and poet laureate natasha trethewey continue their exploration of "where poetry lives." tonight, a project breaking poets out of their ivory towers, and bringing them into their communities. >> it's really important that poets be in the community, be with what's happening and conscious and connected to what's going on in the world around us. >> ifill: those are just some of the stories we're covering on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> at bae systems, our pride and dedication show in everything we do; from electronics systems to intelligence analysis and cyber- operations; from combat vehicles and weapons to the maintenance and modernization of ships, aircraft, and critical infrastructure. knowing our work makes a difference inspires us everyday. that's bae systems. that's inspired work. >> i've been around long enough to recognize the people who are out there owning it. the ones getting involved, staying engaged. they are not afraid to question the path they're on. because the one question they never want to ask is, "how did i end up here?" i started schwab with those people. people who want to take ownership of their investments, like they do in every other aspect of their lives. >> united healthcare-- online at uhc.com. >> and the william and flora hewlett foundation, helping people build immeasurably better lives. >> 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. >> woodruff: another 2.4 million cars and trucks are headed back to general motors. the four new recalls today involve seat belts, transmissions, air bags and risks of fire. more than half the affected models are buick, chevrolet and g.m.c. cross-overs from 2009 through 2014. older model chevy and pontiac sedans account for nearly all the remaining vehicles. just last week, g.m. agreed to pay a $35 million federal fine for concealing ignition switch problems. >> ifill: a major new attack hit nigeria today, a double car bombing that killed at least 118 people. the first blast struck a bus terminal in the central city of jos. a second bomb exploded there 30 minutes later, after rescue workers arrived. the bombings bore the hallmarks of "boko haram", the islamist group that's holding more than 270 school girls captive. the military in thailand has intervened in that country's ongoing political crisis. john sparks, of independent television news, reports from bangkok. >> reporter: the people of thailand woke up to a something of a surprise this morning. the first and only item on the breakfast news, were pictures of troops, trucks and armored jeeps, moving into towns and cities. the military had declared martial law. for viewers of a handful of more partisan t.v. channels, well, the army took them off the air altogether. here's the man responsible, army general prayuth chanocha he said it was about re- establishing law and order its not a military coup, although the general seemed to be the one in charge today. >> don't ask me if martial law will be long or short. when the country is peaceful we'll get rid of it. >> reporter: two weeks ago the prime minister, yingluck shinawatra, was kicked out office for abuse of power, but some see her removal as part of power struggle between her family and the royalist establishment. and these divisions are laid bare in the capital. pro-establishment supporters, the yellow-shirts, are camping out in the center of town, while the opposition are in the suburbs. the army doesn't want the two sides to come together and fight it out on the straits. several thousand people are baking in the sun or taking cover under the trees but nobody seemed keen on confrontation. for the time, this city of marital law remains at peace. >> woodruff: in china, the foreign ministry called in the american ambassador today to tell him the u.s. is jeopardizing military ties by indicting five chinese officers. they're accused of hacking u.s. corporate computers for trade secrets. the foreign ministry insisted the indictment be withdrawn. >> ifill: u.s. tensions with china and russia were part of the backdrop today as russian president vladimir putin arrived in shanghai. he met with chinese president xi jinping, at an asian security conference. the two leaders are trying to hammer out a multi-billion dollar sale of russian natural gas to china. >> woodruff: officials in bosnia and serbia now say thousands of farm animals have drowned in record flooding, and the carcasses pose a health hazard. meanwhile, the human death toll topped 40, as the swollen sava river engulfed more towns in bosnia overnight. and crews searched for old landmines from the balkans war that may have been exposed by the floods. >> ifill: india's incoming prime minister gave an emotional first address to supporters in parliament today. narendra modi and his hindu nationalist party won in a landslide last week. today, surrounded by photographers, modi bent and kissed the steps of the parliament building in new delhi. inside, he fought back tears as he spoke to lawmakers. >> ( translated ): the new government is dedicated to the poor, to all the young people and to our mothers and sisters who have been craving for honor and dignity. >> ifill: modi is scheduled to be sworn in next monday. >> woodruff: forced labor, from prostitution to outright slavery, is yielding $150 billion a year in illegal profits. the u.n.'s "international labor organization" reported the figure today. it estimated 21 million people are victims, and more than half are women and girls. the agency said the report adds a new urgency to eradicating the abuse. >> ifill: wall street had a down day, after retailers reported sub-par earnings. the dow jones industrial average lost 137 points to close at 16,374. the nasdaq fell almost 29 points to close below 4,097. and the s-and-p 500 shed 12, to finish under 1,873. >> ifill: still to come on the newshour: the fallout from credit suisse's guilty plea; a tycoon's bid to turn the tide in ukraine; the wave of merger deals in the telecom industry; poetry students bringing the gift of verse to their communities; plus, tailoring scientific research to reflect gender differences. >> woodruff: credit suisse is the first big bank in more than two decades to plead guilty to a felony crime in the u.s. the department of justice announced the charges late yesterday, saying the swiss bank had conspired to aid tax evasion over decades by helping thousands of people hide wealth. credit suisse, which has an american investment bank, will pay $2.6 billion in penalties. attorney general eric holder has been emphasizing of late that, quote, "no bank is too big to jail." the credit suisse case, he said, was a good example. >> this announcement should send a firm and unequivocal message to anyone who would engage in dishonest or illegal financial activity, that the justice department does not and we will not tolerate such activities. when a bank engages in misconduct that is this brazen, it should expect that the justice department will pursue criminal prosecution to the fullest extent possible as has happened here. >> woodruff: holder's comments come after many experts have frequently asked about why the department of justice has not pursued more serious charges against some of the banks connected with the financial crisis. we look at the latest with this case and the bigger picture. nomi prins is a senior fellow at demos and the author of, "all the president's bankers." before she became a writer, she worked in management positions at goldman sachs and bear stearns. and mark calabria, a former republican staff member of the senate banking committee. he's now director of financial regulation at the cato institute. we welcome you both. so, nomi prins, to you first, explain exactly what it is credit suisse is charged with and how significant is this? >> well, they're charged with helping both individuals and in smaller print by extension companies those individuals might have set up to shield taxes from the united states government from the i.r.s. over a period of many years. so the $2.6 billion fine, to a large extent, is retribution for the taxes that should have come to the united states because of these tax evasive programs that credit suisse set up but did not. >> woodruff: and how significant? >> the c.e.o. of credit suisse yesterday said this would only dent one-quarter's earnings by $1.8 billion and they're paying $2.6 billion, so that in itself is a little bit of a shell game. there is a significance in that it is a felony, a guilty crime. we've not seen any of that type of plea happen throughout any of the wake of the sub-prime crisis, so there is one, but it is more significant to note this tax evasion felony has nothing to do with any of the practicing related to the sub-prime crisis. this is independent of those practices, even though there are practices related to the sub-prime crisis that enable tax evasion but they are not contained in this particular plea, nor have they been investigated or gone after by the department of justice by any of the american big institutions. >> woodruff: mark calabria, how significant is this particular prosecution? >> i don't see it as significant. this is no relationshipo the financial crisis, but what we've seen here that's different than previous settlements is a guilty plea. thplea. holder is saying they may be going to jail but i don't see anybody going to jail. banks are reluctant to criminal charges because of litigation out of this. so i suspect americans who have credit suisse are not going to sue, so it's easier to make a criminal admission if nobody is going to jail. >> woodruff: to most, $2.6 billion sounds like a lot of money. >> for most it is. but that said, it's a small amount for credit suisse. more importantly, i think this is crucial for the incentives, it's not being made by the management, this is money paid by shareholders. so the fundamental theme address should the wrong doer pay the penalty, in this case is shareholders are paying it instead of management. >> woodruff: what about nomi prins' point that this is one set of charges that have to do with tax evasion and not connected directly to the sub-prime crisis that led to the financial -- >> that's a crucial point. we've seen the sec where they've gone after hedge funds but not wall street and insider trader but not sub-prime lending, so i think a lot of the frustration in america is about the crisis and nobody is held accountable in a large way, then you see the cases that are absolutely unrelated to the crisis. so i think that's a significant question. >> woodruff: nomi prins, what is your understanding of why more banks, why the administration hasn't gone after moore banks directly because of the sub-prime lending issue? >> well, far the first -- first of all, the u.s. government has subsidized the very banks that have been at the center of the sub-prime crisis. so if you're you be subsidizing bank through a small program through the $7 billion of tarp money or trillions of dollars of loans give on the banks to sustain themselves in the wake of the toxic sub-prime asset waterfall, whether the current debt the federal reserve is carrying to keep rates low so the banks can continue to mark the assets still related to the sub-prime crisis higher and to look healthier than they are, these are all policy initiatives that continue to swirl so that if the department of justice turned around and say, by the way, everything they've done is criminal and they just admitted to criminal charges even tax evasion related to sub-prime assets then it's also to go back to policies put in place by the treasury department and federal reserve and approved by two administrations under bush and obama. >> woodruff: mark calabria, pick up on why it is the administration hasn't -- >> one of the tensions and i think it's quality versus quantity, the easiest thing facing the sec is to get a large settlement. the bank will pay with shareholders money. any executive facing criminal charges will fight tooth and nail. we saw it be bear stearns where they fought tooth and nail and you're seeing the d.o.j. and the sec take a bath of least resistance which is to get a big number even though small for the bank without actually going after individuals. i would like to see less settlements, more cases go to court so we can judge the fact, get higher-quality convictions because, right now, you're not able to distinguish between the actual wrong dorse and those who aren't. >> woodruff: we can't in the one conversation get into all the details, but nomi prins what about the bank's argument that if you come after us and deal a crippling blow in terms of financial penalty, you could affect the entire economic infrastructure of the company. >> that's been the argument the banks and the treasury department have been using the past several decades. that was the argument behind the federal debt bail outs and the sub-prime crisis. there is the notion banks are too big to not be supported and if not supported they will fall and crash the economy even more so than they have been shown to do. but what could have happened is, while they have been subsidizing these banks at the top, rather than allowing them and their chairman as mark pointed out to get off scot-free and not go to jail, why give them trillions of dollars to sustain their practices? thrsked a decision at the level of the white house and washington to say we're going to help the individuals, the mortgages, the economy, not going to help these institutions continue. to that's the problem of why we are continuing to subsidize faulty institutions and not throw people in jail who created criminal activity. >> woodruff: let me quickly cut in. mark, there are signs, though, that the administration is looking for other banks to prosecute. >> this certainly could be a big change. i don't think it looks like a big change. i think we're at the point where it's trust but verify. let's see what d.o.j. does next. i feel like this is a big of nonevent in terms of a change in real prosecution, but again it could change. we could go after u.s. companies. i think it's worth noting credit suisse is not a big u.s. bank and the real big banks that have influence with the government are the u.s.-based banks. so whether you're going to see the same thing with a goldman or bank of america or jp morgan, that remains to be seen. >> woodruff: mark calabria, nomi prins, thank you both. >> thank you. >> woodruff: next, making sure poetry leaves the ivory tower and gets out into the community. over the past year, jeffrey brown and u.s. poet laureate natasha trethewey have been exploring that question in various corners of american life. they recently traveled to los angeles to look at how that played out with a graduate writing program at antioch university. it's the last chapter in our series on discovering ""where poetry lives." >> brown: on a recent thursday evening at a community hall just east of los angeles, alejandra sanchez led a group of latina women in a poetry writing exercise. >> you're going to use those five words. just freestyle with it and write a poem using the five words. >> brown: sanchez began the project as part of a requirement to get her masters in fine arts degree from antioch university, los angeles, which was founded as a satellite of the original ohio campus. the two-year graduate program demands that all students participate in a community service project to enhance the "writing life" of others. sanchez set up her field study project to work with low-income women who'd not had access to writing workshops. >> the power of the word is a doorway. a big piece of my field study is about building community and bridging between academia and women of color, who, in their communities all of the arts have been cut so they don't have this kind of stuff. >> brown: requiring the community service work was the brainchild of eloise klein healy, the first poet laureate of los angeles, who founded antioch's m.f.a. program in 1997, before retiring eight years ago. current antioch poetry professor jenny factor says healy was adamant that poets and writers not ensconce themselves in an ivory tower. >> it's not just about the work on the page. it's about where you put your feet when you get out of bed in the morning. her concept was that art was participatory, that there was a kind of community engagement facet to a lifelong creative practice. >> brown: it's an approach that resonated with natasha tretheway, who's just finishing up her second and final year as the u.s. poet laureate. >> i often talk about how i see it as my job to bring poetry to a wider audience, to promote it, to bring more readers and lovers of poetry. and that's not the work i thought of myself doing when i was in grad school when i wanted to learn everything i could about a sonnet. >> brown: gina loring started her community project four years ago as an antioch graduate student, teaching workshops at a program for incarcerated youth. the work was so rewarding, she continues to teach there, both in detention centers, and at a program for youth who've been released. >> i think it's really important that poets be in the community, be with what's happening and conscious and connected to what's going on in the world around us. because poetry can really be a platform for giving voice, giving voice to the voiceless. >> brown: during the session we watched, many of the young people wrote about the difficulties they still face. >> my body was free, but my mind was still stuck in a cell of the negative past. even after my release, i was walking around in an orange jumpsuit and black shoes. orange will always be your black until you decide to give it back. >> kindness is not stupid or weak, it is a movement. kindness is a movement for change that is so powerful and strong. >> i love that poetry becomes a way to foster conversations about justice. that poetry can be used for all sorts of things, personal things. but also the larger idea of the better world that we're all trying to make and that i see you being involved in. >> brown: natasha and i talked to several current and former antioch students about the link, perhaps the tension, between making poetry broadly accessible, and honing one's individual craft. >> i tell my students, i believe that everyone can learn to write a better poem. you've all made the decision to come back and go to an m.f.a. program to work on craft. why is it important to do that? >> just letting my heart bleed on the page, that's very cathartic and great for relieving stress and getting rid of emotions. but i want to take it to the next level. i want it to be this beautiful piece of art that just touches somebody who may not have experienced what i've experienced, but they can get the similarities of it and it'll trigger something within them. >> it's important to acknowledge that everyone has something to contribute, whether you're in a jail cell or a dorm room, you have a story to tell. but i also think it's like any other talent, if you sing or dance or paint, there's a natural inclination towards something first and then you take the time to work on it and hone it and develop the skills and strengthen your muscle. >> brown: but there's a question that arises, and it's arisen in several of our trips: can anyone write? can anyone be a poet? >> if you want to talk about the poet, the established poet, no i don't think all of us can be that. but the important thing is working with words. it doesn't matter if its messy as long as they're approaching the page with words. >> brown: whether they're veterans, children, the homeless, they don't have to be poets but it's the working with words that's important. >> it's the working with words in whatever way they do it. >> do you have something you'd like to read? >> brown: it's a project for the homeless, in fact, that's been the focus for antioch students jamie garcia and jamaica horton. each week, nearly a dozen people gather at a coffee shop to write. >> what if these poets on the street took over the world? rewrote the daily news to reflect the street. would we forget the homeless, the mentally ill, the veteran? >> brown: part of what we're seeing is these kinds of programs encourage all kinds of people to write. i don't know if that means everybody is a poet. does it matter? >> i don't think it matters. i think poetry lives in all of us. i think what might distinguish the people who turn to poetry out of everyday need, to articulate something difficult versus people who go out to publish their work and hone their craft, are people who are devoted to it in different ways. they are people who are willing to practice, do it again and again. not simply to emote but create a "made thing" through language. >> brown: the students at antioch college told us they will continue to hone their craft, all the while working to make sure poetry continues to live, and even thrive, in their communities. >> ifill: you can hear a former antioch student read a poem inspired by incarcerated teens. that's on our arts page. >> woodruff: when you see headlines about a new drug chances are you rarely thought about the gender of the lab animal the drug was first tested on during trials but, in fact, most early trials are conducted on male rats or other male animals. researchers say that gender difference has led to a significant impact after a drug comes to market. last week, the national institutes of health announced it is requiring scientists to test their work on both male and female animals. for some insight into what's behind these changes and what it means, we turn to: doctor janine clayton, the director of n.i.h.'s office of research on women's health, who announced the change. and phyllis greenberger, the president of the society for women's health research, who has long advocated for this. we welcome you both to the program. dr. clayton, why the sex of the animal makes a difference? >> it makes a huge difference because the pre-clinical studies are the studies that build the evidence base and inform the clinical studies. so if you will be studying a disease that affects both men and women, it's important to think about male and female cells and in the animal model work when you do the clinical research. >> woodruff: so this is something you and your organization has been focused on for a long time and been known for a long time. >> it's been known within a certain portion of the research community. i don't know that it's still generally accepted by everyone and i think it's still going to take a while before it filters out among research scientists, but there is a lot of push-back for a long time and, obviously, finally this is getting the attention. >> woodruff: is that the reason it wasn't done earlier dr. clayton, that there was this bush pak in the scientific community? >> there are probably a lot of factors involved. what's really important now is we have been able to put the focus on getting this as a priority. as phyllis mentioned, the society and other advocacy groups and scientists and others have talked about this in the past and we are support scientists doing this research, but it wasn't enough of a priority. in some ways it was like a blind spot. steintists weren't thinking about it. >> woodruff: phyllis greenberger, were there actually individuals who were harmed or where help wasn't delivered because the research was done only on males? >> well, when you talk about males, you're talking about not only male animals or male cells, but we're talking about in terms of clinical trials an inclusion. so when we started looking at the whole issue of the lack of inclusion of women in clinical trials was 25 years ago when mostly males were in clinical trials and we worked with congress to get women and minorities in clinical trials. that was where we defined the phase three, and we were told the n.i.h. felt that was basically what they could do. no one talked about animal models or cells or even phase one and two, which is still where we need to go to some extent, without getting into all the details. but actually i think what really started it is there was an institute of medicine report that the society commissioned and finally came out in 2001 that said every cell has a sex and that was sort of the beginning i think of recognizing how far back this research had to go to understand sex and gender differences. >> woodruff: dr. clayton what's involved for scientists now that they're told they have to think about this? what's involved in doing that? >> so we're calling on scientist to take sex in account when they think about their pre-clinical experimental design. so they will need to take a balanced approach in looking at male and female differences in cells in animal work. the reason why that's so important is because that's what drives the clinical benefits so men and women can benefit from medical research. >> woodruff: is it extra work, more expensive and what's involved in making sure there's a gender researched? >> the first thing from my perspective is recognizing it and thinking about it differently and taking into account in the design and experiments they work on. so we'll talk about that in terms of releasing the policies and training materials where we'll go through the multiple strategies people can use. there's no really one way. depends on the scientific context and the research being performed. >> woodruff: i want to ask you the question i was asking phyllis greenberger. are there instances you can cite where harm was done or help was not provided because research was done only on males? >> well, clearly, we're all concerned about harm and not considering sex and gender and how that might affect that is something of concern. i guess the real answer is we will never know the number of women that weren't treated appropriately or the number of men missed in terms of diagnosis. for example, a woman may not have chest pain, crushing chest pain when she's actually having a heart attack. she just may have pain in her jaw, feel really sleepy and not doing well, overall extra fatigue, and if she comes to an e.r. doc and says that, she may not get picked up as having an actual heart attack. >> but there are instances -- we've commissioned with congress and worked with government accounting a gao report, a number of years ago, back in 2000, and turned out eight of the ten drugs that had been taken off the market had disproportionately adverse effects in women and one was a cardiovascular drug that actually caused heart failure in women. so it's hard to know at this point whether the risk factors or the side effects for women are because the drug wasn't tested, that it's just an individual. you know, everybody is different anyway, so you may have a risk factor that i don't, even though we're both female. but it's difficult to know all about the risk factors across the board, what we have to do, but we know from the gao report that that was an example. >> woodruff: but in any event, now you're saying it will make a conference because female and male subjects will have to be part of the testing. >> absolutely and the female animal models and the female cells will have to be used in the studies where they're testing drugs to see if they might be effective. >> woodruff: and scientists will go along with this? >> well, as it's taken 25 years to get to this point, i don't think it's a slam dunk. i think it's going to take a while. you asked the question what was the resistance, i think part of it was just understanding that this is important and that there are differences. but female animals turned out to be more expensive than male and male are less expensive than female and it's complicated and probably more expensive to do research on both as opposed to one, so i think there's going to be -- you know, there are some complications and it will take a while for the change to occur. >> woodruff: well, it's something that i know that it's important to take note of and we appreciate you both being here to help explain it to us. >> we, i appreciate the opportunity. >> woodruff: dr. jeanne calle, phyllicalle -- dr. janine claytd phyllis greenberger, we thank you. >> thank you. >> ifill: later tonight on most p.b.s. stations, frontline airs the second part of "united states of secrets." tonight's installment focuses on the relationship between u.s. technology giants and the national security agency. the following portion reveals some of the tech community's reaction to revelations that the n.s.a. was accessing data from major internet players like facebook, yahoo, google and skype. the agency called the program, prism. >> narrator: on the other side of the country, in silicon valley, there was anger and confusion over just what kind of access major internet companies were giving the nsa. >> there was shock and disbelief and horror. a lot of people i know, silicon valley-type people, just felt, "it can't be right. it's not possible google, facebook, these guys are collaborating. it's not just what they would do." >> the ceos of internet companies like facebook and google denied... >> narrator: the companies scrambled to respond to the news. >> google denies that they have direct access. who's right? >> they freaked out because they'd never heard of a program called prism. and they were not letting the nsa get direct access to their servers. they were cooperating with a secret program that they really couldn't describe in sufficient detail to their customers. >> these n.s.a. folks are saying... >> they saw here a big threat to their image, to their business model, which relies on people to trust them with their communications. and they started issuing quite heated statements, taking issue with the idea that they would be just handing over free access to the n.s.a. >> narrator: but then there was more bad news. >> the washington post, citing documents stolen and released by edward snowden... >> narrator: prism was only part of what the n.s.a. was up to. >> narrator: in a program called muscular, the n.s.a. was secretly extracting data from fiber optic cables overseas, where intelligence operations are much less restrained by surveillance laws. >> prism was a front door. prism was the court saying, "you have to cooperate with the n.s.a. and give specific information when asked." now, they find out that through the backdoor, the government is actually breaking into their infrastructure and taking whatever they want. >> they can't intentionally look for a u.s. person's information unless they believe it's a legitimate foreign target. but otherwise they're free to collect it at... pretty much unrestricted abroad. they can hack into companies' internal networks and collect information in bulk. >> narrator: the n.s.a. did this by invoking a reagan-era presidential order, from a time long before the modern internet. >> the n.s.a. decided it was okay under executive order 12333 and with the backing of the justice department and the white house to break into the private links, the private data links that connect the data centers of google and yahoo around the world. you're collecting a very large fraction of the whole planet's internet traffic. and that includes a very large number of americans. >> the project identified by the code name "muscular"... >> we do not just tap into lines in the united states. overseas, the ability to do that in bulk is critical for finding the communications of people who are trying to hide. if you can look for certain patterns and dive into those communications, you find people utterly unknown to you who are very dangerous. >> narrator: google was shocked. they had leased what they thought were secure data lines. >> the idea that one of our own government agencies would go out and essentially break into google's own data streams to go beyond what google thought had been a skeptical and resistant, but nevertheless cooperative relationship, i find that quite shocking. >> woodruff: next, hari sreenivasan talked with an author who wrote about the impact one man had on the success or failure of a company. >> sreenivasan: when the one man is steve jobs, it's a question worth asking. it's been more than two years since he died at age 56. since then, more than 200 people inside and outside the company have been interviewed. the upshot, who knew apple after steve jobs. welcome. >> thank you. >> sreenivasan: you ended up with a story about apple having seen its best days. why? >> how apple is handling the transition at a time when it's trying to stay at the top of its game and i just thought that it was a fascinating period to be watching them really closely because, you know, i think of them as this empire and it's an age-old question, right? it's been asked many times what happens to an empire when your great leader dies, and that, to me, was a fascinating story. >> sreenivasan: you're saying the empire is not doing so great? >> i'm saying the empire is struggling to find a new identity after the loss of somebody around which it revolved for a very long time. >> tim cook, the c.e.o., read your book. he put out this note on cnbc, e said, it fails to capture steve, apple or anyone else in the company. are you surprised? >> in the past, write about the ipad before it came out and steve jobs himself told me much of my information was incorrect. i wrote about the low-end iphone six months later and apple denied that as well and both have proven true. >> sreenivasan: but one of the concerns is, in this particular period of apple, any different than some of the challenges that steve jobs might have gone through or a pre-steve jobs passing apple might have gone through? >> i think that's a really good question and the challenges applele are going through, a lot of them are big company challenges. this is a company that has grown for really rapidly for -- in a very short amount of time and it's facing big company issues that steve jobs himself would have faced had he been around. the fact that it's going through this leadership transition makes the challenges even more difficult for apple to grapple with. >> sreenivasan: what's tim cook like as a leader? you describe him as almost polar opposite of steve jobs. is he in a position to lead apple to the next disruption in technology they have become so famous for? >> i think if you're talking about profits and revenues and as a business, he's a great businessman. but steve jobs embodied this combination, this rare combination of vision and the power of persuasion which, together, helped apple disrupt industry after industry with these great products, and there is nobody there right now who has both. >> sreenivasan: when you look back at the apple stocks, somebody's going to say what's about the empire? the market thinks there is something still worth investing in apple in, right? >> well, i think, you know, the market is an emotional thing, but i think it's doing better. there was a lot of concern a little while ago and now it's coming back up again, but my story isn't about the stock market or how apple is doing from a day-to-day standpoint, it's from the long-term vision. and from that standpoint, i think what i saw is apple grappling with the loss of this man around whom their current vision is based on, and the market is changing rapidly and they need to find a new vision for the company post-steve jobs and i'm not sure they're doing that. in this period of time i have ie been looking at, they're lost a little bit. >> sreenivasan: one of the chapters you had that was interesting to me is all of the events around fox com, the factories in china making most to have the products apple is holding, there was a rash of suicides and apple had to deal with this problem. for an apple consumer today, have those problems been resolved? is it any better? >> i think the problems in china are hugely complex and a lot of it is beyond apple's control, and i do spend a fair amount of time. i visited china and wento the factory gates and talked to factory workers and, you know, one of the things i discovered is that -- is how complex and i'm not sure it's something that apple can resolve. it will be something that will keep impacting the company, and that's just the reality, and it's a risk for them. >> sreenivasan: the name of the book, haunted empire, apple after steve jobs. thanks so much. >> thank you. >> ifill: the media, telecom and mobile landscape is going through enormous change right now, and this week's announcement of another mega- merger, and the prospect of even more consolidation, shook up those industries again. >> ifill: a.t.&.t., america's second-largest wireless provider, announced sunday it's agreed to buy satellite television giant directv for nearly $50 billion in cash and stock. the companies said the takeover will allow for more bundling of mobile, t.v., and internet plans. executives from both sides spoke during a conference call yesterday. a.t.&.t. c.e.o. randall stephenson. >> it gives us the opportunity to lead the way and to redefine the video entertainment business for a mobile and high-speed world. that includes delivering content to consumers across multiple screens, mobile devices, t.v.'s, laptops, the backseat displays of connected cars and even airplanes. >> ifill: the deal will give at&t and directv a combined 26 million video users in the u.s. a.t.&.t. already serves 116 million mobile customers. the purchase comes amid broad questions about the future of television and online video. in february, comcast unveiled plans to buy time warner cable for more than $45 billion, a deal that would serve more than 30 million cable subscribers and nearly as many broadband users. some lawmakers said such consolidation only hurts consumers. minnesota democrat al franken has questioned the a.t.&.t. deal and, last month, the proposed comcast purchase. >> we are here to question whether this deal is good for competition, whether it's in the public interest. i'm against this deal because i believe it does not meet either test. i believe this deal will result in fewer choices, higher prices, and even worse service for my constituents. >> ifill: but comcast executive vice president david cohen defended his proposed merger. while this transaction will make us bigger, that's a good thing, not a problem. most of our real competitors are national and global and larger than us. >> ifill: the a.t.&.t.-directv merger could face similar scrutiny. it could be finalized within a year. >> ifill: what do these deals mean for consumers? and why are corporate giants spending tens of billions to try to get even bigger? we turn to two people who know this field well. matt wood is the policy director for free press, a non-partisan organization advocating for media and technology policies. and jim nail is an analyst at forrester research. they focus on consumer and business data in changing marketplaces. matt wood, what is the appeal of a deal like this for a company as big as at&t? >> well, i think they see the appeal as a quick boost to their bottom line and as wall street rewarding them for these kinds of americaners, we think it's wasteful spending, that if at&t would provide more broadband for existing customers and expanding broad banned offerings would be money better spent, but the the deal was more like $70 billion, once you factor in at&t debt, and with that they could wire half the country with fiber, instead they eek looking for the bottom line of the merger and the stock price. >> woodruff: does it make sense for a company like a company like at&t -- jim nail, does it make sense for at&t to be spending money this way? >> it absolutely does. this gives a few kind of future both to at&t and to directv by expanding these services and giving at&t the crash flow -- cash flow to do the kind of expansion we were talking about. >> ifill: we talk about these kinds of mergers, jim nail, we mention there have been a lot of them lately. why? >> we actually have a tale of two different stories going on. time warner comcast is a classic combination of two similar companies who are seeking efficiencies and economies of scale and, therefore, higher margins as their market flows. directv and at&t are actually a different story. it's actually being driven by a fundamental change in consumer behavior where consumers expect to get the content, the programming, the data they want anywhere they want, on any device they want. this is something that satellite can never deliver and, so, satellite has to get together with a different kind of provider so they can satisfy their customers in the future or, you know, they're out of business. >> ifill: are customers commanding this kind of wireless technology? does it make sense, therefore, for a company like at&t to put its money there? >> i think jim and i would agree it makes sense for at&t. for consumers, people are definitely demanding this kind of connective but the question is are they demanding a single company offer it to them or are people capable of making the bundles on their own? that's the genius of the internet, people can go to different sources on the screen and for at&t to say we'll take away a competitor to at&t's existing video services and the only benefit they can name is now everything will come to you through anthth connection, we just don't see it. we see higher prices and problems for consumers even if this benefits at&t shareholders today and tomorrow. >> ifill: does at&t benefit from increased innovations from these problems? >> the innovation tends to happen on the edges, as it should be, these companies provide valuable services giving us the connections we need to receive these innovations and more and more for people to make them on their own, but to say in at&t will be more innovative, it's not looking at their track record of being a carrier in the middle, doesn't do much for themselves. we need them to provide the pathway for the rest of us. >> ifill: how much tha has to do with the changing, competitive landscape involving streaming services like amazon, netflix and yahoo and you name it that makes companies like at&t mike different decisions? >> i think that's the core of the kind of innovation and change we're looking at here because a lot of the analysis is looking at this through the lens of providing television services. so in that sense, it makes sense to preserve directv as a television distributor versus comcast, versus all the other companies. but what's really going on is a change to broadband internet being the fundamental flat form through which all the other services are provided. when you look at it that way, consumers have tons of choices, lots of competition on the internet to distribute television content. as you said, netflix, amazon, hulu, youtube, on and on. that's where the innovation will take place, and what i hope the regulators will see in this is it's not just about preserving choice in television, but it's stimulating innovation and expansion of broadband which will be a foundation that on top of which all of these other companies will innovate, bring new services and new competition for the benefit of consumers. >> reporter: are we headed inevitably down the path of consolidation, just a couple of companies controlling all access? >> i think that's where we're headed in the department of justice and the fcc don't block the mergers. they have a chance to do that. i think jim is right, the companies provide a pathway to innovation and competition, but that's the key difference. when at&t says we compete with netflix or google or amazon, none of the companies can reach their customers undecember at&t remains a platform for that company. so at&t has in a lot of ways control over their competitors, and when they say, we're a content company, too, that's true up to a point, but at&t is also the carrier we need to even reach those other companies in the first place. >> ifill: jim nail, how much of a problem is it for consumers in a situation like this if they seem to have fewer choices and companies to rely on to provide the content? is that ever-shrinking environment really helping? >> well, let's look at the fact that, right now, we have monopoly in many areas around broadband access. most people can only buy broadband from their cable provider. so we're in a monopoly world right now. this actually increases choice by giving at&t the ability to expand their broadband network and be in more areas in competition with comcast or time warner and others in the future. >> ifill: do you think this will be approved by the justice department, open question? >> i think there's a chance. i think we have a good case to make this is not actually a consumer's benefit and at&t could expand their broadband network without first taking out a competitor. >> ifill: matt wood, jim nail, thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: again, the major developments of the day. general motors recalled another 2.4 million cars and trucks for problems including seat belts, transmissions and air bags. and a double car bombing in nigeria killed at least 118 people in the city of jos. >> ifill: on the newshour online right now, in many professions, working women have long earned less than their male counterparts. what's the best way to compare your own compensation? our "ask the headhunter" columnist is putting together some pointers on how to ask for more money. leave your questions for him in his latest piece, on "making sense." all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. >> ifill: and that's the newshour for tonight. on wednesday, we look at a pioneering dance program that benefits children of all ages. i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. we'll see you on-line, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us here at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> when i was pregnant, i got more advice than i knew what to do with. what i needed was information i could trust, on how to take care of me and my baby. united healthcare has a simple program that helps moms stay on track with their doctors and get care and guidance they can use before and after the baby is born. simple is what i need right now. >> that's health in numbers, united healthcare >> 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. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org  . this is the nightly business report. brought to you in part by the street.com. featuring herb greenburg who reminds investors that risk is real with herb greenburg's reality check. you can learn more at the street.com/reality check. dow drag. the bluechip index tumbles triple digits as retail earnings disappoint and a federal reserve official says rate hikes may be coming sooner rather than later. on sale. a number of retail stocks gets slammed. is weak consumer spending a sige of more problems ahead? meeting of the minds. what president obama says leaders from across the globe to convince them to inven

Related Keywords

United States , Shanghai , China , Nigeria , Thailand , India , New Delhi , Delhi , Bangkok , Krung Thep Mahanakhon , Minnesota , Ohio , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Switzerland , Serbia , Ukraine , Americans , America , Chinese , Swiss , Russian , American , Natasha Trethewey , Jeffrey Brown , Randall Stephenson , Margaret Warner , Phyllis Greenberger , Alfred P Sloan , Los Angeles , Vladimir Putin , Janine Clayton , David Cohen , Macneil Lehrer , Tim Cook , Yingluck Shinawatra , Jeanne Calle , Jamie Garcia , Hulu Youtube , Gina Loring , Judy Woodruff , Edward Snowden , Al Franken , Gwen Ifill , Alejandra Sanchez , Prayuth Chanocha , Hari Sreenivasan , Warner Comcast , Eloise Klein Healy , Bush Pak ,