhouse last time said that we're not going let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers. is that a theme you hear from other offices on the hill as you cover it in. >> it is. they think that he make the case that they're biassed and slanted and done out of spite and that even if they are deemed completely to be out of line with the truth they're going to ignore them. >> let's hope it's a movement to come. product placement here. snapple does facts at top. i'll read this one. some violence contains 70 separate pieces of wood. folks are snap checking real facts. maybe it's movement. thank you all very much for joining us on "reliable sourc " sources." the obama administration's unprecedented crackdown on whistle blowers and reporters that cover them. new study warns the standing of america as an international example of press freedom is at stake. we'll hear from the report's author. [ male announcer ] at humana, understanding what makes you different is what makes us different. we take the time to get to know you and your unique health needs. then we help create a personalized healthcare experience that works for you. and you. and you. with 50 years of know-how, and a dedicated network of doctors, health coaches, and wellness experts, we're a partner you can rely on -- today, and tomorrow. we're going beyond insurance to become your partner in health. humana. to become your partner in health. ido more with less with buless energy. hp is helping ups do just that. soon, the world's most intelligent servers, designed by hp, will give ups over twice the performance, using forty percent less energy. multiply that across over a thousand locations, and they'll provide the same benefit to the environment as over 60,000 trees. that's a trend we can all get behind. the end. lovely read susan. but isn't it time to turn the page on your cup of joe? gevalia, or a cup of johan, is like losing yourself in a great book. may i read something? yes, please. of course. a rich, never bitter taste cup after cup. net weight 340 grams. [ sighs ] [ chuckles ] [ announcer ] always rich, never bitter. gevalia. [ announat any minute...h, never bitter. ...you could be a victim of fraud. most people don't even know it. fraud could mean lower credit scores, higher loan rates... ...and maybe not getting the car you want. it's a problem waiting to happen. check your credit score, check your credit report, at experian.com america's number one provider of online credit reports and scores. don't take chances. go to experian.com. >> an important new study released this thursday has hit and everybody has taken notice certainly in the journalism community. what did you find? >> i found that in several ways the administration is making it very difficult for reporters to hold it accountable for actions of its government particularly in the national security area but throughout the rest of the government as well in several ways. there have been these leaks investigations including the number of prosecutions under an espionage act designed for foreign enemies that prosecuted officials that provided information to the press. and in addition, lots of other leak investigations going on that produced prosecution that made government officials afraid to speak to reporters. i have talked to people that said that government officials are afraid to talk to them. >> to be clear about it, you and i spoke as well. you quote me in here. i think i made sense. the point i was making is that in some of the ways that the administration goes to the public on its own, openness is good. promised openness. if taken too far, that can become a slippery slope to spin and even worse. >> the president promised to have the most transparent government in history and they use social media and websites to present lots of information that makes the administration look good and other information that's useful to consumers and businesses and so on. at the same time, they really have shut the door on a lot of the reporting that's necessary to hold the administration accountable by journalists. >> you've been in it town a long time. here's part of what you wrote in this report. the administration's war on leaks, you called it, and other efforts to control information are the most aggressive i've seen since the nixon administration when i was one of the editors involved in "the washington post" investigation of watergate. that's a strong allegation. >> it's what i heard from everyone i interviewed here in washington. not many resolved as i am going back to the nixon administration but in their memories, time they've been working here, this is the most close administration they've encountered. >> i want to push back a little bit. if the administration is clamping down on leakers dealing with sensitive information, they should be doing that. >> first of all, some of this was clearly whistle blowing about problems in the nsa surveillance program long before the revelations of edward snowden. these are people you would want to call whistle blowers. administration makes the distinction between what they say is whistle blowing or information about bureaucrat waste and abuse and information about government programs and government actions that american people should know about. many secret programs are not -- revelations are not in danger of national security. they bring about the kind of public debate that's necessary. >> one of the other things you point out is increase in secrecy over the past several years. the report cites that by 2011 more than 4 million americans, 4 million americans had security clearance. >> way too much information is overclassified. it's almost difficult for a government official to talk to the board about anything that isn't classified and the president promised again at the beginning of his administration he was going to reduce overclassification of government administration. there was a commission from congress that made recommendations to the president and specific ways to reduce that and none of that action has taken place yet. >> you quoted david as saying memo went out from chief of staff that told people to freeze and retain e-mail and presumably phone logs of communications with me. >> this is the other problem with these leaks investigations whether or not they result in prosecutions is there is a lot of going through communications records of reporters and their sources in government. and that really does have a chilling effect. reporters tell me their sources don't want to talk to them on the telephone and don't want to talk by e-mail and not just about classified information about anything. they want to meet secretly if they want to meet at all. it's made it difficult to do reporting and also these are knowledgeable government officials who can help reporters out. you had a story earlier on this program about a problem with "the new york times" story. the problem is if you can't talk to knowledgeable government officials, then you're working around edges with people not so knowledgeable. >> recommendations in this report for the government? >> to reduce overclassification is the president's presideomise not yet done and to tell government officials you can talk directly to the president. you don't have to go through the press office all the time and get permission and send reporters to the press office. let's knowledgeable officials talk to the press. >> you are not saying and the report is not calling for more leaks of sensitive information that would endanger national security. you understand that? you all understand that. you got the are yourself not to report certain things and you sat on those stories? >> we didn't sit on the story. >> sometimes. >> it is usually details within them. locations of things. names of things. things like that opposed to the fact that a certain program is going on that the american people should know about. >> before i let you go, i want to talk to you since you were executive editor of "the washington post" about what we were talking about earlier with "the new york times." three very serious stories either getting it wrong or parts of it wrong in just eight days. >> these things can happen. particularly if the administration is not cooperative with the press. >> blame it on the administration? >> i don't know the facts. i don't want to sit in judgment of their editorial decisions. it's important to be transparent. this report is about government being transparent and news media needs to be transparent. acknowledge your mistake and why it happened. in the case of the first two things you cited, they changed stories without explaining why they changed the stories and it seems you should be transparent about that. >> i wish they joined us today to explain what went wrong. for most that read this, it's officials say. that's one of the big things that we all fight. >> it's up to the administration to allow people to talk on the record and up to reporters to be aggressive about seeng that. >> as always, thank you so much. thanks for the report and for coming by. thanks for being transparent. coming up, don't blink. a look at the six second sensation that's gaining traction in journalism and the corporate world. i was made to work. make my mark with pride. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars. we've always been on the forefront of innovation. when the world called for speed... ♪ ...when the world called for stealth... ♪ ...intelligence... endurance... affordability... adaptability... and when the world asked for the future. staying ahead in a constantly evolving world. that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. is what makes us different. we take the time to get to know you and your unique health needs. then we help create a personalized healthcare experience that works for you. and you. and you. with 50 years of know-how, and a dedicated network of doctors, health coaches, and wellness experts, we're a partner you can rely on -- today, and tomorrow. we're going beyond insurance to become your partner in health. humana. to become your partner in health. ido more with less with buless energy. hp is helping ups do just that. soon, the world's most intelligent servers, designed by hp, will give ups over twice the performance, using forty percent less energy. multiply that across over a thousand locations, and they'll provide the same benefit to the environment as over 60,000 trees. that's a trend we can all get behind. trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron. does your dog food have? 18 percent? 20? new purina one true instinct has 30. active dogs crave nutrient-dense food. so we made purina one true instinct. learn more at purinaone.com nthat's why they deserve... aer anbrake dance. get 50% off new brake pads and shoes. with our ever decreasing attention spans, it's no surprise that vine that lets user share 6-second repeating videos is taking off. news organizations are taking stock of this innovative technology as well and now this news has hired a vine journalist. news organizations aren't the only ones using vine to further their reach. dunkin' donuts and target are just a few companies cashing in on this new marketing scheme. here to discuss potential advantages and disadvantages of vine, from new york, barbara lippert and in los angeles, cody johns, now this all right, cody. you do everything in six seconds. a few six-second questions for you. what is now this news? >> so now this news is the first basic vine news outlet, so anyone who gets on the app of vine, the only thing that they're going to see newswise is now this news that is really dominating the medium with almost 100,000 followers in just a few short weeks. >> that was a little longer than six seconds, but i'll let you get by with it. >> okay. >> what are you doing as a vine journalist? are you really doing six-second news pieces? >> yes. and the reason we're able to execute it very well is because we can also incorporate a caption with the video. so we're doing a six-second bit, and we're fitting in as much as we can while also posting words on the caption below. i'm going to show a few of these in a second. but barbara lippert, how wide and far is six-second video reaching? >> well, first of all, for advertising as opposed to journalism because maybe it's a little trivializing for journalism, but for advertising it's the greatest thing to happen since "mad men." 30 seconds of advertising can be hideously boring and tough to watch. >> let me roll a few of these. first, burt's bees. six seconds, check it out. >> bad travel choice. >> now we got it. >> so they're selling their classic products by parodying classic literature and plays. with advertisers, six seconds can be mesmerizing. if you try to write something for 30 seconds or even a minute, it can really go bad in so many ways. >> i'm not sure i'd call that last one mesmerizing, but let me show you this one. co cody, i will let you have a shot at this. samsung put together a vine six-second loop. we'll let it repeat because you can barely tell it's repeating. take a look. somebody running across, and it makes you want to go for them. cody? >> it's a very well-executed stop motion vine. those are also very popular, and they can appear that they're always continually looping in their -- and it looks like they never stop. every single time you watch a video, it just repeats over and over again, so it gets ingrained into people's minds. that's why i think ads are doing so well on it. >> it can be pretty hypnotic i think, and whereas if you're going to go online and look for a story and an ad covers it, you're really annoyed. it's really intrusive. you can't wait until you can exit out of it. whereas people go looking for vines i think because advertisers are so crafty, and they know how to use the medium so beautifully, and this costs almost nothing for them. they've made the best one so far. >> let me show you how john mccain turned six seconds into a vine. >> i don't trust vladimir putin and his word and neither should the world. i don't trust vladimir putin and his word and neither should the world. >> all right, cody, we let that play twice so people could see john mccain doesn't trust vladimir putin apparently. where does that go? what does that tell people? >> so i think what it's telling people is the legitimacy of vine and doing posts that now this news is doing. we're going to be getting people like him and, you know, politicians and, you know, maybe even one day the president to do a short six-second vine video just -- >> does anybody learn anything from that? >> well, like i said, i think this is geared to more of the younger audience because the audience on vine is very young. we're talking like 13 to maybe 20, 23. they need to be exposed to politics and news at their age and this is the perfect medium for them. >> code jy johns, barbara lippe thank you for your time. when we come back, i'll go below the fold to some important stories that were crowded out by coverage of all this washington noise. people don't have to think about where their electricity comes from. they flip the switch-- and the light comes on. it's our job to make sure that it does. using natural gas this power plant can produce enough energy for about 600,000 homes. generating electricity that's cleaner and reliable, with fewer emissions-- it matters. ♪ ♪ hooking up the country whelping business run ♪ ♪ build! we're investing big to keep our country in the lead. ♪ load! we keep moving to deliver what you need. and that means growth, lots of cargo going all around the globe. cars and parts, fuel and steel, peas and rice, hey that's nice! ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪ the media love a good food fight. he said, she said, they said, who is up, who is down, who is losing? there comes a point if you're the president of the united states and it's your government that shuts down, you've got to be the big guy. get in the room and do business. >> while president obama is right to fight this fight right now and break this republican fever. >> shutdown and the debt ceiling make for great headlines, better talk radio and must-see cable tv. >> president's leadership quotient is at its lowest point ever. >> the republicans could not defeat him at the boallot box, o now they are determined to prevent the president from governing. >> the drama shoves so much off the radar. just this week california allowing immigrants in the u.s. illegally to get driver's license. a new report on climate change says it's happening faster than ever. washington stopping hundreds of millions of aid to egypt. a cyclone slams egypt. malala inspires, iraq unravels, and the u.s. agrees to sell vietnam nuclear fuel and technology. these can be find online and in newspapers but they've been barely visible on tv, which matters because tv is still the runaway news source in this country. a new survey by the pew research center shows almost three-quarters of us watch local news. about two-thirds network news and 4 in 10 watch cable every month. the cable audience is the most dedicated. op average they spent twice as much viewing. the heaviest users more than an hour a day. here the story takes a twist because despite all the polarization, more than a third who watch liberal msnbc also watch fox. about half of both watch cnn. so maybe the lens doesn't have to be so narrow. maybe there's room for more than process and politics. wouldn't you like to know more about all those nobel prize winners last week? they actually did something.