The Intercept — Fearless, Independent Journalism

Posted in Home Furnishings, Local journalism, Uncategorized on September 12th, 2020
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

this is not normal for a Democratic Society these interests are being served by the chaos[ Music] everyone in America’s communications are being mustered right now I want to do speak to the people that are actually dealing with this every day.

Is public journalism, journalism? (1996) | THINK TANK

Posted in Home Furnishings, Local journalism, Uncategorized on June 17th, 2020
Tags: , , , ,

Ben Wattenberg: hello, Im Ben Wattenberg. In contemporary years, newspapers have prided themselveson the Joe Friday institution of journalism: just the facts, maam. However some thing new is now stated to be on thescene. It goes by using distinctive names, like public journalism,civic participation, neighborhood journalism, conclusive journalism. It doesn’t matter what you call it, this journalismsets out to head beyond just the tips and tries to form the agenda. Query: is this new? Is this a liberal trick? Joining us variety through the conflict and consensusare Jane Eisner, editorial page editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer, which recentlywon the Gold Medal from the countrywide association of Opinion page Editors; Steve Cuozzo, executiveeditor of the brand new York submit and writer of Its Alive: How Americas Oldest NewspaperCheated dying and Why It concerns; James Fishkin, chairman of the division of governmentat the institution of Texas and creator of The Voice of the persons; and Jodie Allen, Washingtoneditor of the net journal Slate and former editor of the Outlook part on the WashingtonPost.The topic before this condominium: Is public journalismjournalism? The Philadelphia Inquirers new editorialpolicies mirror the objectives of public journalism. In a controversial sequence, two Inquirer reporterscritiqued US monetary policy. The title of the sequence explains its thrust:the us: Who Stole the Dream? The authors expressed strong and stronglydisputed opinions within the information section on web page 1. They proposed, among other things, highertariffs, immigration restrictions, and raising taxes on the rich. Different aspects of public journalism includea heavier reliance on public participation via center of attention companies, reader polls, readereditorials, newspaper-subsidized civic corporations, and candidate forums. All of it sounds excellent, however critics say votersend up spoon-fed with the views of the establishment media. For illustration, in North Carolina, led by TheCharlotte Observer, the essential media used polls and center of attention businesses in an try to shape theagenda and then drive the insurance policy of the Senate crusade.Sen. Jesse Helms refused to play alongside, sayinghe must be allowed to run on his report, for excellent or for in poor health. Jane Eisner, public journalism is aterribly amorphous phrase. What are we speakme about? Jane Eisner: well, it is vitally amorphous, andI think thats some of the problems with it. So i can only answer what it method to me asan editorial page editor. Ben Wattenberg: k. Jane Eisner: Its really quite simple. I think it just means, from my point of view,involving readers far more on the pages of my editorial pages, whether or not thats in editorials,op-ed pieces, or letters.And to do this, I consider you particularly have toreach out to individuals who would not often write to us. , now not everybody has a press agentor a fax computer and might send flawlessly structured, 800-word op-ed portions to primary newspapers. And its to these persons, whether or not theyreyounger or disenfranchised or just dont suppose that had been focused on what theythink, these are the people that we are achieving out to. Ben Wattenberg: Professor James Fishkin, whatis it all about? James Fishkin: Public journalism? Good, Im a social scientist. Im now not a journalist. But Ive gotten involved in a number of projectsthat humans time period public journalism, so i assume Im an recommend of it, and Idiscuss it in my e-book.Public journalism, I consider, means journalisticinstitutions take some accountability for making a public. By using a public, I mean residents who can talkto every different concerning the issues, are told concerning the problems, and whose voice is facilitatedin a way. So it additionally means airing the peoples agendaon the problems, not simply horse race of the campaign, but the problems that individuals reallywant to listen to about, no longer just tabloid journalism, whos snoozing with whom or whatever, butissues that honestly affect peoples lives, as usual humans construe that. Now, its very elaborate to pull off, and myinterest in that is in anything referred to as deliberative polling, which represents what the publicwould suppose concerning the issues in the event that they grew to be engaged.Ben Wattenberg: Which you did on PBS earlierthis 12 months. James Fishkin: sure, yes. Ive now been involved in eight deliberativepolls, some countrywide, on PBS with the presidential candidates, some in different countries. Ben Wattenberg: All correct, good come backto that in just a minute. Jodie Allen, what do you suppose of these items? Jodie Allen: well, I consider its being oversold. I believe that whats good in it isnt newand whats new in it isnt necessarily just right. Without doubt, its just right for a newspaper tobe in contact with the people that its serving, to head out and do excellent reporting on whatsreally concerning them each locally, but in addition nationally, and thats a threat when wesimply get too much hand-protecting of dont you feel dangerous in these days. And i worry so that I dont think that thatis new. If youre a good newspaper, youre outthere attaining into your group, seeing whats going on, following it. However what worries me is that you just do see thismove within the news pages, now not on the editorial pages, however in the case of The PhiladelphiaInquirer, correct on the information pages, where crusades are being run pretending to be news, obviouslywith powerful and selective selections of the information, or in some circumstances, fully ballot pushed andcutting the politicians out of the political system and rather turning the manage overto the pollsters.Ben Wattenberg: Steve, he mentioned the magicword tabloid, and he did not say in it in a pleasant manner. You’re the executive editor of the worldsgreatest tabloid. Steve Cuozzo: And champion of tabloid values. Ben Wattenberg: right. Steve Cuozzo: Which I define in a somewhatdifferent way from normal definitions. Tabloid journalism is journalism pushed bya centered awareness on contributors as particular from the workings of associations. So even supposing we cover associations, such asgovernment or the Federal Reserve, we tend to take action from the factor of with the perspectivethat theyre run via character guys and females. However my experience of public journalism is this:that in NY city, an extraordinarily distinct and particular market, we observe a very differentform of public journalism altogether, which consists in having three every day newspapers,at the least 5 television stations broadcast, plus cable channels, and probably a half of dozenodd weekly magazines, month-to-month magazines. And all and sundry, with the intention to communicate, wake up everymorning and scream our brains out about the whole lot, every from a different perspective and a differentideological every pursuing, kind of blatantly, an additional ideological agenda.Out of that cacophony of voices emerges somethingresembling actuality or reality. Ben Wattenberg: what is all this entire thingthats going on? I imply, you’ve all these vivid young journalismmajors in tuition and bright younger journalists talking about this wonderful new factor andraising high this commonplace. Jane Eisner: good, I think theres anotherelement to it, and it pertains to what Jim mentioned, which is that I believe there are manyof us who do think that we’ve got a accountability to create a safe area for a deliberativedialogue, that it is a part of our roles to do this. Sick give you one illustration. Ben Wattenberg: A risk-free area for a deliberativedialogue. Jane Eisner: Mmhmm. Its not talk radio.Its now not persons yelling at each and every other. However its not also what typical op-edpages were like. For illustration, our newspaper will do what itsalways finished, which is recommend candidates on this election cycle, and we will be able to interviewthe candidates and study them and talk to people about them and dissect their files. But in some circumstances, were additionally going outand meeting with voters from these districts. Ben Wattenberg: Why isnt what the new YorkPost does group journalism, public journalism? Jane Eisner: Im particularly no longer very hung upon these labels. I dont to find them very adequate at all. , I simply feel its just right journalismwith a slightly broader framework than what weve had previously.Jodie Allen: but I suppose theres a big differencebetween what Jane does on her editorial page, where I believe wed all agree thats theplace the place opinions should be, and the predominant thrust of the new, quote, unquote, publicjournalism, which apparently sufficient, the American Journalism evaluate says is notso preferred among younger reporters, but among older publishers looking for approaches to makemoney. But it’s quite yet another factor for frontpages to move out and have polls finished or to head out, as in one case, and inform all theirreporters to talk to four persons, which seemed to be a as a substitute small pattern, and are available backand make a decision, as is the case in North Carolina proper now, what the total range of issuesthat are going to be blanketed shall be, no longer just in one paper, but in several papers andseveral tv stations, with the influence that the precise candidates running down there,candidates like Harvey Gantt, are having no protection at all, are unable to get their messageout.It is a real getting rid of of the politicalprocess from politicians, who, some thing their faults, their fault just isn’t by and large that theyrenot poll pushed ample, however that theyre too ballot driven. James Fishkin: Most advocates of public journalismI know dont say that say that you just must cover the crusade, however you duvet it ina different means and from yet another angle and also you deliver in the issues that contact peopleslives as good because the horse race, which dominates the whole thing. I imply, we now have democracy thats not reallyfunctioning all that good.I communicate as a political scientist. When you appear at the turnout, should you appear atthe expertise that residents have concerning the campaign, I imply, forty percent dont knowthat Jack Kemp is Bob Doles jogging mate, and a quarter dont recognize the vice presidentis Clintons running mate. This was a Washington publish/Kaiser be taught recently. So weve acquired a public that is simply barelyattentive that reacts to a vague impact of sound bites and headlines.And if your concept of public journalism iseverybody shouting at each different, its difficult for people to think when everybodys shouting. Ben Wattenberg: how will you tellthem to feel with a public opinion ballot? James Fishkin: Ah. Good, I dont. Im no longer an Im a critic of conventionalpublic opinion polls. I have a new approach, which I call deliberativepolling.Do you wish to have me to assert a word about that? Ben Wattenberg: About one or a few. [Laughter.] James Fishkin: The idea of deliberative pollingis to head past traditional public opinion polling given that for those who just do conventionalpolling to advocate newspapers or whatever, you may also good simply reflect back the publicsvague affect of whats already being blanketed. But there is a further query. What would the men and women think if they actuallyhad an opportunity to overcome what social scientists have referred to as rational lack of awareness? I mean, theres a reason the publicsturned off. If Ive received one vote in thousands, why shouldI pay numerous attention to the complexities of public policy? When you consider that I wont have so much outcomes.But if we can create a social context wherepeople clearly can get engaged in the disorders, the place they think their voice matters, theypay attention. They do the rough work of taking note of competing Ben Wattenberg: and also you introduced together 500people as a nice sample and put them to tuition, truly, for a couple of days, studying theseissues. James Fishkin: good, we introduced put thewhole country in a single room beneath conditions where they could think by way of the issuesand ask their questions of competing professionals and competing politicians, including the vicepresident, over a number of days of discussion. And in instruction for that, they startedlistening to the media, studying up on the problems, speakme to pals and family, hearingcompeting facets of view.And we had dramatic alterations of opinion abouttheir view of the priorities. Steve Cuozzo: Forgive my announcing so, however theelitism inherent in that statement takes my breath away. Its underlying assumption appears to be thatthe public is incapable of making up its possess mind or listening or applying any criticalthinking to disorders in an atmosphere wherein there are lots of voices being heard. It strikes me that in lots of the marketswhere Im no longer a pleasant believer in polls or in center of attention businesses; Im a believer in themarket. And in lots of the areas in the us wherepublic journalism has taken maintain, I become aware of that, most commonly, they have an inclination overwhelminglyto be in cities which might be monopoly newspaper markets, small cities, medium-sized cities,with only a single newspaper, which is tends to be march in lock step with the advertisingcommunity. In bigger cities, together with Philadelphia andBoston, it perpetually tends to be the paper, within the case of The Inquirer or The Globe inBoston, the paper that’s totally dominant in that market. And it seems to me that in a metropolis with a diversityof media voices, as in ny, or in the nation as a entire, which has a diversityof media voices, its unthinkable that public journalism, as I appreciate you men and women, drawingin result, drawing yourself in with the voters to affect the political agenda, would reallytake location.Who determines what the issues are that matterto voters rather than the voters themselves? Do they must be guided and informed from onhigh? James Fishkin: The idea is first, the assumptionis no longer that men and women are incapable; as an alternative, theyre no longer with ease motivated. Actually, we now have discovered that they arevery capable of assessing problems if you happen to just give them a context the place they can speak toother folks and where they’ve some cause to pay attention and become engaged. Jane Eisner: I take first-rate challenge about thisbeing elitist. First of all, Im simply doing what Imdoing on my pages, and that is basically just right reporting. And its the sort of reporting that an editorialpage editor hasnt carried out in the past on The Philadelphia Inquirer. I spend a whole lot much less time at cocktailparties with the elite within the Philadelphia vicinity and more time simply being in gatheringsand being attentive to natural men and women. And its Ben Wattenberg: and also you run fewer syndicatedcolumns.Jane Eisner: No, thats no longer real. Ben Wattenberg: not genuine? Jodie Allen: The editorial pages are turningto reporting considering that the reporting pages are turning to editorializing. But I feel I a lot pick Steves modelwhere we let the entire vegetation bloom, however actually that were getting fewer and fewer[inaudible]. It appears to me then that we need to demandmore objectivity of a newspaper, less cheerleading, much less leading of crusades when its onlyone than when there are five. And so I consider the whole development runs in thewrong approach. Ben Wattenberg: There was once a ballot run recentlythat requested in regards to the ideological leanings of the Washington press corps and their editors. It was overwhelmingly, beyond anybodysprior notion, that they were a long way more liberal than the public as a whole. If the public journalism advocates are announcing,boy, we ought to get extra of us within the story and give an explanation for to folks whats wrong, isntthat automatically going to come back out much more as a trick of liberals to do more ofwhat theyve been criticized for? James Fishkin: No, its to get the peopleinto the story, no longer the pundits.No longer the pundits. And its to facilitate the humans comingto their possess conclusions and getting the peoples agenda aired within the newspaper so that peoplecan connect with the experiences. Ben Wattenberg: So youre going to have10 young journalists, 9 of whom are liberals, going out and discovering that the folks reallyhave a conservative agenda. Is that what were saying? James Fishkin: No, no. No, thats why Ive devised this elaborateprocess of random sampling of the persons and of the whole lot being obvious in terms ofeverything that is given to Ben Wattenberg: No, I appreciate that, butIm speaking about this common inspiration, which we nonetheless have not properly defined,incidentally, of Jane Eisner: but it surely cant be outlined. I mean, each newspaper is doing things intheir own means, and i feel thats one of the crucial problems with public journalism. And Ive written about this. I suppose the persons who are type of leadingthis action havent been discerning enough.I dont suppose that theyve stated that thereare some things newspapers ought to not do. And that i dont believe that its our function toshape the agenda besides on the editorial pages. I do suppose its our function to pay attention, especiallyto the men and women that we dont probably listen to. Steve Cuozzo: nevertheless it appears to me that if editorsand publishers need to spend money on the civic procedure of interaction between elected officialsand the voters alternatively, allow them to run for mayor, allow them to run for councilman,and allow them to, you know, take these steps that mean real funding in the method.James Fishkin: I feel newspapers and thepress almost always, the media, must be concerned with getting people discussing the issuesin an instructed way. You know, we had a enormous debate among presidentialcandidates. The actual future of democracy rests now not withthe debate amongst candidates, but with the controversy among the persons. Will we facilitate a debate among the many persons? Then folks that need to vote can come to a decision tovote, however as a minimum if they vote, theyll be instructed. However its a intricate system to figure outhow do we genuinely get them engaged adequate so that theyll even pay concentration. Ben Wattenberg: Jodie, what’s looking for tobe born right here? Jodie Allen: good, it appears to be that thebig case at the back of it’s a want to sell extra newspapers. Now, that is not a brand new concern on the partof newspaper publishers. Ben Wattenberg: to not come to be part of theprocess and purvey their precise ideological, style of goody-two-sneakers establishment sortof a thing, in my phrases? Jodie Allen: well, a few of that, too.But I suppose as you look, and when you lookespecially at a chain like Knight Ridder, which has been a chief within the public journalismidea, they are concerned, as are all publishers, about the fact that newspaper earnings have notbeen growing and in some cities have been declining. And theyre watching at all of the competitiontheyre getting from tv and from the web etc, and so they want to boostsales. And so they say, well, the right way to increase salesis to make the paper extra vital to peoples considerations. But that, you understand, its a common impulse,however its a detrimental one. One should depart from the idea of our job,find it irresistible or now not, is to present the information and the details as relatively as we are able to, realizing wedont continuously do it right.We are able to reward it in a more interesting approach,and that i think this has been a good move. However to then slavishly flip it into wellgo out and do a poll and let individuals tell us what we already knew and, keep in mind, everybodyknows that pollsters decide, A, what questions to ask, and B, learn how to ask them, and that theanswers they get no longer in Jims variety of poll, but thats not what have been talking about. Ben Wattenberg: And moreover, when politiciansfollow polls, we are saying, Oh, my God, theyre doing a terrible thing. Jodie Allen: Oh, isnt it horrible? So now heres the newspaper Ben Wattenberg: after which when newspapers followpolls, we are saying, Isnt that extraordinary? Jodie Allen: sure.Why would that be? Jane Eisner: I believe it I mean, Imnot going to shield that. We dont do that, and that i on no account would. But I do think you have got to watch out herebecause youre talking about a whole lot of newspapers doing a entire lot of differentthings, and that i believe its now not fair to brandish them all with one style of brush. I imply, I consider you, Jodie. We have under no circumstances carried out pollings here. I agree with you, Steve. We havent performed voter registration drives;yet another newspaper in Philadelphia did. I’d to find that to be a to compromiseour independence due to the fact that, correctly, the news side of The Philadelphia Inquirer did a terrificjob a number of years ago of uncovering a vote fraud scandal that was perpetuated through the very peoplewho had been seeking to get folks to signal up for votes.So I couldnt do this. Steve Cuozzo: Thats journalism. Jane Eisner: I mean, I simply believe like thatwould be really out of bounds. Steve Cuozzo: I believe that what youre doingon The Inquirer isnt public journalism, as youve defined it, Jim, notwithstandingthat there’s a targeted fuzziness in regards to the definition. Identification make one more point. Jodie, you mentioned, you already know, that publishersare promoting or tolerating public journalism of their pages with the hope of selling morepapers.And my wager is that theyre quite doingit to sell more advertising. I dont consider that anybody has any greathope of turning on a younger new release that doesnt have the newspaper addiction to goingout and buying newspapers in exceptional numbers. I believe nothing turns into a monopoly newspapermore in its market, or the dominant newspaper in its market when there’s one obviously dominant,than an aura of objectivity and civic accountability. And frankly, the form of public journalismthat promotes a variety of total, fuzzily outlined, good executive agenda lets get peopleout and vote, lets seem on the problems that quite matter to their lives is blandenough to promote that charisma of objectivity and promote extra division retailer commercials. Ben Wattenberg: you are pronouncing its a fakepopulism, whereas the tabloid voice is the true populism. Steve Cuozzo: Im not saying that the tabloidvoice in itself is the real populist voice. I say that the multiplicity of voices is thereal populist voice.Ben Wattenberg: correct. James Fishkin: might I introduce an historicalnote for a 2nd? Ben Wattenberg: sure. James Fishkin: the general public opinion poll wasitself launched with the aid of newspapers, and newspapers had been attacked for intervening within the politicalprocess after they did so. And correctly, most dramatically, even GeorgeGallups preliminary launch of the ballot within the 1936 election used to be financed, in gigantic section,with the aid of The Washington submit. So now, when newspapers habits polls, theyhave an result on the election. All these horse race polls have an effect bandwagon results, momentum results, obviously within the predominant season, and in the generalelection.Now, by some means thats now come to be a part of themodus operandi of newspapers, and its now not inspiration that theyre intervening. But they’re intervening. My exact proposal is: Why not intervenewith polls that measure in a more considerate method what the public would think? But these different efforts to seek advice the publicare just efforts. They’re much less dramatic interventionsin the political system than what newspapers are doing all the time. Jane Eisner: I truthfully feel weve setup a false dichotomy here, appearing as if theres objective journalism in some pure form thatused to be practiced until very just lately and this new variety of brand of public journalism,when in fact we continuously make judgments and picks in our journalism.We attempt to do it. You recognize, we are professionals, and so wetry to do it as quite as possible. But we are settling on. We are identifying to explain a political campaignas a battlefield, or we can decide upon to describe it as a discussion. And we use those phrases every day. Ben Wattenberg: is this tendency towards publicjournalism, whatever it method, impacting on this election this year? Jodie Allen: I dont believe its had avery gigantic outcomes on the presidential election. One cause is that individuals are simply now not veryconcerned about some thing. What the polls show is that even though crimepops up as the absolute best hindrance, thats seeing that it will get a ten percentage vote, which is why thisyear paying attention to polls is specifically misleading. But it is making a difference in some stateand regional elections, North Carolina being one very clear example. And i dont consider its making youknow, that its having a just right effect.I believe its having a worrisome result. Ben Wattenberg: The paper there is settingthe agenda and forcing the candidates to talk about that or they wont duvet them anymore. Jodie Allen: Theyre not even overlaying thecandidates. Theyre variety of masking themselves, andits just variety of statewide thumb-sucking. I quite with the television going alongside withit. I believe its a bad thing. Its no longer democracy as I are aware of it. And that i consider there is to select up on somethingJane said, I feel shes right that newspapers are getting if you appear at the long run,theyve surely gotten better instructed and, actually, more goal. But that has been their goal. When you now swap the intention and say, no,put out of your mind the objectivity, the factor is to get in tune with what the persons need, youllsee the pattern step by step move within the other direction. And i dont believe its healthy. Ben Wattenberg: Is it simply what the peoplewant or what the journalists want? Jodie Allen: well, see, theres the dangerousthing.We make a decision, you realize, what query to askthe people. I feel, you recognize, if you get that mind-set,the chance is invariably there anyway, and when you feed it, it will get worse. Ben Wattenberg: correct, and if youre a suspiciousnon-liberal, like your moderator, I mean, and you seem at these polls, pronouncing, well,most of these journalists are swinging from the liberal aspect of the plate, is thatnot grounds for being suspicious of this? Jodie Allen: Oh, yeah. Ben Wattenberg: good. Thanks all. Thanks, Jane Eisner, Jodie Allen, JamesFishkin, and Steve Cuozzo. And thanks. We revel in listening to from our viewers. That you would be able to ship your questions and comments toNew River Media, 1150 seventeenth avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036. For consider Tank, Im Ben Wattenberg. Announcer: This has been a creation of BJWInc., in organization with New River Media, which are exclusively liable for its content..

Full Kerry, Schwarzenegger: Have To Treat Climate Change ‘Like A War’ | Meet The Press | NBC News

Posted in Home Furnishings, Local journalism, Uncategorized on January 16th, 2020
Tags: , , , , ,

Welcome again the 2019 UN climate alternate conference starts the next day to come in Madrid amid sobering new studies on the results and acceleration of world warming in a single learn the ancient projections of flooding at high tide through the yr 2050 in this case in southern Vietnam we’re up-to-date to look extra like this and no longer there’s much more water there than southern Vietnam with almost the complete discipline below water now via 2050 here in the us an group of scientists politicians and yes celebrities called World war zero hopes to spark millions of conversations about global warming and the subsequent yr and create extra urgency on the problem joining me now from l. A. Or two founding participants former senator and Secretary of State Democrat John Kerry who created the team and former California Governor someday Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger I say some time i’ll let assist you to governor inform me in this day and age the place you’re with the get together but gentlemen welcome back to meet the press secretary Kerry let me start with this query i’m gonna be slightly of a cynic here however you go out of your strategy to say you are not backing a single local weather plan with World struggle zero that is about developing extra awareness to the issue is concentration is concentration to the limitation relatively the the drawback proper now this looks like a ten year ago quandary the obstacle right now could be convincing a distinctive president u.S. To behave good it can be not only a president Chuck there are excellent efforts available in the market many environmental agencies younger humans in particular however no nation is getting the job performed I mean the straightforward fact is that we’re approach at the back of method behind the eight-ball things have become worse not higher and so we have our not likely allies coming collectively right here there isn’t a crew that has persons as various as ours in terms of nationality age gender ideology heritage existence experience and all these men and women have come collectively announcing we’ve acquired to deal with this like a battle I imply it has to require resolution-making and organization and efforts which are simply not taking location and so we have now humans throughout ideologies I mean you may have you have got former Treasury secretary Hank Paulson you’ve got former governor of Ohio John Kasich you have got Arnold you will have quite a lot of men and women in the other side the aisle who’ve all come together without saying that is the one approach to get there but with the desire that makes certain that in the usa and world wide and people are going to place this dilemma way up on the prime of the record we’re gonna do the matters we must can we’re gonna organize we’ll mobilize we’re gonna speak to literally thousands of usa citizens over the direction of the following month’s and that is going to turn out to be a essential hassle Governor Schwarzenegger I imply what does more – however what does more to variety of focal point folks’s attention to this hindrance a town corridor or these or the fact that you realize you look at your state I imply the wildfires are worse and there is commonly nothing proper now you are able to do about it good we’re very completely happy and really proud of what we now have accomplished here in California and i think we’re superb proof which you could guard atmosphere and those who preserve the financial system at the same time on account that we now have the strictest environmental laws here in California and even as we are the quantity one economically method ahead of the united states usual progress is around 3.6 percent with the USA development is around the 2% and you know we create extra jobs hundreds of thousands of jobs due to the fact we now have handed these legal guidelines so you’ll discover that we can do both with the fifth biggest financial system in the world correct in the back of China Germany and in Japan and the us said it simply indicates you the vigor that now we have by going inexperienced and the kind of jobs we created and that i consider that’s what we need to do we would like the entire u.S. Go in that course the entire world to move in that path and i am very very completely satisfied that they’ve joined up here with John when you consider that John has been a longtime buddy of mine and i have constantly admired his passion in regards to the a easy environment and about you realize bringing both parties collectively I imply he negotiated with Lindsey Graham for years a satisfactory first-rate deal that was nearly about to occur and so so I feel that we’re working together on this and i consider that it is a fine notion to bring Republicans and Democrats collectively and of direction i am a fanatic about communication which is a entire different issue secretary tell me so for instance stroll me through what a town hall goes to look like and in in in in West Virginia when you’re in coal country well I quite appear ahead to that actually on account that they’re simply large fiscal possibilities for a West Virginia that are not being utilized there’s what if the humans do not want it’s not that been the situation like that I feel you have to provide persons a alternative John they may be now not even being given a choice right now I mean you mentioned are we gonna again one plan the answer is yes there’s one plan and that plan is to get to net zero emissions with the aid of 2045 or 2050 now how we get there there are numerous specific ideas in the market but the foremost thing is that that’s no longer happening now I mean it can be embarrassing that in the Democratic presidential debates you had a entire bunch of debates wherein there wasn’t one query on local weather alternate and local weather change is is I mean younger we’ve got a young we’ve a variety of younger lively it overall it’s a bit overwhelming secretary I mean seem we I the controversy I participated in we requested fairly slightly on climate change however it’s difficult to chew off and that i suppose that is a part of this stage right here is that it’s so overwhelming how do you sort out it one one piece at a time actually Chuck it is it can be now not it will not be overwhelming and that’s why Arnold and that i and a whole bunch of men and women you know there is a young lady who’s taken two years off from going to Stanford her identify is Katie eater and he or she’s been part of the climate strikes at some point coalition and she or he mentioned collaboration is the important thing to our survival young people get it they comprehend what this is about however they do not need a vote within the board room they shouldn’t have a vote in Congress they wouldn’t have inventory in within the fossil gasoline firms and actually that there are a huge number of jobs to be created right here fastest growing job in the usa in these days a sun power technician 2d fastest wind technician I imply the coal is going down on the grounds that the market is making that resolution so what we wish to do is say the individuals here are the methods wherein take wellbeing well being can also be so much expanded in the USA young people are hospitalized in the U.S. And it’s costing taxpayers fifty five billion dollars a yr given that of environmentally prompted asthma that comes from pollution so we’re speakme about reducing we’re speakme about growing jobs we’re speaking about American protection one of the most people who’s joined us on this effort is general Stan McChrystal right I mean there isn’t a larger Patriot no person has paid his dues extra we’ve got Admirals and Generals who are all coming to the table to help make the argument to americans and to folks on the planet ok that is an international protection dilemma governor handiest agree but I simply want to let you know that for instance in California and Bakersfield where there may be various oil drilling going on there may be extra sun jobs now and Bakersfield and around that subject than their oil jobs men and women are leaving the oil fields and they’re going to work on solar and clean power and stuff like that so that is the type of stuff you indoors with coworkers so it can be only a matter of yeah how do you plan those things we in California have made a first-class plan and we see men and women now leaving the very fuels and coming to the vigor Chuck i need you to come back to that i would like you to come to that town I would really like to come any time for governor we would really like to be there do you ignore President Trump or do you continue to attempt to convince him to change his intellect and would you could have that one-on-one assembly no no to start with I utterly agree again with John when he said you know it’s now not just one character we need to persuade the whole world and that i consider how one can persuade the whole world is by not simply consistently speakme about local weather exchange which doesn’t imply that much to many of the humans as a maverick we’ve executed the polls by way of the Schwarzenegger Institute and you and i’ve pointed out that once we mentioned climate change there was once like of the conservatives there have been handiest 17% interested and inspiration that there used to be a significant danger however as soon as we stated air pollution the numbers went over 50% so we got to keep up a correspondence the environmental group has to keep in touch higher and talk about air pollution when you consider that pollution is a danger correct now and whilst you introduce this piece you talked about in 2050 people can suppose about 2050 to consider about now how am i able to continue to exist how am i able to furnish jobs how can i’m going and and feed my loved ones these are the kind of disorders that’s why it’s predominant they be talking about the wellness hindrance yeah that is how we now have passed all of our strict environmental yeah and coding for time I got i am manner out of time k you guys had been excellent I recognize it extra importantly I recognize you acquired up early on the west coast i’m well conscious of that on this weekend so secretary Kerry Governor Schwarzenegger you talked sufficient where you got out of two political questions I was once gonna sneak on you so we are going to depart that there hello from Washington i’m Chuck Todd and thanks for trying out the Meet the press channel on YouTube click on the button down right here to subscribe and click on over right here to observe the modern-day interviews highlights and different digital exclusives

Bernie’s AMAZING Plan To Save Journalism

Posted in Home Furnishings, Local journalism, Uncategorized on August 31st, 2019
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

>> it’s no surprise that natural mediaoutlets, and i am speakme about media retailers, that do real journalism are facing a verydifficult media landscape. Correctly, neighborhood news has been eaten up by means of thisgiant media conglomerates, and that makes it possible for for company control. Company control of some corporations total of our media. And it’s anything that Bernie Sanders wroteabout within the Columbia Journalism review. So in his piece, he not only sheds gentle onthis large concern in journalism. However he additionally talks about what his solutionswould be as president. So here is what he says. We’re going to institute an on the spot moratoriumon approving mergers of essential media organisations except we are able to higher fully grasp the genuine effectthese transactions have on our democracy. He additionally writes, we will be able to reverse the Trumpadministration’s attempts to make company media mergers even more seemingly sooner or later.We are not going to rubber stamp proposalslike the new plan to merge CBS and Viacom right into a $30 billion colossus. So there’s extra. There’s a lot that he wants to do, and thereare also details that he talks about the concerns he has about media that I wanna get into injust a second. However has any individual, as a presidential candidate,mentioned media conglomerates? I don’t suppose i can believe of a single personother than this instance from the day prior to this. Bernie Sanders announcing that, good day, that is ahuge drawback, this goes in opposition to our democratic system.We need an advised public, so we’d like toactually focus on this trouble. >> Yeah, the only other character, unsurprisingly,in at the least half of of the context, is Elizabeth Warren. She pointed out breaking up the giant digitalcompanies like facebook, Google, etc., which have large digital media accessories. And Elizabeth Warren’s been a lot rough onbusiness pursuits total. However sure, Ana, when you are speakme about themedia conglomerates from natural media, Bernie Sanders is speakme about it. And he is doing it with nuance, and i wannadive into that a bit bit. Due to the fact he says, look, 20,000 jobs have beenlost in typical media over the final decade. Essentially, 3,200 jobs had been lost the mediaindustry just in the final year alone, which could be very massive.1,four hundred communities have misplaced nearby newspapers,no one else is speakme about these traits, k? They usually’re obviously at the presidentiallevel, and this enables individuals to consolidate vigour. After which, when few multi-billion dollar corporationsor average saw the media, they control the message, they manage the framing, and theycontrol a lot more. He additionally criticizes the media for supportingthe popularity quo seeing that of that and supporting company interests.Now, that’s in general verboten, no longer allowed. The leisure of the media then come down on themlike a ton of bricks, and they did. They look at this concept, and close to allthe write-usaare sneering. Although he is seeking to aid the media,they are like, no, you dare to criticize us from the left, which is utterly unacceptable. From the right, you might bash us all daylong, make up conspiracy theories, threaten our lives, and we are going to cower to you. However from the left, in case you have a legitimatethoughtful critique, our emotions are hurt, and we will fake that you are in opposition to us. When for those who read his real inspiration, he is actuallytrying to avoid wasting the media. >> Yeah, exactly. But I imply, seem, I consider it particularly does dependwho the commentary is coming from. So if the commentary is coming from independentjournalists or from contributors who worked in these regional publications who misplaced theirjobs, my wager is these varieties of proposals enchantment to them. However if you are given a multi-million dollarcontract to be a bunch on cable information, and your manufacturer falls beneath this massive media conglomerate,yeah.I mean, you either love this, and which you could’treally say whatever about it, or you hate it seeing that it places your economic future injeopardy, or your very profitable financial future in jeopardy. So let me give you some more of what BernieSanders needs to do. What Trump has performed enables cross-ownershipof newspapers and tv or radio stations. He’s additionally given the green gentle to owningmultiple stations within the identical market. So within the commencing of Trump’s administration,there was once that significant story about Sinclair broadcasting team and the way they’re snatching up nearby stationsall over the nation.And they’re quite monopolizing the news andthe messaging that will get out there, so that’s one example of what Bernie Sanders is talkingabout right here. We will be able to begin requiring important media corporationsto expose whether or now not their corporate transactions and merger proposals will involvesignificant journalism layoffs. >> they are going to. >> Yeah, and they do. Frequently they do, and we’ve got visible that overand over once more. Staff need to receive an choice, I lovethis part. Staff need to be given an possibility topurchase media outlets by way of worker inventory ownership plans and revolutionary trade modelthat used to be first pioneered in the newspaper industry.So oftentimes, the hardworking humans behindthe success of these publications or these television stations, they don’t get paid enough. They don’t have advantages that may actuallyappeal to any common individual who wishes healthcare or a retirement plan. And so he’s pronouncing right here, seem, we’d like tohave the staff get a seat on the desk, have some ownership of the corporation throughthis stock options, and i love that. He’s all about looking out for employees. He additionally fascinated about the necessity of diversitywithin this newsrooms, which i really like. So he also says, additionally, we will passmy workplace Democracy Plan, if you want to raise media employees’ laudable efforts to type unionsand mutually bargain with their employers. >> Yeah, not one of the bosses are gonna likethis. And so the more I read it, the more I thought,man, he is bought a good shot of winning.And so, you understand why? Virtually, you do comprehend why. But the guys on television, and incidentally,it can be now not just television. I suppose so, probably the most egregious violators ofbias within the media is the new York times, NPR, on and on it goes, k? And their base assumption is that this approach isawesome. Any mission to this process and the bosseswho run it’s unacceptable. And so, but the extra they preserve pronouncing that,like a Bernie Sanders would truly trade the method, and he would provide the employees’rights, it can be outrageous. What individuals heard is, Bernie Sanders wouldchange the system, I really like that. Staff would have more lift. Wait, i’m a employee, yeah, tell me extra.>> Yeah, there are extra employees there. >> they’re by accident doing advertisingfor him. And they can not see straight, cuz they may be like,well, all the humans in cost do not like Bernie Sanders, so i am simply gonna hold repeatingthat. Thank you. >> David Sirota, who is on Bernie Sanders’scampaign group, had tweeted anything about how he is been rising in the polls despitethe very negative and hateful coverage towards him within the mainstream media. However i do not think it’s regardless of. I consider that their assaults on Bernie Sanders,as you simply mentioned correct now, helps him. >> Yeah. >> considering that it attracts concentration to these proposalsthat folks, typical american citizens. I am now not speakme about executives’ love, correct? >> Yeah, but appear, guys.How mostly have you heard me say on TheYoung Turks? I imply, if you’re counting a few billion,if you are taking part in drinking video games, you’re obliterated at this factor. American voters don’t like large business,they do not like gigantic media, and so they do not like general politicians. That is headquartered on the polling. All of them poll miserably, 30%, 20%, 10%. Congress once failed a 9%, maybe even 7% inone poll. And each person on tv tells you, americans lovebig business.Howdy, that is who creates the jobs, okay? And americans love giant media like me, proper? Getting paid 10, $20 million a yr. They love that, they love it. And when I support every person who’s robust,they love that. And polished politicians who are constantlychanging their strategy without a principles in any respect, american citizens love that. None of that’s true, none of it’s remotelytrue. So what i’ve been saying and advising publicly,modern candidates, is run towards that. In case you bash these associations, American peoplewill love you for it. Even though the media will yell at you, yougot to brace for impact. And also you obtained to be competent to say damn the torpedoes,damn my colleagues. Cuz they are gonna get their emotions hurtfirst, and they’re gonna go rush out and be like, hiya Bernie, come on. I take cash from Comcast, are you sayingI’m corrupt? I am your colleague, Bernie. Well, sad day for you, then don’t take moneyfrom Comcast. And i’m moving on with my existence. You received to have the nerve to assert that, yougot to have the courage to claim that. And then the media will all yell at you inunison, and that is a difficult factor to deal with in case you’ve in no way dealt with that.Fortunately, i have. So i understand how that feels. But you if you are gonna run for president,you’re gonna win. You obtained to do this. And now that Bernie has commenced to do this healways had the right insurance policies. But he wasn’t honest announcing that, and youheard me say this commonly, back in 2016 and within the commencing of this crusade. He wasn’t being hard ample on the mediaand his damned colleagues. And so, now that he takes a way more aggressivestance, whats up, appear at that rise in the polls. >> like it..