News and data has not made our world more comprehensivible. Speed and technology is one thing. Context, Something Else all together. For me and my colleagues in the school of journalism, serious journalism, real journalism, the idea of journalism we share with our students begins with the simple idea. It is about being there. Not just to get the story, but to help illuminate places. It is often about reporters crossing frontiers in the hope they can bring light to the stories of people who live in the worlds darker places. Yet these days, this kind of journalism comes at a terrible price. And it is that blunt reality that brings us together tonight. John and diane foley and Terry Anderson can attest firsthand to this brutal truth. We are deeply grateful to them. And to my former colleague, david mccraw, for joining us to share their experiences and thoughts about this hard, new world. Today journalists are seen as targets. Not only by terrorist organizations and narcotics cartels, but repressive governments. Since the early 1990s, more than 1100 journalists have been killed and many more kidnapped or detained or driven into exile. The toll includes local reporters, who lived and worked in these troubled places. It includes a growing number of freelancers, americans and other westerners, who have been enlisted to cover faraway conflict zoensz. The center for border and global journal itch was launched last fall to help bring greater focus to the challenges facing journalists everywhere as they engaged in more globalized and a more perilous world. Working across campuses, not only along the border with mexico but in the middle east and afghanistan, we hope to explore programs and initiatives to preserve and extend the kind of free and independent global reporting that is essential to a democratic society. What can we all do as professionals, educators, advocates to support the journalists who are out there now . How can we train and equip them and keep them as safe as possible . Leading this discussion tonight is my colleague, mort rosenbloom, a member and. Ran bureaus in africa, asia, south america and europe. He is the author of several books on reporting. Over his career has filed stories out of 200 different countries. A number of which, mort loves to point out, no longer exist. As mort knows as well as anyone, the essential qualities of a good correspondent have not changed much over time. Now it is about curiosity. It is about intelligence. Importantly, it is about empathy. More than ever these days, it is about courage. The numbers are shocking, but tell only part of the story. Behind the statistics are victims who dont know what might happen next and families who can only hope and pray for Something Better than the worst. In some regions, death follow for journalists rises with an outbreak of war. As happened in Southeast Asia in the 1960s and 70s. If other places, such as a nearby border, the danger is ever present. Since 1992, 32 journalists have been killed in mexico. Until the 1980s, most victims were casualty of war. Journalists were seen as observers of the news, not part of it, and were seldom targeted. Then in 1985, Terry Anderson, the Associated Press bureau chief in beirut, was muscled into a green mercedes. Seven years passed before he could meet his daughter born while he was chained to a wall. His captors were on the fringes of the iranian hezbollah. One told him, as if you were some comfort, dont worry, this is political. When anderson asked, his guard gave him a new, red bible. Associated press executives worked with u. S. Officials to get him released. The situation changed after 9 11. Journalists were targeted for what they wrote, what they represented. In 2002 wall street journal reporter daniel pearl was executed as he pursued al qaeda activity in pakistan. In the years since, a number of journalists who have become victims has increased at an alarming rate. The threat can be seen clearly in france, near the normandy beaches. In a treeshaded park, a monument to reporters, 28 columns have been engraved since world war ii with more than 2,000 names. Men and women fallen on battlefields or assassinated or killed in accidents while covering the news. Since 2001, many of the names have been those of journalists hired in their own societies to get to stories that outsiders cant reach. Other names are those of freelancers, who venture from the United States and other nations to cover the news in the most dangerous areas without continuing support of a large news organization. Now, with so many freelancers in the field, people such as New York Times attorney david mccraw, are working to confront the challenges facing journalists and families in these perilous situations. This year a fresh named engraved in the monument symbolizes the spirit and courage, not only of freelance journalists, but also the family and friends who support them. James foley survived in imprisonment in libya and then went into syria. He was executed on camera. Foleys message about the importance of news was clear. The reporter must be there to tell the story. His parents now work tirelessly to make sure that an easily distracted world hears this message. His death is no reason to turn away from the danger. On the contrary, in america, and every other nation, people must support journalists who choose to go into dangerous places on the publics behalf. Thank you all for coming. We have some Serious Business to discuss this evening. In fact, what can be more important than our eyes and our ears in the most perilous places of an overheating planet. . Just some background before we start. About two seconds after i met diane and john foley at the annual war correspondents award in france, i knew this evening had to happen. People seldom get so warm and wonderful, as youll see. Their courage and strength are beyond any words i can come up with. Among those white columns you just saw, we mourn also camilla page, a young french reporter killed on the border in the Central African reporter. Diane put aside her own grief to comfort her distraught mother. The foleys message is wise and unwavering. We need those brave, prepared journalists out there in the ugliest parts of the world. To reflect realities that we all must understand. We have to learn the hard way, the price is high. Not only them but those at home. The foleys started a foundation, and well talk about that tonight on the home front. Their message brought to mind my old friend Terry Anderson, a colleague from the ap, for seven years, like so many others, ive worn an aluminum bracelet with his name on it. When he emerged from the lions den, a wee slip of a terry, none of us could believe his towering spirit strength of spirit. Today he teaches young people exactly what the foleys tell us. Reporters must be out there. And even today, for terry, its still up close and intensely personal. Sulamae welcoming home her father, is now herself a reporter, covering stories in lebanon and beyond. I asked terry last night if he was worried about her. Duh. Happily enough, some gifted people work tirelessly to help journalist in trouble. A stalwart among them is david mccraw, the New York Times. I have on my script the New York Times fifth amendment lawyer and bill schmidt glanced at it and said david says, well in arizona, maybe the Second Amendment lawyer, but its the first. And i underscored the first amendment. Who is also here with us this evening. Were extremely grateful to have this panel. Im actually the foleys are here because john got tired of shoveling snow in new hampshire, but what the hell. Terry teaches at the university of florida and his gators aint freezing. David accepted bill schmidts invitation without a seconds hesitation. Thank you, again, for coming. When i left tucson from here, actually, this school, in the 1960s to get mixed up in far away mayhem, you had to be pretty unlucky or pretty unaware to get into serious trouble. My first post was the congo, covering a mercenary war with drunkraged rebels with machetes. We knew where they were. We stayed out of their way. In vietnam, the pentagon began trying to limit our access in asia, africa, the middle east, latin america, we journalists were simply observers. Not part of the stories. As someone put it, garnish at the side of the plate. Pretty much across the board, combatants left us alone so we could tell their side. Well, today all thats changed. We are no longer a definable press corps with correspondents who know one another and bosses back home watching our backs. Freelance, independents and local reporters hired at low wages operate on their own. Freelance means, no wages. It means, you get what you sell. Governments arrest them, militia and terrorist groups hold them hostage, gangs with no political purpose kidnap for ransom. So, thats our topic for tonight. What now . And keep in mind, because people tend to forget this, were talking about journalists. If we as journalists ask our government to protect us, were asking them to control us. Its a pretty serious conundrum because thats not what were there. Were not there as representatives of anybodys government or anybodys anything. At the same time, u. S. Citizens elect higher and paid government to do their business. And one Job Description is helping americans stay alive. Were not a policy pawn for any administration. So, let me start with terry. Terry, if you can just give us a brief rundown of how the u. S. Government first worked with hostage families back in the early 80s. And then n your case, the Associated Press, then what changed and how do you see it evolving . The American Government used to look at hostage taking as a criminal enterprise. And just as you do in crimes that involve hostages, whats the first thing you do . You bring in a negotiator. That doesnt mean youre going to give them anything or that youre going to reward them for what theyre doing, but youve got to talk. By the mid80s, by 1985, when i was taken, the government was the Reagan Administration was insisting they would not negotiate with terrorists. As we all know, those old enough to remember the iran contra affair, they were negotiating with terrorists. As a practical matter. Until the negotiations were uncovered, became public, and then they stopped. Up to that point, they were actually talking to the families of hostages. My sister, peg, who many of you may remember, was a front person for the group of families and was very outspoken in her advocacy and pressure on the government to get something done. The point man in the white house was a guy named ollie north, marine lieutenant colonel. And she peg talked to ollie frequently. And then all of a sudden, it stopped. Now when president reagan pounded on the table and said, we do not negotiate with terrorists, he said, we mean it. Its not going to happen. The terrorists, in fact, didnt believe it for quite a while. More importantly, the people in the government that our families had been going to for information and for help, took refusal to negotiate to mean, dont talk to anybody. Including the families. And they cut everybody off. And that has pretty much continued since then. And i think mr. And mrs. Foley can pretty much testify that thats the way it goes. They would have to tell the families, keep quiet. Were doing everything we can. In fact, it was an excuse to do nothing. Which was a real problem. Thank you, terry. Diane, thats starting to sound familiar, from what weve talked about. What has been your experience, you and john . Well, jim had this was jims second capture, if you will. He had been in captivity for 44 days in libya, and which in retrospect was so brief, but at least there his capture was had been witnessed by a New York Times reporter. And we knew he was held by the government. And, thus, the state Department Took the lead rather clearly in that case. And we were in touch with the state department. Actually, it was another person who got him out, but nevertheless, the state department was in touch with us. The second time was very different. Because we had no idea who had taken jim. He did not report back to his colleagues on thanksgiving day, and we received a call from another freelancer, who had been awaiting his return, that jim didnt show up. That they had been stopped at gunpoint and captured. So, we we didnt know what to do. It was just surreal that this would happen again. And jim was freelance, so he had no organization, if you will, behind him, to come and take care of things, you know, take charge. So, we were frantic, really. And fbi eventually contacted us and told us they would be taking the lead because this was a kidnap of an american citizen outside of the country. And, you know, we thought that was good. I mean, we needed help. So, thats how it started. Almost immediately the fbi convinced us to go into media silence. Certainly, the captors felt similarly. In hindsight, i think thats one of my biggest regrets. Media silence helped two entities, one is the fbi and the other is the captors, t. The fbi had no pressure to go forward with jims situation and obviously the captors wanted silence for obvious reasons. So, this went on. And after about six weeks, we were really hearing nothing. Absolutely nothing. We were frantic. We, fortunately, were able to secure the services of a Securities Team through jims paper, global post, and we began our search. But for one year, we really didnt know where he was nor whether he was alive. And at that time, what was most difficult is we really had no person in the government to go to. We had no one who was accountable for jim, if you will, or any of the others who were kidnapped. I started a series of trips to washington, going to state department and to fbi, you know, just to remind them that jim was still missing. We didnt know if he was alive or not and such. And we we were very disappointed. You know, we had no access to anyone with any power or who had any information. And we were not allowed to be part of the effort to gut our son out. I know we can do better as families. At many points i was just appalled at the way we were treated in some instances. I think for a year its important that for a year and a half, diane and i were both told that jims situation was the highest priority. That Everything Possible is being done to bring him home, but they could tell us nothing because everything was classified. What did they tell you, if you would have gone ahead and started thinking about ransom on your own . There was a Senior State Department person, counterterrorism he was with nsc, National Security council. Yeah. We eventually got all four families together. This is roughly in may of 2014. He was very blunt. In fact, on three occasions said the same thing. Number one, were not going after him. Number two, were not going to negotiate. Number three, were not going to pay ransom. And, number four, if you try to collect money, youll be prosecuted, or could with high likelihood would be prosecuted. At that point we realized we were on our own. Unfortunately, we realized two years later. We said, what the heck, i would rather be in jail than jimmy over there. So, we began to raise money in terms of pledges. We didnt want to handle the money. Its very difficult to collect money from somebody or collect donation from somebody who might end in jail. We struggled with that, but we had some very fine individuals who were going to go to bat with us. Thanks. David, as it turns out, theres a new Public Information person, department of state, whos one of us. A guy named douglas franz, a tremendous Investigative Reporter at the los angeles time times. I worked with him after 9 11. We were both in pakistan, trying to get across the border. Doug is doug gets it. Hes a really good reporter. And hes gone over he was working on the Senate ForeignRelations Committee and now hes up at the state department. So, my question, david, is mean, this came up the other day at the museum in washington. His answer was, look, these are american citizens and were going to do the best we can. And this is being studied very seriously at high levels. Did something come from that, david . Well, i hope so. First, i want to thank the university for having me. And i want to thank everyone that set this up, to be up here with these three brave people. It is an honor for me. My connection to this topic came about because in 2008, one of our reporters, david rhode, was kidnapped and i became the person designated to run the response to that and work with his family and work with the government. And that was shortly followed by another kidnapping and then by detention of four of our reporters in libya. And as a result of all that, i it was such an unpleasant experience, such a difficult experience, i really ended up committing a lot of my time to, how can we avoid being in that position in the first place . So, i spent a lot of time working with people at that time about security. On the government question, that mort asked, its clear to me from those experiences that the government can and should do better. Diane and john and i were talking earlier, and their experience as a family actually is not that different from what we experienced, even though we had access. The New York Times, a powerful institution, we know people, we can get people to come to the phone. And still the failure of the government to share information was extraordinary. There are many, many good people working in government who are very helpful. Doug franz has always been extremely helpful. On everything that we need. And we appreciate that. But structurally the idea that the fbi is lead leagagency make absolutely no sense. The fbi does not have the capacity to solve crimes committed in syria or in afghanistan. And they shouldnt be the lead agency. To give you the one example, and then move on, which is that on thanksgiving day of 2008, the taliban called our bureau in kabul to negotiate for david, who was being held. The fbi was assisting us, very helpfully, by coaching our reporters how to handle those calls. This call came. The fbi could not get marine clearance to