Off the fall season. Arenado speakers you mentioned ed freeman he has the Professor Business Administration at the Darden School of uva. Today hes going to discuss his latest book which is so relevant given the current discourse that is going on in our nation. He calls the word and the most powerful word in our language. Here to find out why the power of and responsible business without tradeoffs. Thanks very much for having me. Its a real treat to be back even if only virtually at fordham. Many years ago in a fit of youthful idealism that you mentioned i have that ph. D. In philosophy. That was great. My father said well you will never have to worry about it job because they just opened a bunch of philosophy factories at the interstate. You will be fine. I got very lucky. Ive always taught in Business Schools but i want to recapture today if i can fact as an optimist and idealism in the shadows of this awful pandemic and the real devastation that has occurred in the world in many communities. I still remain incredibly optimistic that we are going to find our way out of this, that we are going to find our way to Racial Justice and that we are going to build a better world which is what all of us i think would like to do. I want to focus on the mistake that exists about ethics and capitalism. There is an old story about business thats a deeplyrooted all over the world trades not just in the u. S. And you know the old story. Its about the money. Its about profits. Last week was the 50th anniversary of the very famous paper by Milton Friedman and the only task of managers is to make as much money as possible for shareholders. That old story may have been useful at some point or they dont want to know but its not very useful. Its not very useful anymore. The idea that making money is all that matters and the idea that shareholders are all what matters and businesses about greedy people trying to do each other in a people only worry about their shortterm economics and when i tell somebody the specifics that people at the managed not to laugh or they have to make jokes comics and oxymoron like jumbo shrimp or Theatre Company theoretical subject. Ever since the Global Financial crisis youve seen an increase in the clarion call for can we think about business or capitalism different . Im going to use those two terms interchangeably. Im kind of a modern day adam smith fan. Smith never use the word capitalism. He did write a lot about ethics and most people dont read. The aftermath of the Global Financial crisis on increase in the calls for reform. I would juxtapose that against several rome spread the first trouble him is called the 70 problem. The 70 problem comes from a study that looked at engagement, how much are people engaged in there were . The 70 number was done in the u. S. In many places the world and the few places like singapore and others and 70 of people are in engaged and i love this or actively and engaged in their jobs. If you are unengaged you just dont care. If you are actively and engaged i would guess you would show up every day to take the place down. Thats a real problem, a real practical problem. I have asked many ceos what are the numbers in those organizations and they all like to think its better but some would say well you know we have to work on this. Theres a standard issue thats been there for a long time about trust in business, trust in business and executives. Youve seen studies around 20 . People trust the business less than they trust doctors in less than they trust lawyers which hurts to some of us. Global financial crisis. And along comes the covid19 pandemic and along comes the movement by black lives matter and search for Racial Justice. Reed business is not immune to any of these things. He has a part of plate in all of them. But we are not going to solve these problems with more of the wrong thing. Not going to solve these problems trying harder to maximize shareholder value is were not going to solve these problems by saying business as just a bunch of greedy pastors trying to outcompete each other. Always acting in the short term, self interest. And what we need is a new narrative. A new story of business. A new way to think about business. We needed a new conceptualization. Another good news is that its fairly dark beginning in the good news is that this is happening the world. And it is easy to forget about it. Thinking about the incredible interests, starting in the 60s. But we have seen incredible renewal of interest in Corporate Responsibility and sustainability. We have seen entrepreneurship come to the floor. An organization adjust capital. Like an exclusive capitalism. I richard script whose name i always forget. Like the gri and the impact. In the Conscious Capitalism and socially responsible investing. All of these movements and they are all founded by the Real Companies doing business in a different way. I was at a meeting at the white house and the rainy days of the Obama Administration and the point in the meeting was to try to figure out what is the right brand. And what with the government in particular, the department of labor, what do they do to encourage this movement. I just kept thinking what is the right way and how does this get branded. Wouldnt it be better if we all sort of pull together under one brand. And im sitting there for a while and began to think that maybe it was the wrong question. Very different question. Maybe a better question is to think about what are the four or five absolutely necessary things that whatever the brand turns out to be, this new story of business and capitalism as to deal with. And so we decided to write, bobby, one of my colleagues and also martin, colleagues at notre dame. We decided to write the the power of and, the responsible business without tradeoffs and suggest that there are five key areas and principles, five key ideas and maybe six or seven and we focus on these five. They are connected. They give us a way out of thinking about business in the old story. But they do require a fair amount of imagination. So i wanted just briefly talk about these five, and focus on any of them in the q a that you want to. And the first one says that we need to think about the idea of purpose. This is that purpose of businesses to make as much money as you can. Hello, i need red blood cells to live. But it doesnt fall from that that the purpose of my life is to make red blood cells. Even when i might have to focus on making red blood cells, had a fun weekend a few years ago, i got my hips replaced. That was not a fun weekend. I had a focus on taking red blood cells. And even though thats what i had to do, that wasnt the purpose of my life. A business must have profits. In the idea profits are bad or evil, is like red blood cells saying that they are evil. No, you have to have them. You tell them to live. Im a little bit of a musician. Everybodys cutting and paint. It doesnt matter whether you are forprofit or notforprofit. You have to get paid and invest in the future. So profits are necessary. As of the purpose of the business. And some might say im going to start something to make money. And i saved have a better chance of making money getting a job in egypt starting one. Entrepreneurs start a business because they have a purpose, they have a vision. Want to bring something into being. Purpose is what activates business ideas. Profits follow the purpose. And they are not themselves the purpose of business. Theyre not come. Its a little bit like some of you may know people who spent a lot of the time focusing on being happy. Everything they do is about being happy, they gotta be happy. Etc. These are the most miserable people on the planet. Because they just dont understand that happiness is an outcome. An outcome of what your relationships are, what you are doing with your life, what your purposes. Etc. Profits of the same way. Profits are simply not come of how you make your purpose real. What are the ways in which you create value for your stakeholders. We need her for purpose and profit. The second point is no surprise, to any of you that are familiar with anything that ive done since the late 70s. A written about this idea of stakeholders. I thought that was the way business worked. Even on a dirt farm in georgia, we knew you had to deal with the folks who could affect you and that you could affect. That seemed like just complete common sense to me. It always has. Have never understood why people thought that was a radical idea. Even an interesting idea. But that there were some interesting ideas in this old book i wrote called Strategic Management stakeholder approach. I didnt thank you so the most interesting one. I did not realize how embedded the old story was, how much and what my practical friends would say, where in the grip of that old story. Integrate the need to break. Look, any business has always and will always create and sometimes destroy, the value for customer supplies. In the communities. And the people with some money. Building and leading a business means getting these things going in the same direction. Even if in the most staunch person in the world. And all you care about his shareholder value spring how you will you do it. Are you going to have supplies to make it better. You can have employees, who are engaged in communities and want to there if you do that youre lucky, you might makes money. So sing the stake holders versus the shareholders is a complete mistake. These are interdependent. You cannot look at them as one versus another. In the second thing to notice here is that thinking about stakeholders is a fundamentally different way that most people want to think about business. Because you had to think about them in relational terms. You have to think about stakeholder relationships. In the relationship is very different than a transaction. Transactions are oneoff things that might be repeated but relationships endure over time. You expect them to continue. And elise the personal relationships, we kind of get restored to pray wife and i have been married for 43 years. She is the reason that i went to work in the first place. This full we went to grad school and followed her there. I know if i went next door, and of in our house we are, and i said, you know and keeping score and i think you owe me three. Im very certain of what the outcome of that would be. Since she is a Second Degree black belt. Dont think it would be good for me. Relationships, you dont have to keep score. Wish push comes to shove, help each other. That is how business works. It is not just this transactional thing. There are some parts of business that are like that. But for the most part, to build a great company, you build better relationships. So his purpose and profits as stakeholders, and shareholders. Business does not exist in this world, imagined by economists. Where is perfect competition, all information is paid and price etc. Etc. We dont have that story goes. Business in the real world is connected with other Society Institutions. And we as actors, we are at once, consumers, and sometimes employees, citizens, parents, partners, patients it is very hard to separate out what institution from another. We need to see business as connected in society with these other institutions. And to try and understand how business can partner with them if you like. To improve. This is also true if you think about we call the business embedded. And one of the things we know is we cannot forget about not only are intangible resources that are tangible resources. And so thinking about the sustainability and what it means, and how business can be connected. So lots of other Society Institutions is a problem. Its a problem but especially today, in the u. S. And other places of the world because of capitalism. Because of some businesses and cocoons with people in government the make special deals for themselves. Here the case is not let the markets work enough and not seeing businesses apart of society. But rather im doing this to make as much money as i can. We need, for going to solve problems like global warming, we really need people to start businesses and use their creative imaginations. A human complexity principle, and the idea behind it is that were not one dimensional of our shortterm answers. There are people like that. We call them sociopaths. And for the most part, we elect them to a political office. And i just want to say thats a completely nonpartisan statement coming from me. Human beings, what are they. Well we can be selfish of course. And we can be incredibly caring. Anybody who has been in love for anyone whos ever had a child, knows that this idea of focusing on our rational self interest is just a logic mistake. That is not what human beings are. Ive often said what a human is and can be illustrated by disciple that i have here. Think of the vocabularies that we had to literally invent to get to iphone. It in terms in the problems the histories, we had to invent a vocabulary about glass. We had to invent the information on the inside. What a human being is a set of what, or a human being is a creature who invents vocabulary to solve problems together. To actually realize those solutions. Thats what business does. In times that we recognize that. Business works because we can Work Together to create something. And no one of us can create alone. Its not the urge to compete that is so important. It is the urge to create, to be a part of themselves and to Work Together in relationships with others. That is what capitalism and more and it does high time. [inaudible]. That they would set lots of examples of companies that are doing this. This is eds wish list, dont take it that way. The way the world should be, it is rather wouldve tried to argue is this is actually happening in the world. But in such the grip that sometimes we dont see it. It in the final issue is that weve got to put this in ethics together. In most people to the truth and keep their promises. But if they didnt, will have crisis in society we can talk about the stuff anymore because we can talk about race or gender or cant talk about religion. We think theyre too sensitive etc. That honestly is the deathknell. The society if we cant figure out how to talk critically about the things that affect all of us i think and it is not here for very long. Simply summarize and say, five things. Purpose and profits. Stakeholders and shareholders. A Market Institution in business. People with full humanity and economic interests. It an ethics and business. If we put this five things together, i think we get a very different view of business in a different view of the world. We need moral leadership. We need people who lead critical conversations, not righteous ones. No lectures on moralities. We have to take people where they are and lead them to where they need to be. This requires i believe incredible emotional intelligence, requires humility and i think it is best done with a good dose of humor. If we can address our own values, and authenticity, and contribute to others, were going to have a really good future. It let me end by saying two things. So one take away is are you willing to see the results of your conversations in the newspaper. People always say the new york times, and the washington post. In the papers, they never say show daily progress. Because if they did, the test would be at least five years and is the caption under the picture correct. Even vague idea that you read this two days before somewhere else. It so does not work for us tiny little charlottesville. So we had to invent a new and inventive test is something that i would call the molly test. The names of the kids. Can i go home at the end of the day and say to ben and emma and molly, let me tell you what i did today that i am proud of that i want you to learn from. Because we are not making our organizations or synagogues and community centers, our educational institutions, for not trying to make the places for our children to live in, with that the bar too low. The second thing comes from one of my favorite musicians and guitar player by the name of Warren Haynes, is a great guitarist. Later in government in places like allman brothers etc. Numbering to play slime by listening to him on a video. Now playing a slight guitar sounds like youre basically killing a cat. And that you are doing it because the cat the most pain. Its just the way it sounds. Thats are struggling with this. All of a sudden Warren Haynes stopped and he said, now look. When you put in front play the blues, doesnt really matter how any notes you play. You just have to mean the notes that you play. My challenge to all of you, is to figure out what are the notes that you mean to play. Because in todays world, theres a lot coming at you. Theres an awful lot that we dont know. In listening to somebody like Warren Haynes we became, that one note full of. I wish there is more humanity in that one note that in the hundred others that people complain. I think that is a role to set as well. Let me start to turn it back over to david. It. Host thank you so much and that was great. We have 50 copies of your book. In your book, you give the number of concrete examples of companies that are playing great notes to use your analogy. Can you share a couple of examples and why you chose some of the companies that you chose. Ed sure, there are lots of them. Reed some of them give a lot of press like whole foods. Weve also done and led by a film called fishing with dynamite. And it is a 70 minute town on the shareholders in stakeholder idea for a more of people comment on it including Michael Jensen and others. I would pick out in their three companies. The container store, its a medium sized retailer. In a startup of a company is fully sustainable. Fishing and grain. In a chemical company. There. Interesting companies. We look at nearby which is in the business for very long time. They basically embodied these principles. We looked at tarmacs. Which is revolutionized the used car industry which is to me the used car salesman another used to be the icon of unethical behavior. And there are lots of others per unit is important to note that we are not trying to argue that any of these Companies Get it right all the time. The oldest story tells us, you gotta think about this like faith and centers. Most businesses, they are sinners. They are just in it for the money. There might be a few that are saints. And when the saints make a mistake, see, there just in it for the money. Now the saints and sinners come as a hallmark of the old story. It is changed. Oscar wilde, said look, every saint has a past and every sinner has a future. I dont know any sinners that are sinners all the time. And i certainly dont know any saints as human beings, we are going to do some stuff wrong. And every time we did something wrong, i have to go straight to have cannot go past go, business will not be very interesting. Host mi on here for the next question can you hear me. Okay, to the best of his knowledge, all financed textbooks except for one, said the purpose of the firm is to maximize shareholder wealth. What can we do to get finance faculty and finance textbook authors to wake up. Reed i think we will see them waking up in the near future for several reasons. For one, theres a statement on the share holder value stuff doesnt help very much for you to be have a broader idea of stakeholders freighted to, the principles of responsible investments which there is 9 trillion under management by the banks. The sign with those principles. And three, the ceos letters to the companies about that. So its not that the financed textbooks tell us that technologies of how to do stuff and they are important they just dont help you solve problems. Like how a build a great business. I often ask students how certain they are and that 20 year prediction when theyre doing their cash flows. In the present value. I can even imagine the people do that anymore. It so i am more optimistic about this. And probably your that author of the one that does not do that. You talk about shareholder wealth and i think that is a great idea. I think were going to see more of that. There is no going back. There is no going back. I just cant see it. Host thank you. Theyve written a new book on finance. I encourage everybody to take a look at it. So i have a question from 104 adjunct professors in the school of law. Professor janice is asking, would it be less skip skepticism regarding Business Practices as if they were viewed as a Corporate Governance option to Enterprise Risk Management and shareholder value rather than as a new model. And fighting a study thats asserting a disconnect doing the business roundtable, signatures and aspirations and what theyre actually doing and implementing. Reed for any years i tried to follow the Corporate Governance literature. And the law. Though im not trained in that. I would say first of all, if they are trying to say, look, theres a disconnect between the roundtable and how much they have implemented of course there is. They issued the Statement Last summer. It is a little soon to be trashing it just seems to me. If you look at just capital. They have a website in which what they do is track what the companies have done by the stakeholder but say with respect to covid19. Is there trying to see whether the companies that are around them roundtable, are putting their money where the methods. It just takes time. And again, youve got to avoid the saints in the sinners thing. It and argued persuasively to me, that the idea that the shareholder values is the only objective, is not the law. Shareholders dont own companies. Companies on themselves. Theres an awful lot of myths around that. So its interesting but im not sure we understand, is embedded in the idea that shareholders are what counts. Im not sure we know quite yet but the stakeholder governance. What that is like. And we were told in the 50s, the governors arent really different levels. There is the ferment as a whole. But there are relationships. We need to understand it that as well. So interesting but, im not hopeful of the governance as i currently understand it. Im certain i am behind in that as well. And i apologize for that. Hosted i wonder if you could tk about the history of teaching business for mbas, what you seen over the years. How to get started. Can you give us a little baseline on this is where you think it is going. And has been successful with the mbas. Reed as an academic discipline, really started in the capital. And again primarily, the universities that was in the 50s and 60s. Some philosophers started thinking about this and again primarily from the universities. And they took on to teach Business Ethics. It was a required course in the Business Schools. And began to develop ideas. And patricia especially is sort of the founding mother of the academic, she started the journal of Business Ethics quarterly. And really raised it to a first rate academic thing. I taught for a number years. It never taught ethics. The strategy people really didnt care. Who cared about the stakeholder, when i put this out, im clearly a member of the strategy discipline. In my book was Strategic Management. Enough of what could be more clear. They just didnt care. They were in the grip of Michael Porter and economic theory. Etc. People cared were the people who did social issues and management. Or who did Business Ethics. Those management people were sort of at the time were mostly philosophers. Another sort of thing in between. We did the first required graded course and a Top Business School in 1989. We had a module before then and to be some of the people did too. Maybe there is Something Else the schools did i dont know about. And then in the 90s, more business goals. Chairs for ethics after the scandals of Insider Trading etc. Became. Easy to raise money for the Business Ethics. And more schools again taught. There was this crazy in my mind, idea about teach the Business Ethics is a standalone course for do you do it as a or throughout the curriculum. So my answer to that was to go to 104 finance folks and say you know, every business decision has finance in it right. In the cs. This is that we dont need to teach them five finance course. We need to teach finance across the curriculum. So forget about it course. In its history and the discipline and the technology. In this just had a graded all in the other courses. Thats actually a dumb idea. Just like it is a dumb idea to do that with others. Ethics is far older in any of the business disciplines. So its ironic but play and aristotle, he had a good deal to say about on this. Im just finishing up a book with philosopher Dominic Scott on plato leadership. In which plato has often more insight as a readership than much of the current leadership. So that led to a whole bunch of courses with acclaimed credits and schools that they were doing something but they werent. And on ethics day, most people get it right. It soon is tricky and thinking about how to design a course that is not just avoid disasters. So you may not know, 3000 Community Members were killed given in a Chemical Plant accident. Would you say about that is not the cyst. I say just do that. Its not run your business so that you dont kill people in the community. It is not a hard problem. Try to figure out how you program autonomous vehicles. So that you consult with a call the problem trying to figure out who to swerve from. Trying to figure out what to do about misuse of a machine that can lead to abortion of female fetuses. Thats a hard problem. There are plenty of those. There are also problems that are but i would say, we know the right thing to do. It is hard to stand up and do them. We certainly see that played out in our political life now where people know the right thing to do. But they dont have the courage or they dont have the knowledge of how to stand up. One of my colleagues professor who is invented is called giving points to values. We spent a lot of time trying to figure out where students know what to do in situations where you dont know. And we spend a lot of time with them trying to figure out how to give them practice and standing up for what they know. When they know the right thing to do. Both of those kinds of things are important i think in todays world. There was a longer answer than you needed david and i am sorry. Host is great and it kind of ties in to another question from another colleague. And miguel writes i am fascinated as you know, but you claim there were no tradeoffs. That tradeoffs were just illusions. And he goes on to say that for some illnesses curing a small number of people is better than curing a large number of people. He gives the example of a slight cold versus aids unit and is asking, what is your intuition about how policy seems to be primarily about tradeoff between health and the economy. Do you think this tradeoffs are also false. Reed as miguel knows, not my view that there are no tradeoffs. It is my view that if all you look for our tradeoffs, all you will finds tradeoffs. But it is possible if we use our imaginations to avoid tradeoffs. To try to figure out how to have both sides. And i think this example about framings, framing the problems is a problem or tradeoff between health and the economy is, they say in the press all of the time, professor freeman, we need profits for do we need ethics. Thats like asking me if i want to hearts or a long period of one book of those things read we had to be able to figure out how to keep people as healthy as possible and with jobs and a thriving economy. If you friend that is a tradeoff, that is what you will find. We try to argue in this book is to stop framing it as a tradeoff. You dont have to. I think if you go back to what i said, that the human beings are, we invent vocabulary to solve our problems. Nelson invent vocabulary 70 tradeoff. Sometimes you have to make tradeoffs. Sometimes you just cant figure it helped. But, that is a failure. It is a failure of imagination. How any business goals spend time and effort helping their students build their creative imagination. And i dont mean just courses and creativity. I mean, spending a lot of time studying and practicing the creative arts. He built creative imagination, unfortunately not through cases. You can do a little of that but you do it through music and art and literature. And their creative. Theater. And we dont start doing that and visits schools, dont think it will be much left for us to do. Because ai will do it. So think this idea, do a couple of ceo friends of mine said that once you start not been for tradeoffs. Looking to avoid tradeoffs, you get better it. And its a matter of how you frame the problem. I would only add to this in one of the most ingenious note tradeoff companies was enron. They figured out a way around the tradeoffs. They were of either downright illegal. It so theres no guarantee here in a tradeoff gives you the best world. But if you dont frame it, if you frame it is looking for tradeoffs, im certain that is what you will find. Im just suggesting theres more value to be creative. Ed thank you for unit do you prioritize stakeholder groups, one over the other or our employees increasingly important given several of the new social trends then i would just add that we have someone speaking at some time ago that we talked about, hes a ceo of paypal. We had constituencies, shareholders and customers and employees, he said he focuses on his employees. Because if theyre happy the other two will then be taken care of. How do you feel about that. Reed i think there are lots of ways to run a business. Think especially if you start thinking about what entrepreneurs do. Sometimes the most important stakeholder. But sometimes they are the least. Sometimes the employees of the most important supplier is. Cant get the code from your supplier to do your app, youre not going to do very well. So think it is hard to make a call and says, this with the academics want us to do. They want me to tell them once and for all, what the priorities all are for all cases and for all businesses and for all times. Thats just the fools hand. No one can do that. And the point is, the theoretical point is that stakeholders are intertwined. Their interests are or have to be coordinated. Like to think about it. I would use the metaphor, that you have to keep them in harmony. White harmony. Because harmony notes are different. But they do sound good together. So the trick here is to get these interests, not aligned because youre never going to get everybody absolutely aligned. The kind of harmonized. In music when somebody plays a disharmonious note, like a passing tone, just means the wrong note, we have opportunities to create more challenge. Because it works because of this. So thinking about harmonizing stakeholder interests gives them all roughly the same direction over time. And im not talking about just for the long term. Ive had 40 years of people that kept telling me the stakeholder stuff. It makes sense in the long term. But it doesnt mean he makes is the short term. In his longterm are it does. In the minute we move the short term, we move the term. It never seems to catch up. And it makes sense in the long term, the comes a point where it doesnt in the short term. Do that now. And i become an increasing skeptic of his shortterm and longterm distinction. The finance theory said to us, they said well we did it mean in the share holder value in the short term, we met long term. And im not much to leave that sort of stuff but a lot of them are. I can only be measured in the short term. We live life in the short term. We have to figure out how to do this, do it now to keep it up. Thats certainly more than a rant than you needed. Host thank you so much. Im going to ask the last question. To question about the standard globally and that they are different around the world. What would you recommend to somebody who wanted to create a start up in different country for example, and china. How would you know when to make the business feel for when to stand your ethical ground. Reed plugin, i would not make a distinction between the business deal on the ethical grounds. I would try to see what it is, will people said when in rome, do as the romans do. For the first one doesnt respect when in rome do what we do in charlottesville. It doesnt respect the person. And then we dont respect ourselves. So the way that ive always something goes when brown, do what we can agree upon. And you have defined or have a conversation about how are we going to do business here. A lot of people japan and the jump in without knowing very much. In my experience, i worked. Much all of the world. The best people from all the world, right down the top three values that you want to teach your children. If you dont have children, right and thought top three in which other people would teach their children. There is a remarkable similarity all over the world read in this respect, love compassion responsibility is working hard. What it means to show somebody respect is very different in new york city from another country. There are cultural differences. But i think that the moral differences are relatively smaller and we think about. So i wouldnt say that you really have to understand the culture. If you are dealing with and try to come to terms with whether you could live in that culture or not. It including, could you explain this to your children. Or to your closest friends. It i dont know anymore magic in that ethics needs to be about a conversation. Its a conversation about her hopes and dreams. The conversation about what the meaning of our lives is going to be for ourselves and others. As a that we need to be engaged in. Much all of the time i think. Both in schools and in our businesses. Ed this a very easy conversation, one hour just like your book. Statement weeknights this month, were featuring book tv programs is a preview of what is available every weekend on cspan2. Tonight we focus on neuroscience and healthcare. Beginning with David Eagleman in his book, i wired. And another vote bottle of lies. Later, lisa moscone, and the double x rain. This arsenate p. M. Eastern. Into a book to be this week and never weekend on cspan2. Book tv on cspan2 has top nonfiction books and authors every weekend friday saturday at 1 00 p. M. Eastern, more recent virtual southern festival of books, authors marsh inverted in winkler, reflective life. And others discuss the gym pro era in the south. Then at 7 45 p. M. , staff writer discusses his book joe biden. Life in the rent and what matters now. On sunday, 1 00 p. M. Eastern, the southern festival of books, generalist talks about his book deep justice. About a civil rights case which helps to reaffirm the right to a trial by jury in most criminal cases. An author and ar their thoughtsn Investigative Journalism and its role in the democracy. Then and i p. M. Eastern on afterwards, professor talks about his book american contagions, epidemics and the law from smallpox to covid19. Hes interviewed by Georgetown University law professor. Watch book tv, this weekend it on cspan2. You are watching book tv on cspan2. Every weekend with the latest nonfiction books and authors. Cspan2, created by americas Cable Television company is a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. Host welcome back to our centennial speaker