A little bit of our live addition of reliable sources this morning. A lot to talk about even in reaction to what Kellyanne Conway was saying. Let me start with the former covering obama presidency. And then devika patrick, the ceo and founder of taxonomy. Well talk about facebooks role in the future of news. They were covering the clinton campaign, and now doing abc six years ago, Kellyanne Conway just said the press is negative of the man we cover every day. Are you presumptively negative . Im cynical and thats my j job. Not skeptical cynical . I think we have to be a little bit of both given this administrations relationship with the truth. And how tough it is for us to get at that right now. Do we start our day, and i think i can speak with all of us to sit in the Briefing Room everyday, and a negative manner . Absolutely not. Thats not the tone from my perspective of our coverage. My sense is that this perception that there is an adversarial relationship much more comes from the white house them from our end of the Briefing Room. They won an adversarial relationship where they perceive this to be the case, were just doing our jobs. I dont think the complaints they have are any different than the Obama Administration has had about coverage or negativity your any other one. You you think same complaints but theyre louder about it . I think so. He was unhappy with coverage to. What about policy coverage versus style. Just now kelly and was saying what about the border, political and everyone else cover that yesterday, im not sure why she said it wasnt covered. What is your impression of that complaint about lack of policy . I covered the Obama White House and started in 2007 and eight. I can guarantee you that i heard the exact same thing from the Obama White House that political cared way too much about other things and do not cover policy. I covered health care and away i guess i would basically hear the same thing and sean spicer said this morning that they want us to cover policy, the challenge is that the white house itself is very focused on intrigue and he was up and whos down. It is not just the press engaged in this so i would say this is like a longstanding complaint, we do cover policy, we have 125 reporters who cover policies alone. Thats a Huge Investment in what is going on. We give it play and yes i would maybe give them up point and that they typically do pretty well, people are interested in whats going on, the differences this white house engages with our reporters to talk about whats going on in the white house. Thats what spicer and others push back and try to internally say dont talk to reporters. Think they backstab each other for leaking. I think theyre saying dont talk to reporters, they said privately. We had a story two days ago where we quoted six people inside 30 talking about the 100 days. Thats a remarkable level of people leaking and talking to us. I mise fascinated and i talk about this a lot, seems like its happening mormor in every story the number of sources that it are being reported get bigger and bigger. They say we spoke to 18 sources today, its a sign of how much people are talking. You asked about policy versus intrigue, i would say until syria last week through a percentage out there, 80 or 70 of the content that gets asked about her discussed is the press corps asking about who is doing what to whom inside the white house and or can you clarify something the president tweeted about. A lot of this is self generated the fact that were not talking about policy. The president s anti media tax came up earlier. When asked from your perspective, what has the impact been from this white house . Has it hurt us with our audiences or not . I think it has created a more challenging environment. Are people trusting what your reporting . I dont have data on that, i feel the pressure of the divided environment and my response to that is how i set the tone for newsroom and how we report and reminding our reporters and editors that the basic rules of journalism still apply in an environment where doesnt feel normal is still imperative that we conduct ourselves just as journalists would. You verify information, you try to get as many sources as possible try to be transparent about how we got the information, doing that and adhering to what the basic rules of journalism are in giving people a chance to respond, engaging with them that doesnt change. If we do our jobs like were always supposed to do thats our best insurance for the long term. Were in a weird environment right now. It might not be like this in five or ten years. All i can do is make sure my newsroom is living up to the standards of journalism i learned years ago. Getting as many sources as possible, you really want to have a preponderance of evidence feel completely confident about what youre putting now. Thats good for journalism. Were under scrutiny that involves response. A divided but connected world. Thats the title of the session. David, how do you view facebook and other social media impact on the first 100 days. I could make the case that his tweets dont matter that they only matter when cnn and politico report them. Because on twitter hes not reaching that many people. However i can also say that it allows him to go around the media on a daily basis. The bigger point is that the landscape changes everything. This well programmed morning started exactly right, not only with the Pulitzer Prize winner but someone who won a Pulitzer Prize using social media to include his audience as his source. And to create a collective process. The fundamental difference of a connected world is that it is a participative age. Everybody wants to participate and they will whether you like it or not. Every person in this room has one of these. When theyre on a theyre not just receiving, their broadcasting. I think his tweets matter a lot. One thing i would, tell, the thing that was said in the Journalists Panel about how trumps tweets cannot be responded to come you cant followup like you could in the press conference, thats a legitimate complaint but on the other hand if you listen to what happened with faron holt when he used trumps handle and a tweet about his philanthropy and then trump called him, because you can actually tractor comment to the president in a way you never could before. I might argue that is a counterbalancing factor. Regarding facebook versus twitter, think its easy and washington in particular and given we have a president who is twitter centric to forget the primary way most people get their information is through facebook. Probably not just in the united states. Definitively on a global level the primary source of information for peoples facebook. In all but three or four countries. That is a big change that will continue to change the landscape. Theres more we could say to follow that. Your same facebook is the internet and the news to a degree we may not appreciate. Its a place where people receive the news and because it is a twoway medium it creates a context fundamentally new to have the ability to react in a position were formerly you are just a passive. He said some reporters tweets were a hot mess during the campaign this was an issue, somewhere printed out and she would show examples. Do you worry or doublethink before you tweet. Yes, it goes back to how we started the conversation. The pressure is on all of us more than ever to not screw up. To get everything right. Twitter is a medium is no different than going on the year on world news or gma. You cant screw up on twitter or on air, theres no differentiation anymore between the outlet any of us are on i want to go back to what you are talking about right now in terms of how the social media impacts us in real time. Just yesterday in the press briefing when im sure all of us were aware that sean spicer made that comment about the holocaust in syria that his sons blown up, rightfully so. It kind of landed in the press briefing. None of us really knew what to do with it. It took five minutes or so and im looking on my phone scene from the news desk at this thing is blowing up. When you say hey do you want to respond to this, it was at real time in the press briefing the comment was gaining traction. We give them the opportunity to clarify and that do not go well for him and he ended up doing a apology tour all night. This white house is even struggling on what to do with this. Thats a fascinating example. I do not know thats how it happened. Weve heard quite a few times this morning particularly from fleischer pulmonary that the press is biased i found that anachronistic point of view. The fact fox news is the number one cable channel. We cannot have the session we had here this morning without paper being represented. Were in a new landscape where there is a broader range of voices in the media generally. This because the internet made it possible, fox notwithstanding. So that anecdote goes to show the tail is wagging the dog a little bit. The world is much bigger than the press and i think that the internet has broadened the range of voices dramatically and included everybody. There is a professor at harvard that did a study on the media landscape and actually the landscape on the right is bigger than those in the center and on the left. One of the scary things is that there is almost no communication across the divide just doing a mathematical analysis of traffic on the internet which is disturbing. The biggest story about the future of news is those two alternative realities. Breitbart versus the New York Times. Was there anything facebook or other companies can do . That is a profound gaping wound. That is a question there asking themselves. Anybody who has read and if you havent you should read Mark Zuckerberg extraordinary essay about a month ago where he contrarily acknowledged that fakeness was a problem. Can you remind us about november . You had them on stage a few days after the election. This is where he said its a crazy idea that fakeness affected the election, which he is now essentially retracted. So youve seen him evil. I have a lot of respect about Mark Zuckerberg. His extraordinary but he is racking his brain about this. There are extremely conscientious people of facebook asking themselves what does it mean that we are the fundamental landscape of information dissemination. I think its scary that society and all my respect for the company that a commercial enterprise and in the position of having to make the decision theyre going to have to make about how they prioritize public dialogue. It is truly a global issue. There is a great story in the guardian about a week and a half ago about how this fake news problem is almost every country. In germany alone their 500 people working for facebook in berlin combating fakeness in german. The taiwanese government is worried about what facebook is doing. Its hard for a company to do it. Im not sure company should do it but thats a position wherein. We invited facebook to be here today but they declined. Youre talking about last summer they said we dont have responsibility and it sounds like now they do have responsibility. The responsible people. But they let me post live in spam and whatever i want on facebook. They didnt have to do that. Its not that easy for them to police all 2 billion people in real time. You have to keep that in mind. The existence of these platforms should be put on us because we are making the big by using them. Whose faults, if anything. I do think facebook takes several seriously. I dont think they have the answers for these problems. Doesnt outlet like political think about writing stories to reach folks who prefer an alternative reality where its real or that the pope did endorse donald trump. We feel a need to report on what is the facts. On pizza gay tour if it is donald trump claiming he created 600,000 jobs on his watch. Providing the context for that, thats what we attempt to do. So yes, that is not our soul mission these days, but when we are presented with a glaring factual inaccuracies, i think we do have an obligation to make that clear in the course of our writing and reporting. Its interesting to watch the evolution of this over the course of the campaign into Donald Trumps candidacy in presidency and how we as a media has struggled to correct the record. Lets just take the tweet on wiretapping for example. To a have to . At what point do we say in our stories, print or digital otherwise, this is just not true. I think were now at that point where we are doing that. I think it took us a while to get there. There is a sense of, is that our job is immediate to be Fact Checking every single thing. Can we possibly fact to check everything were reporting on question i dont know if we can. But i do think were doing it much more. If we go to Fact Checking to narrative checking when he said there 600,000 jobs created what is he really think . You could make the case that this white house has been conventional. Conventional media has not been doing live, live shows with the president are creating a new form of media through social networks in a way that has been all that disruptive. Weve seen some experimentation but the world has not been flipped on its head the last 12 weeks. I agree, i think there are tools white house can be using that the Obama White House used to great effects. Alternative ways to reach out to folks through different platforms. Using the white house media apparatus to do videos and do their own news focus projects. I have not seen that yet. That is only three months in. Its early going. We saw a more nimble media in terms of using all of the possible tools at their disposal. We see the typical twitter, the fact that sean spicer does media briefings every day i think is a good thing. That is something he threatened not to do at the beginning. He is doing it because as i saw, you get in there and you realize the power of being able to command an audience for 45 minutes, and our, and as he does he is changed in a way that he reads our prepared remarks at the beginning of his briefing to get out a message. When the president decided to bounce syria the last week, the value of the press pool was clear. It was 1030 or 11 00 p. M. At night and he had a press pool ready to broadcast what he did. People realize the power of having this White House Press corps there to broadcast what he does. Was anything to learn from that night of live coverage in the networks . Some shoddy audio, the night of the serious strikes, did you see anything about media tactics or techniques that stood out to you . Nothing that comes to mind. We disappointed the Audio Quality . Certainly. There was questions about the rush to the nature to rush it. Is the first time anything like that happen they have to get the technology together, that is not the biggest offense in the world. In terms of coverage the white house policy when it comes to military action we will tell about yo after the fact. What predictions you share your conference and what would you share this audience about what well see happen between now and 2020 more were talking about reelection . Any politician with a head on the shoulder should be emulating trump as much as they can in terms of twitter and social media presence. It serves them well. Theres a major differentiator before that he tweet so much. Its a good thing that he has a direct pipeline and channel to his audience. Frankly, good leadership probably do that from now on. One of the ironies about the Obama Administration that many of us in the tech world were critical about his he got elected because of social media. And then there is none and evidence to speak of. He didnt use it to govern our martial community of support to his policy. Trump is definitely doing that. Whatever you say about the briefing and is not my world, what happens in the white house Briefing Room is a little bit beside the fact at this point because there is another set of channels that exist and ultimately media is going to have to operate more in those channels than the old one. I really do think, especially when i heard fleischer talk, theyre sentimental for something that is no longer the landscape. Do you agree . Yes, no. As a journalist we need that Briefing Room. There is a huge value for both sides of this. The president needs that to get his message out. He can circumvent the media as much as he wants but you cant get it Briefing Room out and hundred 40 characters. Maybe he will tweet that out prove me wrong. In terms of us going forward, the mission in terms of reporting is no different than it was when i started the career and for all of my colleagues that came before me. Its the truth and it matters now more than ever and we cant screwup trying to get there. Stay in your lane into your job. It is no different now. So do you think that is enough, reporting the truth,. As opposed to what . Whats the alternative . Carrie, what about politico and its views of news. How is the the company been cheating to adapt starting up here . Back what i said earlier is its an intensive process of examination of all the stories that we out, stories we were going to have an empire that will get scrutiny. For looking new ways to reach new audiences and new forms of storytelling, new to get the message out, thinking about my newsroom and not only racial, but geographic diversity, political diversity that is as well. Its also a time where i spent a lot of time talking to reporters about how theyre doing. Our newsroom folks have gotten threats and mailed to their home and there in a very, sort of, difficult time doing their job. That can wear on a newsroom. I have to be conscious of that and make sure that i, as an editor, are a psychologist for some folks. Im monitoring the room to see how people are doing. Its a different environment than the white house i covered in their dewey. Work but it can be adversarial but that on hidden stories that the white house is very accessible in a lot of ways. My reporters and other reporters, theres a lot of access. Thats a good thing. Its maintaining a sense of doing a good job, stick to the principles, be aboveboard, our business is, we are nonpartisan newsroom back what youre describing is evolution, not revolution. Doesnt revolution. Doesnt sound like youre seeing revolutionary changes right now ive been asked that question a lot. I agree with philia where theres cores that we have to stick to but im