Marty Baron: News Maker

he's kind of the dean of American journalism right now. Yeah, and not just because he was portrayed in the movie Spotlight by Lee of Shriver, yes, but also because he's probably the most skillful, experienced, courageous newspaper editor in America and at the Washington Post, he's really made a name for himself by having the courage to take on the

new administration and to take on Donald Trump. Brian, you and I were completely geeking out because we got to talk to Marty at a conference that was organized by The Information, aation which was founded by a friend of yours, Jessica Lesson. Jess and I went to college together and she created Harvard. Yeah, your safety school came. It preempt

your favorite joke. But The Information is kind of a new kind of tech newsletter where people pay for content there are no ads, and it's popular among a lot of Silicon Valley insiders. And so we talked with Marty and Jess about the future of the media industry, about d C and the Trump era, and of course about how technology is changing all of this. That's right, And just a few months after Marty became the top editor at The Washington Post, the paper was purchased by Jeff

Bezos from its longtime owners, the grand Family. Now you all, I'm sure know that Jeff Bezos is Amazon dot COM's founder and CEO. And ever since the sale went through in two thousand thirteen, I've really wondered what this transition was like and how the Washington Post is merging technology and some of the greatest journal is um that's being produced today. So that was the first question I asked Marty. How has a tech owner and a tech mentality changed

his job and the mission of the Washington Post. Sure, we'll have changed it dramatically and immediately. So when our mission previously had been described as foreign about Washington, certainly recognizing that Washington was the location of the nation's capital, but we were we had pretty much a regional focus. Uh. And when Jeff came in. Uh, he said that that wasn't the right strategy for us, and he immediately changed

our strategy to be focused on becoming national and even international. UH. And you know, he said that the Internet had taken a lot of white things away from us, obviously the protection that we had against a competition of all sorts,

but it had also given us some gifts. UH. And the primary gift that it had given us was essentially free distribution, and it would be crazy for us not to take advantage of that, particularly given the Washington Post brand, Uh that it was no nationally, it was known internationally and had the opportunity to become a national news organization. And that was the fundamental change that took place for us.

You know, I've always thought that the media outlet that figures out the secret sauce between technology and content was going to win the day. And I have to say, I think the Washington Post is the closest I've seen to really making that combination. And I imagine, Marty, when you started out in this business, you had didn't have to worry about a B testing, algorithms, programmatic advertising, sponsored

content and all that jazz. How do you balance sort of technology and content and are you worried that all these things are going to have a negative impact on quality journalism? Right, Well, it's true that those Uh, I didn't have to worry about those things, because those things didn't exist when I got into the business forty years ago. Uh. And there was actually, uh the people who were involved in the newsroom really weren't involved at all on the

business side. There was people talked about the wall between them. Uh. You know are certain things where we we don't share with them, but there are other things where we actually have to collaborate. So you know, fundamentally, I think that UM technology has just changed the way that we tell stories. Uh. And I think I think of it as uh, the

Internet and all that it is brought about. All digital platforms now represent a different medium or actually different mediums for us, in the same way that when radio came into existence, there was a different way of communicating with the audience that you didn't just get up there and read a newspaper story. And when television came along, you didn't read a radio script and you didn't read a newspaper. There was a different way of communicating with the audience.

So with the Internet. The newspaper industry responded by just putting up newspaper stories on the Internet, and we expected to succeed that way because we just viewed it as a distribution platform. Uh. And that didn't really work very well. And then we said, well, let's do that faster um, and that didn't work so well either. And I think we're coming to the recognition that this is a different medium or different mediums uh. And we have to tell

stories in completely different ways. But you also have to track the attention. And I'm just curious. I mean, Marty Baron and clickbait are two things that I would not put in the same sentence. So how do you How do you thank you for that? I appreciate that. Well, I don't think we do clickbait, so I think that's testing. We do a b testing, but that's not clickbait. I mean,

there are you know. I was asked a few weeks ago, how do you I was actually in Spain for speaking engagement, and the students there asked me, how do you get people to read beyond the headlines? I said, write a goo to headline, uh, and then they'll read more. Uh. And that's not clickbait. That is, we can write about very substantive matters, very serious matters, but we don't have

to write about them in a stuffy way. And we can certainly write about them using a more conversational, accessible style, which I think is suitable for the web. And there's what we are trying to do with at the Washington Post, and not just doing it in a different style, but using all the tools that are now available to us, so uh, displaying social media, using audio, using video, using original documents, annotating those original documents, uh, incorporating interactivity with graphics,

and in all sorts of other ways. Those are tools that we can use to better tell stories. And there's no reason that we shouldn't do that. And I guess clickbate Sorry brands want every one more follow up? I think clickbait. I guess can notes, uh, you know, enticing

someone to click something and then not delivering. But I did have an interesting conversation that maybe a year or so, Marty, with your boss Fred Ryan, who told me that when there was a headline about succession in Saudi Arabia, nobody clicked, but then when you changed it to Game of Thrones in Saudi Arabia. Suddenly everybody clicked on that story, so

it's thrones actually applies in that country. By the way, But would you say it, it's really pushed you to be more creative in terms of how you attract consumers to the stories you're telling. You. I think it has it's it's it's pushed us to be more creative. It's pushed us to be more colloquial. It's pushed us to talk in the way that other people talk, that ordinary people talk. Uh, And look, I mean newspapers have a very structured style. We all, all of us who got

into the business, we sort of learned that style. It was appropriate to that particular medium. And by the way, the headlines for newspapers were designed to fit into the space that was permitted. So you would have were short words like somebody eyed something and somebody molds something. Nobody talks that way. Nobody talks about eyeing something and mulling something and things like that, And those were words that were designed to fit. They didn't use articles like the

and a and and and things like that. Those were thrown out. Well, now we can write headlines in the way that people ordinarily speak. People can identify with that. The style of writing I think is it sounds more authentic. I believe it is more authentic. It's more reflective of the voice of the author. You have a better sense of the personality of the author. And I think that that's all a good thing. I mean, this question be

for both of you. I mean one change that I think technology is wrought is that, particularly on social media, reporters feel a lot more comfortable using the first person singular and expressing opinions. When and where does that cross the line into bias as opposed to just having a distinctive voice. Well, I think that's very hard to define,

and it's it is risky territory. I think people want to use social media Twitter, Facebook, other read it wherever it might be to reflect who they are, give give readers a sense of who they are as persons, that it's not a nameless, faceless institution there. Uh. But um, they have to be careful that they not go out and express opinions that they would not be allowed to express actually on in a conventional news story. Uh, And

that is that is tricky. I don't know exactly where the line is, but I know that we're being monitored all the time by political factions out there. Uh, And we hear from pell when they feel that we've crossed that line. And we always were always constantly evaluating that, and from time to time we have to remind people that they need to restrain themselves. But it seems to me that people do want a point of view increasingly, and and that reporters are acting generally more like calumnists

these days. Um, And I think that must be tricky, but it also I think the market is demanding it in some ways, don't you think, Marty, Yeah, to some degree. And I think, as I said, I think people want more authenticity. They want to know who you are. They don't want just some anodyne presence on on on the web or on other digital report Well maybe I don't want to take it out on They do quite a

good job, but that, um they. I think there's a difference between let's say, providing analysis, being honest with your readers about what your conclusions are based on actual factual reporting, as opposed to just going out the next wresting an opinion and taking sides. I mean, today we launched or this will be last week we launched Briefing, which is

The Information's first commentary product. And for years our subscribers wanted not just our unique articles, but the opinions of the reporter who's covered Google for ten years on what Google just announced. And we waited a long We waited three years to offer it because I wanted to be able to offer a product where we had enough reporters we could get some breath and expertise. So we have now in its live today um last week Briefing dot the Information dot com our first stab at this. It's

you know, our reporters take on the day's news. And I was leary because I think there's so much just punditry and opinion or sense that to be a great journalist you have to have a brand. So you have to be have a like brand for journalism as a personality. It's trustworthiness, knowledge, sort of influence based on your experience as a reporter. So I'm interested to see where it goes for us. Let's talk about fake news? Can we? I mean, is there anything that can be done about

all these fake news stories? I know that I interviewed the guy who started Craigslist, Craig Newmark, who is here actually Hi, Craig, wherever you are, and he gave a million dollars to the Point Institute to try to figure out like should there be a good housekeeping feel of approval or something along those lines so a consumer can understand that certain journalistic practices were followed in the creation

of a story. Where do you see that going, Marty, And is there anything that can be done about it? Because some of them are so artfully done, it really is hard to tell the difference. Well, I you know, it's hard to It's hard to answer. I think it's a difficult challenge. Probably the greatest challenge that we face in the industry at the moment is that there are media outlets that are propagating falsehoods, that are propagating dangerous

conspiracy theories all of that. Um. Look, I mean from our standpoint, I think we just have to do our job and rooted in the reporting. We also do fact checks uh constantly, um. And we have an inordinate number of fact checks on the President at the moment, uh and that will probably continue for quite some time, but also on what other people are what other people are saying. Now, the problem is that people who are aligned with a certain political point of view, are not moved by these

fact checks. In fact, they view these fact checks as part of the conspiracy, as part of an effort to suppress what they're hearing from other outlets. Uh, it is a it is a huge challenge. I do think that the social media companies have a responsibility here, which I think they are beginning to recognize and still beginning to grapple with. And that would include Google and Facebook and Twitter and some of the other they ought to be doing that they're not doing today. Well, I'm not entirely sure.

I mean, I think that they they've already taken some steps to reduce the economic incentives for people to spread falsehoods. I think that's a that's a good first step. Uh. They've in Facebook has incorporated fact checks onto its site. I think that's at a very nascent stage and a very urgent, uncertain stage. You know. I think they're very sensitive to the free speech issues, and I'm sensitive to

the free speech issues, and I'm sure you are as well. Um, but it's also dangerous not to do anything about it. And so I think we're at a very early stage where people are trying to figure out how do we how do we grapple with this. You know, there's another definition of fake news, which is not stories that are inaccurate. It's stories that the administration doesn't agree with, even if they are. That's how they that's that's how they define

fake news. And so how do you combat that or at least the perception among you of the country that if you write something critical of the president, you're propagating fake information. Yeah, it's a tough one. Um. I think that we have to be more transparent, and I think that's where the industry is going right now. Certainly what Google is pushing with its trust prom with it's not really Google's project, but there's a trust project Google is

helping to support. I think it's what David Farrenhold, who just won the pull ups are at the Post did with his investigation of Trump's charitable activities or lack thereof, as you as you noted, uh, is that he actually opened up his investigation to the public. He said, who else should I call? What else should I look at? Here are my notes? He actually took a picture of his handwritten notes, put them up on Twitter and said, here's my list. Who else do? Where? Where else should

I go? And he enlisted the public and his investigation, and that was a very transparent process. And I think we have to do more of that. I think that we have to make sure that we include original documents. I think that we have to h include audio of our interviews. I think that we have to, uh, you know, do all those kinds of things, talk a bit more about how we went about our work. I'm not saying

that's a total answer, it's a possible answer. I wonder how effective you know, Donald Trump was so affected during the course of campaign. Of the campaign sort of ripped eating these mantras like crooked Hillary or what was Marco Rubio? He was Marco, you know, blah blah blah. But but I think he was actually incredibly smart about kind of the repetitive nature of these monikers. And when he does that about the news media fake news. I mean, I

think there's a method to the madness. And I'm curious if you feel he his de legitimization of the news media is going to start actually almost seeping in subconsciously into the minds of consumers so that they have even it's going to increase the mistrust that already exists. Well, it's evident that that's already happened. I think he's actually

achieved some of his goals in that regard. There was a Quinnipiac poll that showed that something like of Republicans now believe that certain media outlets are the enemy of the people. Uh. There was just a poll that I saw this this morning that has over a third of Republican now believe that, uh, a free press can can be more dangerous, can actually be dangerous. I think that's very concerning now. Thankfully Democrats don't see it that way.

Independence don't see it that way. But I think it's a it's a it's having a seriously corrosive effect on our credibility and I think ultimately on the democratic system that in this country we do our jobs. I think that, uh, you know, the day in and day out, we just have to do our jobs. We have to present actual evidence, we have to be transparent. I like to remind people that during Watergate, I was in high school at the time, but the press, the popularity, the approval of the press

was at a very low state. Uh. The Washington Post was doing the investigation, other media outlets were doing their investigation. Was the press was held in extremely low regard. The press was under constant attack from the Nixon administration. Spirag knew his his first vice president was constantly going after the press. You know, we had that ati is um uh was one phrase, but there were worse. It was very illiterative, but not very not very elegant. Uh And

but he had other more harsh words. And of course there was an enemy's list and all that, you know, uh Lee investigations and all that sort of thing that

seemed very familiar today. But after it was over, when Nixon had to resign, when the public knew that their president really wasn't crook, the popularity of the press really rose because it showed that the press had actually been doing its job, doing it courageously, doing it accurately, and doing it in spite of this demonization by the White House. We're going to take a quick break. We'll be back though with more from Marty Baron and Jessica Lesson right

after Brian reads these ads. So as a reminder, in our next couple episd ssodes, you'll hear from Sheila Evans, who is the president of HBO Documentary Films, and also Christy Todd Whitman, who was the first female governor of New Jersey and the former head of the e p A under President George W. Bush. And of course, as always, we want to hear from you guys, so please call us. We'll leave a message with your questions for Sheila Evans and Christy Whitman. Can I do the phone number please?

Of course that's nine to nine, two to four four six three seven. Again, that number is nine to nine two to four four six three seven. And if you call in the next thirty minutes you get a set of GINSU knives. I sounded a little like one of those ladies, you know, an infomercial. No, not an infomercial like on a sex line. Yeah, we won't tell. We won't tell people about that part of your career. What are you wearing? Okay? All right, and now back to

our interview with Marty Barren and Jessica Lesson. You know, it's interesting Silicon Valley is home to some of the only institutions that people still seem to respect, even as you know, the media goes down in public estimation corporations Washington d C. Do you think there's gonna be a point at which sort of tech gazillionaires are going to become the new Wall Street bankers who are reviled rather than celebrated. But I think it's happening. I mean, look

at Ubert right, Um, a company that's a Silicon Valley darling. Um. But you know, really in a spate of bad press, many of it of their own making, I believe, But I do think that there is a I do think tech CEOs are are the new bankers. And if you look at how um, you know some of these really young, wealthy billionaires are treated, um and the scrutiny they get much of it deserved. Um. You know, there's an interesting It's it's nice being out on the East Coast and

out of the Silicon Valley bubble. And I planned here in the heartland of Manhattan where I know, and then I'm going to d C next week or later this week,

I'll be at another bubble. But um, look, I think that there's still It's fascinating to me how outside of Silicon Valley the valley is viewed and um, there's no doubt that right now, I think there's a big gap, and there's in the sense that the valley is viewed as people are curious, maybe a bit worried about it coming to encroach on their turf um and tech companies, but also a lot of sense that, you know, we're living in another planet with self driving cars and disconnected

from reality, and I think there's a lot of truth to that. My advice to to the entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley is like, wake up and change your tone a little bit about how you're talking about things like jobs. You know, Techy's gloat about reducing jobs, right, and and that's obviously I don't think the right narrative. So I think we're probably even only at the beginning of the backlash. Let's take a brain interlude and talked to you, Marty

about your background. Um, you grew up in Florida, You're the son of immigrants. I know that you worked on your high school newspaper, your college newspaper, Lehigh, Right, So what drew you to this business? And one of the biggest changes you've witnessed since you got into the business. Uh, well, you know what drew it to me was I wasn't a family that had come to the United States. They were keenly interested in what was happening in this country.

Where they had arrived. They were keenly interested in what was happening around the world. We had a news news habit in the household newspaper every day, the local newspaper, which was the only one that you could get at that time. Uh, the national news with the Huntley Brinkley Report at the time, and then local news and then Time magazine every week. And that was just part of it. And we would talk about that and and they were keenly interested. So I became interested in all of that.

You know, the changes are there's so many changes. I mean, obviously the Internet has been the most dramatic change. I mean, it's just changed everything about our business. Uh. We had all sorts of protections in this business. Before it was very difficult to get into the business. We didn't have as much competition or all that much competition for advertising. We didn't have as much competition for readers. People. The newspapers were the only place people could get some information.

Those were huge advantages. Turns out none of those advantages were actually earned. They were just gifted to us and so uh, and then when those advantages disappeared, we had to adjust. You know, for me, it was very difficult at the beginning, I have to admit, I mean, I, like many people in my field, I sort of went through this period of mourning because you could just see

staffs being cut and things like that. But at some point, you know, you have to stop mourning in the same way if you were to lose a relative, a close relative, or a friend. At some point you just go on and live your life. And I came to that conclusion, and then you start to see, well, what are the opportunities. And there are incredible opportunities in this field right now. We reach more people, we can tell stories in different ways, we can tell these stories more effectively, we can show

more of our work. All of these things are really fantastic, and for someone like me, it's it's an exciting time to be in the business. Jess, you were at the Wall Street Journal for years before founding the Information curious your reaction as a as an alum of the Murdoch Empire to what's going on at Fox News, And I

love to hear Marty's thoughts about that as well. You know, I think earlier today we had Jeff Sucker on stage and he was talking about Fox News is sort of the administrations, UM propaganda wing, and its just sort of when I look at it, it's just part of the continued polarization of our news landscape. And I think that it's problematic and there really aren't solutions. I mean people like say, well, we'll just sort of play it in the middle, or will be more transparent, UM put our

audio online and then people will trust us more. I think people hear what they want to hear. And so one thing that I just stay laser focused on is hiring more journalists who were doing original reporting and whose job it is to go out there and get stories that no one else is writing. And Marty's absolutely right, you know, the newsroom head count is shrinking. The information We have the second largest technology reporting team and Selicon

Valley behind Bloomberg, and we're three years old. And it's because we have a business model that as loud as to scale and hire a great journalists. So UM, I think when I look at one outlet or another outlet, or what they're doing or not, I'm just saying, are they hiring reporters who are going to write great stories? And I try to convince them those stories will drive their business. There's a sense that just great journalism isn't

a good business. You have to have a fancy events business, or you have to have a B two B business, you have to something else. But our experience has been it's a great business. We're casually positive, we're growing fast. So um, sort of zooming out how I see the landscape? And um, I don't pay close attention to the day to day of Fox News, the the latest surveys about people's trust in the media. How concerned are you about how siloed it is? And and as just said, people

hear what they want to hear. A friend of mine said, people are looking for affirmation, not information. I mean just taking a look at the big picture. How worried are you for sort of the state of democracy? You have so much division in this country and have really you know, the more you think about it. In some ways, I think, uh, Kelly and Conway, this notion of alternative facts, Um, it was. It was kind of ridiculed initially, but in some ways

I think it's weirdly true. Yeah, well I call alternative facts fiction, but um, you know what I mean. I mean different points of view, you know, I unders I understand and I'm extremely worried about it, and I've talked about this a lot. As I said, I think it's the greatest challenge that our industry phases, and I think it's a challenge to civil society and democracy. I think that people are drawn to sites that affirm their pre

existing point of view, and that's a concern. But when you're when you're drawn to sites that not only affirm your pre existing point of view, but present you with so called information that is in fact fiction, that's completely made up, that's full of bizarre conspiracy theories. Uh, that is incredibly corrosive to civil society. You have in order to have a democracy, you have to agree on a base set of facts. You can disagree on the analysis of that that those facts, you can disagree on the

prescriptions for for solving the problems of society. But fundamental, you have to agree on a base set of facts and then work from there. Uh. And right now we can't even agree on what happened yesterday, and that is a huge challenge to civil society. Let's talk about not the facts, but the factor. What did you make of the whole bill O'Reilly incident? Well, I'm not quite sure how to answer that. I mean, you know, obviously yeah, well I'm not sure. I want to try too hard.

But look, I mean I think there was good reporting that took place. Uh. The New York Times was did a fine job. Yes, I was. Uh, you know, I guess I have to be honest. Um. So you know, we had done a lot of the work on Bill Cosby, uh so, and they did a lot of work on on Bill O'Reilly. So. Um, but I do, but I

am jealous. I mean, I look, I mean I think that they appeared to have done good work, appears to have been well documented, It had impact, it was sufficiently at least with there was an independent, supposedly independent investigation at Fox of the actual underlying facts. And for whatever reason, whether it was commercial or because they found the information credible, uh,

they discontinued their association with with Bill O'Reilly. Uh. And you know, but there's still a public out there that may continue to be drawn to him, and and we'll have to see how that that goes. I know we have to wrap up soon, but before we go, I do want to ask you about Peter Teel and his sort of niche as the President's point man in Silicon Valley. I mean, he's famously contrarian. There's a very contrary position he's taken relative to others there. What's what's been the

reaction to his role? So in Silicon Valley, I mean people didn't quite know what to make of it. Initially thought it was, you know, Peter is an investor, and so, um, he if you bet on an undervalued asset and that asset skyrocks, that value accrues to you. And so I think in the Valley a lot of people saw his endorsement of Trump and then working for Trump first as crazy Peter position and then um, honestly like a little bit of good for him for betting on the right horse. Um.

I think it's notable. Right now we're not hearing as much about him, and I think that is probably reflective of the fact that he wants to and will remain involved, but is pulling back, probably because he got a little some more negative reaction as well from the Trump haters.

And I mean it's just a whole mix. But besides, there's you know a little bit of entrepreneurs who had taken money from him, uh felt the need to reaffirm to their companies Facebook did this too that Uh, you know, they believe in a lot of perspectives in their organization and don't want to start blacklisting investors based on their political point of views. But um, I think it's died down a little and will probably continue. Um, but we shall see. I mean, I think Peter is a fascinating guy.

It's a very strong point of views, and he when he sees an opportunity to have influence, he he'll step into it. So we'll see what happens next. And Marty and closing, Uh, what are you all doing about access? And how challenging has that been? Because I know the Trump administration has invited more sympathetic news outlets to be a part of the White House press briefing, to be sort of part of informal gaggle is in and so is.

Have your reporters said, hey, we're just not getting access or does everybody and their brother want to talk about the in fighting that's going on in the Trump administration? And how how are you handling all that? Well? You know, I mean, I think our reporters have a pretty good relationship with people at the White House. It's very professionals, as it should be I think they're able at the White House, at least they're able to reach the people

they need. At the agencies, I think it's much more difficult. I think the cabinet secretaries are very nervous about speaking

with the press. They are underlings. Are the bureaucrats who have been there, the government workers, I should say, who have been there for a long time, who were expert in their field, are are terrified that they will be they will be fired for actually giving you background to actually help you understand an issue, or that they might say something that that doesn't conform to the administration's position.

I think that's very very concerning, and it's more important that we speak to those kinds of people than necessarily that we get the the in fighting at the at the White House. We also have to make sure that what we're doing is not based entirely on access, and it is not. Some journalism requires some level of access, but not all journalism requires access, requires access to documents,

it requires access to people outside of the administration. It requires our being energetic and aggressive in our reporting, and we're doing that work as well. We're not We're not dependent on access to people at the White house or even in other branches of the administration. Well, thank you so much for taking the time to We are totally speaking out here. I feel like you guys have other

things to do. Thank you so much, Jessica for having us and Marty for being thank you, Thank you, Thanks as always to our intrepid producer Gianna Palmer for putting together the show, to Jared O'Connell for getting to the venue super early to mix and engineer this show, and also to Nora Richie for additional production assistance. Last time we did a podcast, everybody spent the night at my house, so we'll have to do that again. We had a slumber party It's True out at the beach, which was

really fun. But I don't have room for you guys in my New York apartment. So thanks to our social media maybn Alison Bresnik, and to Emily Beena for her part in producing the show, and Mark Phillips, thank you as always for our catchy theme music. Katie Currik and I are are executive producers, and remember you can email us at comments at Currek podcast dot com. Find Katie on social media. She's at Katie Currik on Twitter, on Instagram, Katie dot Kurric on Snapchat, and I'm at goldsmith b

on Twitter. Best of all, you can rate and review us, but only yes, but only if you have nice things to say. I'm very sensitive, and don't forget to subscribe as well. Thank you so much for listening. John said that on my tombstone, you know what it's going to say, thank you so much, because that's apparently what I say all the time. So, by the way, I'm getting cremated. And he said he was going to spread my ashes, No,

hopefully not soon. He was going to spread my ashes all over the country because in death, as in life, I was spread too thin. Is that touching? And he also assumes he's going to be alive when you die. There's so much wrong with this. No he's not. He six years younger. I was trying to help you, cougar. All right, we digress. The bottom line is we really appreciate your listening. Thank you so much, and we'll talk to you next time.