we know that this is serious because the author of the piece we want on to write the law editorials for the new york times in later years. he's now left and teaches law at yale, so help me. [laughter] the original title for me book was 10 bad ideas from the law schools and how they changed the world.
keep turning out certain kinds of bad ideas, and it is not just that they are randomly generated bad ideas. and some of it, but only some of it is ideological. todd mentioned that the law school's, let me in the state again come are not exactly hotbeds of libertarian thinking these days. despite the best efforts of richard epstein, randy burnett, john mcginnis, richard epstein, richard epstein. [laughter] they are outnumbered. it depends on which steady you look at. in some studies it is only six to one or eight to one ratio of democrats to republicans. another one down 28-1. that must be exaggerated. twenty-three to one in colombia. those figures may be exaggerated. yet, harvard, according to people who should know did go for 30 years without hiring a
single republican. a leading taken into that, i believe. this is my favorite part. over much of that time they maintained a committee over its lack of diversity. while it was not hiring any republicans. john mcginnis of northwestern put it this way. even as the tory party -- i'm sorry, the anglican church in great britain has been described as the tory party at the pulpit. so, the legal professoriate in most good law schools can be described as the democratic party at the lectern. now, that has been changing. i'm interested that it has been changing at harvard. indeed, most schools that have any self-respect these days will have a libertarian or conservative outspoken law professor. they may hesitate to have more than one for fear that they will breed, but they do tend to have
one these days. and so things are changing. this is not new. this ideological fact goes back a good, long way. if you wanted to you could trace it back to a century ago. what should be conceived as applied social engineering. isn't that a wonderful phrase? that means law schools might think of themselves as schools of engineering. but it really began picking up momentum during and after the new deal. various law professors joined fdr administration. even more notably people in fdr's administration went over to law schools after they left and became professors. and the stage was set in 1943 for the publication of the most
widely cited end, i believe, most influential article ever published about leeson education -- legal education. the legal education and public policy. the law journal. it set the stage, for just a moment. a very influential new deal official who had sometimes described as the father of modern and a political science. at the time, mcdougal wrote this. the law itself had just changed in a tectonic nine richter scale way because the supreme court had given him and decided that after all of the u.s. constitution not preventing the government from running the economy, it would agree not to strike down most regulatory programs. and so we were clearly launched upon a very new era in which the
government would be doing much more than it ever did. yet here we have law schools still teaching the same old curriculum. this was the beginning of the articles are get. in particular articles -- law schools are still teaching about so-called project lock contracts and property and various other topics that were, indeed, typically training for main street private lawyers who were going to go out and began arranging business deals resolving disputes on main street advising affluent clients as to how to keep their money out of the government's hands. but this was not even what lawyers of tomorrow should be learning how to do. he said that instead of drilling students in such have outdated matters the new curriculum should be determined in
reference to social objectives and toward achievement of democratic values. you're in trouble, but he went on with some specifics. he said that -- he and dave, but often identified as the key author here. he emphasized in such bastions quoting, contracting property which are much favored instruments of the society. if you had to have a course in property law why not take construction and public housing projects as the proper job in off point for your property course. worse yet, they argued, was the public law, the constitutional law. even though the supreme court had made clear that it was not going to change to accommodate the government. they complained that the so-called public clock west is still organized a two months' difference to separation of
powers, jurisdiction, due process chemical protection, interstate commerce, except representative. trust in the states, schools inheritance was going to be kept to a minimum in the new society. local government law, they should realize, that what lawyers really need to be trained in, new forms of regional government like the tennessee valley authority and have it has been set up. and on and on. law schools should adopt the mission of conscious and systematic training for policy-making. now, this was ingenious. part of the ingenuity was that schools which had stopped trading you how to be a main street private lawyer, the whole segment of society would stop being so important. and, yes, it was so terrible. terrible on any number of levels. but let me stress how terrible it was.
had you been trying to train, even a policy lawyer let alone a practicing main street lawyer, the last thing you would have wanted to do was to substitute the tennessee valley authority organization for local government lot due to that, indeed, if you turn to the public library every single one of the concept it wanted to deemphasized turned out to be vitally important and has remained highly important to this day and how lawyers practice law and have the supreme court applies it. so, as a prediction of what lawyers need to know, and i could add parenthetically that every time you hear someone from moscow predicting one area of law will boom in the future, so we should train more lawyers. ignore them. they are approximately always wrong. back in the 70's it thought that energy law was going to boom, which it didn't. no one predicted that trade the -- trademark licensing law was going to boom, which it did. they predicted that group legal
services with bone, which it didn't command the force will shrink, which it didn't. on and on. always ignore them. but it wasn't just a matter of prediction. law school and mcdougal were being kind of ideological about it. and even though, as i will mention in a moment, no one really adopted a program on all, they had a couple of influential atmospheric influences. one of them was that it got professors used to the idea that their students were going to be out their running the world in a policy sense rather than just doing business deals. and the principles they themselves talk might at one remove the shaping the world. law as it is was bound and prestige from then on. law as it should be was up and prestige from then on. and although some might have said that there was a possible problem of indoctrination here,
russell and mcdougal had the answer. when you teach students the old curriculum, after all, you are indoctrinating them in a different way. you cannot escape indoctrination. it is just which time. well, as i say, no one adopted the program because it was just too impractical to drop old curriculum entirely. yet, about ten years later something very noteworthy happened which got a lot of people's attention in legal academia. yale law school dropped property as a required course. this was almost unheard of because in the first place is terribly important on the bar exam. it is terribly important in all sorts of areas of real life, legal practice. yale students then as now were so smart, so agile in their minds that they could cram for that stuff when it came time to prepare for the bar exam. in the meantime, think of the
time he would free up for philosophical discussions. you know, it truly stimulating and interesting things. and this kind of thing, yale, then, as now, was the most prestigious of all law schools. this was intimately related to the fact that yale was the most impractical and philosophical of all law schools. yale professors, it came to be that they would be adorably clueless. if you had an actual legal problem and needed someone to solve, some money needed to bail out of jail a something. it was as if the professors had the most admired medical schools were the ones who were most at a loss when confronted with an actual sick patient. and this got transmitted to other law schools through the competitiveness that so characterizes the law school world. there is an irony here. as i've vented, they taught this crated egalitarian game about,
you know, everyone being on the same footing in society. yet there are no debutantes who are half as jealous of each other as law schools are. there are nine who are obsessed with ratings and pecking orders as law schools are with the u.s. news. and between that and accreditation there is an enormous pressure for them to know become more and yale like. there is an interesting article that malcolm glad well in the last month, one of last month's new yorkers in which he talked about the many failings of university ranking systems. he points out with respect to the undergraduate experience that all schools are under pressure to pretend to be more yale like, more research oriented, interdisciplinary this and famous philosophically grounded professors in every area. this is not what actually works
for most schools. i compare it to someone who came out of the entertainment world and noted the most stressful act was lady gaga and therefore recommended that all other entertainment acts become more lady gaga like. she is the only one you can get away with that stuff. with yale and it's highly philosophical highway policy oriented way of legal instruction. it did work for your help. but without as much time spent on boring old things like the old property law there were able to generate all sorts of very influential new ideas. i will briefly summarize here because at law schools like business schools and education schools, they go to balance every five or ten years. and so you had charles with the new property ideas that the right to welfare payments or a
government job or future tenure, the right to regulatory favors from government was really a new property that you should be entitled to keep at home. much preferable to the old. this is credited with touching off much of the revolution of the 70's and which, of course, courts became -- began creating the process and substantive rights with consequences we see today in the difficulty of getting rid of bodily function and public employees and many other consequences. on through the public interest laws of the 1970's. very much a project marshall to be leading law schools through the new conceptions of constitutional law in which it was believed that the u.s. constitution properly read would require the institution of more or less the entire agenda of the new york times pays.
and down through identity politics with its notion that pretty much everything in the -- in the law, even secured transactions should be thought of as charged with race and gender and every other personal category. now, some of these are much more successful than others. i place in the book bozell of the professes and some of it sellers as with reparations and other areas where the ideas were so impractical that they fell flat on their face when they get out into the actual court. but the story culminates or at least the latest episode of it is the rise of international human rights. and i believe that there is no area faster growing in the law school's then interest in international human rights. there are dozens of new centers and projects. clinics and entities and the law schools. and if you are still thinking of
international human rights as something that is primarily meant furred dissidents running away in dungeons and this sort of newspapers where -- the regimes were they closed down the offices and newspapers, i hear you are much behind the times. that is still part of the agenda. yet, there is much, much more as you can see if you get to many of the university sites were to groups like human rights watch and amnesty international where you are just as likely to see articles about the need for changes in domestic violence or sexual harassment law, the need for the right to health care, the right to a minimum income, the right to collective bargaining, the right to be freed of hate speech depending on which group you go to. and this has been creeping into american discourse and a variety of ways, primarily, i think,
through the importance of legal academia. some of you remember earlier this year when a panel criticized the united states has been lacking in international human rights and violating human rights. the laundry list went on and on. the u.s. was doing many things wrong, often by not having a big enough government. the obama administration response to this to my thought fascinating. so prominent in their response, so unfair for the u.s. -- the you into said the u.s. is systematically violating human rights because last year we passed obama care and took a giant stride toward recognizing international human rights obligations in the health care area. this falls under the category of reassurance that these me less reassured. you know, i find it bothersome. i think that would have been an additional reason to vote against obama care if people had argued publicly that it was required for international human rights obligations. similarly in the controversy in
recent weeks in wisconsin. i wish i had a dollar for every time someone has argued that what governor walker did in repealing some of the old public union rights actually was a violation of international human-rights. that has been very widely argued. so there is a pattern here. much as it was breached in the 1970's that the u.s. constitution required, if properly read, the court enforcement of the agenda of the new york times editorial page. now it is increasingly argue that international human rights properly assessed required the same new york times editorial page agenda. it gives the government more to do. in that it is very much like most of the other ideas i talk about in legal academia. after that point it just sounds like the idea of give the
government more to do. but it specifically gives lawyers and judges more to do. it's not always the idea that litigation should have a bigger role in society. particular it gives legal intellectuals more to do because their the ones who often deal with that when we decide to resolve through litigation and legal processes rather than through legislatures were other ways of doing things. so, i think he would have understood the will of yet another genre of intellectuals who have arrange things in such a way as to make their own preachments more influential and important. certainly good news for graduates of the law school's. it is, perhaps, even better news for the end of and faculty. i'm not so sure that it is good news for all the rest of us. thanks. [applause] [applause]
>> thank you. i am going to ask the first question, and then we will that wall to choose his inquisitors. i will remind you all to wait for the microphone, especially since we have -- we are reporting this buffer heritage and for c-span. please state your name and identify any affiliation before you ask your question and keep it to a question. i said i would mention my one criticism. walter has actually touched upon it. although i don't -- i think his original idea for the title maybe wasn't the best, ten bad ideas from the law school, i'm not thrilled with the title that tito's. on going to ask a very pragmatic question. it is not as greed. it doesn't deserve a screen titled. when that might sell but be misleading is how law schools are destroying america. i don't think that would work
either. to you mind telling us what the process is, the focus group, a book title, how you settle on this one, maybe whether i have any talent or whether i'm all wet? >> well, first, you're absolutely right. i did not want to write is greed. it is not easy to come up with titles, but the last where would try to do it is through a focus group because it would wear off all of the edges. i was thinking, i'm afraid of, in part, the school for scandal as a phrase from the restoration, the lord of the small who was carted around in public festivals to make fun of the high and mighty. and wanted to make sure -- make fun of the high and mighty. partly i was looking for words that had not been overused.
it's lost all shock value aside from signaling. still a word that people have been used. so that is as and focus group away as i can think of. fred smith from see eye. >> walter, i have not read the book yet. you make a very good case that the intellectual self interests pursue it quite well because of their ability, the a moral prestige over the greedy capitalist and also power to both new government. maybe you tell us, is this a threat posed to entrepreneurial businesses, why are businessmen so passive? they have great command of a legal resources, general counsel
and so forth, face like things. and business seems to be passively waiting for its third to be ripped out. >> well, it's a good question. why has business and those who are interested in the thriving capitalistic, why have they paid so little attention to law school? you can ask it even more pointedly after reading the book because i tell, at considerable length, howl of very different group of men lay the foundation, in particular starting in the 1940's and 50's and later joined by other liberals. there were not would like full. there were calling in vast amounts of money and a great deal of organizational skill and to making the law school's more socially conscious, introducing various activist themes, sometimes highly successfully, sometimes not so.
but they were working more or less on their own. i suppose that if more conservative or libertarian donors had been making a similar effort you would have seen whether the university administration's would have let it in. it could be said parenthetically that the law and economics movement did spring up and have very considerable influence, as it continues to have as a counterweight to some of the thinking in some areas. that hasn't been said. it is only a partial counterweight in law and economics itself. people can take economics many different directions. i think it would make sense for people who disagree with the directions to spend a lot more time thinking. because currently their voices are scarcely heard it all. i've mentioned richard epstein. he has to be used in six or seven different areas. the only person to the right of the center because there isn't anyone else.
he's great at doing it, but please give outbreak. yes. >> my name is paul. my question is, i assume that this isn't going to fall on its own weight. i'd like to think that it would. a commentary article that i've read, it sounds like the forces that perpetuate this are very powerful. so, it's not a point to a fall of its own weight, what is to be done? can it be influenced? ten lawyers, graduates of law school try to use their economic weight and collaborate with other like-minded alums to pressure their law schools? if not, what is to be done? >> well, there are several different questions. first, as far as the influence, we are at a moment of crisis for the economics of law schools that is causing a great deal of rethinking of what they should
do. not necessarily an ideological rethinking but every thinking of why there is such a gap perceived by law firms and others to hire you, law graduates, between what they have been trained to do and what they will actually wind up needing to know and practice. that serves as a very significant break against the pursuit of completely fruitless theory. indeed, one of my things in the book is that we hit bottom years and years ago. law schools have been tending to improve not only in ideological recent years but also the extent to which they are connected with real-life legal problems. the age of french deconstruction is an. but, you know, these graduates will deemphasized. and for better or worse, and you see one jump ahead. actually often for worse. now there are more successful.
they're beginning to have a more successful influence on how government operates and a lot of that is to people like elizabeth warren. you have increasingly through blocking, through real-world oriented scholarship you have much more effective liberal forms of styles of being a law professor then you did back in the days of critical legal studies and critical risk. there is the second and not that closely related question of where should a student want to go for a less than lopsided type of faculty? many people i know who are confident in their own ideas are happy to get to a place where there is relatively no support for them. there is now the george mason school of law in the uc suburbs year which has a brilliant
marketing strategy. it went out and scooped up a lot of conservatives and libertarians faculty who were being undervalued elsewhere. it has risen rapidly in the rankings. debt by almost any standard they have done brilliantly at acquiring. so even though it is easy to get discouraged about some of the trends, some of them self correcting to some extent in that the -- there is pluralism. alan dershowitz, with whom i disagree on many other points, put it this way. everyone sees diversity as getting more of themselves. hiring is like a club in which you get hired by the people who are already in the club. that hasn't been said. there's almost no comparison. it's important. between the number of young faculty who would agree with many of us in this room and that
the same sort of survey 15 years ago, no comparison. there are so many more now. >> my name is in drake. following up on that response, you noted the federalist society. did you think that one avenue for counter to the dominance of the left is only going to come from the elites themselves in the elite schools? in other words, in order to get hired at any law school, whether it is some of the for-profit schools, you have to have clerk for a federal judge and come with a degree. therefore, the only opponents within the academy are going to be other people from the elite schools. do you agree that is essentially the only front open to countering the trend? >> i think that is very well put. the problem of that idea will be met by the scholars with other
ideas as has, indeed, been happening. it is in a matter where if you arrange to an ordinary law schools together you will somehow balance out top-10 schools. and ideas have consequences. we always find different ways of getting back to that same point. one must have ideas that are qualified. spending money here, having greater organizations there, networking and a third place, all helpful and all may help people who deserve to succeed from falling by the wayside.
>> yes, i think they do, and i give various examples in the book. i could have easily filled up several books with other examples. in areas that i know on work like this tobacco settlement, whether it either proper role of state attorneys general, of the proper role of statute of limitations which became relatively unpopular in the academic literature and without the overture of statutory limitations you would have never had most of the tobacco litigation or events like that. when it ceases to be respectable to defend notions like strict
application of statutes of limitations and i could communicate other old limits on liability, would it -- in the law schools there will still be some judges who resist, because there are are a lot of strong-minded judges especially these days on the supreme court but most judges are somewhere in the middle. and if they have got plausible grounds for ruling either way they don't want to be attacked and 30 lop review articles. it works its way in buckley versus valeo and citizens united. at this moment we have the strong-minded function of supreme court justices. replace them with ones that don't have to be of opposite points of view but once you are little more susceptible to academic and editorial opinion and use this decision. there are some other questions.
>> david bernstein, george mason law school. one thing that you pointed out that law schools have become at least some more ideologically diverse which i agree with in the last 15 years or so. that has not happened from what i can tell of history, political science, sociology, anthropology. and so forth. and my theory is that it is in part as we have on the supreme court judges ray point -- appointed by republicans and these are taking these ideas seriously and faculties can't just write you off as a nut that if you have other explanations i would be interested by the bar has had a little bit of ship then leans towards other disciplines them into other ideological diversity's? >> that is an interesting question on the tendency of law schools to not be as ideologically extreme as anthropology and that is worn out in the surveys survey said than done. those two disciplines and some others are even more lopsided
than law which takes some doing. law has been the most influential of them and i think he proposed a very interesting first cut at why professors who -- if they intend to specialize as some of them do in big national issues of constitutional law. if they can't predict what the do because they can't make themselves think even in a hypothetical way as -- does than they are not going to be terribly good at annotating the court's doings. all they can do is rail against it so indeed it is tending to reward professors who may indeed the a -- but at least take the time to treat seriously the ideas that differ from their own. indeed you have seen quite a substantial body of liberals who have made an effort to understand conservatives and
many other institutions as well. i'm not sure. it is only a thought. there may be some feeding and from the fact that lots of very bright people go into law for many reasons other than changing the world through politics and they need to be catered to. the views of lawyers generally and practice after they get out of law school are more democratic than the american outreach but are not nearly as -- is the law schools so there are a number of influences on them because lott is inevitably going to be more real world constraints then sociology or anthropology. no offense to those, but it is. in the back row, lieberman with the federalist society. >> hi. i was wondering what kind of reaction you were getting from people in these law schools to the book?
>> i just began to ring on it a few weeks ago, and so i have been to i believe indiana, illinois and minnesota so far and the response has been wonderful. now it may be self-selecting. may be the ones who hate my wouldn't be seen dead in the same room, but the faculty very often agrees with much more than we might expect of both the critique and the possible ways of improving things. the students, maybe they are mistaking my talks for talks about the general law school crisis and why it is so hard for them to find jobs but forever reason it is going up in larger numbers than what i had expected. i mentioned the word economically where people are ripe for. there is a lot of doubt as to
exactly how they will be rethought possibly the ranking system will be shaken up because of the felt sense by law firms that hire is that you sometimes do better hiring someone from an upper pod school than a higher possibly it will be a fact that law schools are so darned expensive than some law schools appear to be able to charge much less and offer just as good an education. one way or another there are a lot of people who come up with a better method. an issue that is particularly come up for debate is what it helped to blow up the accreditation system? i complain in the book that a lot of the trends that i dislike are reinforced by the accreditation agency, the aba and the als which will require a commitment to clinical education whether or not you think it would work at your particular school and it requires certain types of research orientation.
it has been argued by people that i respect that blowing up accreditation will just present us with a completely dead -- different set of problems. release they will be different and we can work through solving those problems. one way or another they are not working well. there was another one in the back row. >> brine from the heritage foundation. this week "the weekly standard" had an article about the declaration of decibels of academic freedom. are you familiar with that document? >> not really, no. >> what i'm wondering is what the declaration has done. it lays out standards and principles for what academic freedom looks like. we give faculties for example a guidance on how they should be making decisions about tenure and who to accept and what articles they should be promoting and those types of things or at least be open to it. would he think about some type of standards for the academic
community actually, not that it is imposed from outside but those standards voluntarily or use by faculty and other members that point to and say you know i am not eating afforded my academic freedom that i should be afforded whether it is tenure or whatever else it might be. d. think that would be helpful? >> i have considerable skepticism about efforts to promulgate general principles of of that sort in one of the earlier questions by the way was what about, what can outsiders do in order to change the ideological complexion. again it quickly becomes at odds with the freedom that academics expect. for example putting pressure on a state law school. we know that has happened in some instances, law school clinics. and a general set of rules is going to be used both as a sword and a shield. they will be used by some people to say you see the principle is the law.
it appears it will also be used aggressively by you know the people who want to defend the boundary. improper rules and so forth. i guess my general sense of the principles of academic freedom is if they don't change rapidly and if they remained decentralized enough so that you have a brady at different institutions in which different kinds of academics can flourish, some of which are almost impossible to pressure from any direction and others of which are more open to some signals from public opinion but they are often going off in the wrong direction. not a very useful action but i never claimed to have one. >> let me mention by the way, if you are interested in my theories about international human rights law as a flavor of the decade in law schools, heritage has a tremendous
program calling attention to the latest developments. you will learn a whole lot. >> thank you. i am an adjunct professor of law at georgetown law center just down the street, a right wing freak show. [laughter] my question is related to some that you have been asked earlier, and it is in three parts. have you noticed among the dean's at any of the top law schools a recognition on their part that there is an imbalance or the extent of the imbalance? second do they regard that as a problem? do they recognize that? and thirdly is there anything like a serious plan among any of them to redress the imbalance? >> i wish i could read their minds better than i could. i have noticed two years ago when adam at "the new york
times" did a good article on this general issue, the set of debates. he was not finding deans of law schools or highly placed figures of other sorts who are actually defending the imbalance in saying you know, darned if you are going to change what we do. we will keep billing up with people who think like me. there was some recognition and certainly there are individuals that we all know who have done wonders to make their faculties more diverse, often at the price if it is a price to bring in people that they disagree with. but the way i think of deans is that they don't agonize about anything anymore than they have to because their time is too spoken for by meetings, and fundraising, and so unless there is discontent on the outside that they have to pay attention to, it is easy to move on to the 10 things that they know they
have to worry about instead of adding an 11th one that no one in bested them and. i think that is probably a varela v. of of the of the dean's actually treat the intellectual diversity issue. fred, again. fred smith. >> at follow-up to dave's earlier question. the anthropologists, sociologists, in one way they are less connected to the world. yet it does appear you see a dramatic asymmetry between the way the private law and part of the economics economic sphere and their intellectual allies respond to these issues in the way that trial lawyers, union lawyers, human rights lawyers and so on and their intellectual allies and what you have talked about. one seems to be strategic looking for president and the
other one seems to be winning cases. is there some way of phrasing the strategic awareness of our side to recognize we are in a cultural war and we are fighting defensively rather than offensive lay? >> well, fred, the way you get me going is talking about cultural wars as a metaphor. i prefer a culture of peace but the question is, why the asymmetry? let me pursue that for a moment he does i spend a fair amount of time in the book talking about how if you move from groups like the american civil liberties union to law school clinics and programs in adjacent areas, you find a whole lot of overlap. you find cooperation and to find sometimes a revolving door of highly qualified personnel. you find that the publications and the roundtables and so forth are constantly informing many of
the key academics as to what the aclu is thinking this weekend vice versa. you have tremendous cooperation. would we actually want that cooperation between groups that are the ideological opposite numbers or would that just make law schools get yet more polarized and yet our ideological? i have my doubts that they should jump headlong into any cozy relationship with conservative or libertarian think-tanks or much less with groups that might have lobbing agendas which would really be essentially disastrous. and so the question is, therefore, should we tell them stop seeing the aclu. stop seeing the aclu four times a month and at least date around with a variety of groups. i don't want them to feel married to any of them though, if you see what i mean. >> let me ask the concluding -- why do you stay here until the
concluding question. since i didn't know why john was here to introduce me and needed to mention my servers on the u.s. commission on civil rights, but then you explain the answer. i see a few of my colleagues here. there've been several who have been agitating to abolish the u.s. commission on civil rights, apparently because american civil rights is passé and they want to replace it with a human rights commission. so if you would mind explaining, what is it that is so attractive to the so-called progressives about human rights? i will suggest one or ask you one. you know, civil rights law actually has some limits that there are no limits to what you can dream up in the human rights round. >> yeah, and i am also highly alarmed by the effort to rename and civil rights to human
rights. as you hand, civil rights we conceive of as a bunch of categories having to do with minorities orators and potentially other groups. not a member of that group, is probably not a civil rights issue. human rights encompass thoughts plus the rights of health care, labor, welfare and many others. it is much easier to bring in the literature and the pronouncements of the various international groups that follow this. one thing that wouldn't change is the tremendous influence of legal academia because in both the civil rights and human rights area, basically every new idea that comes along has been fêted to a jury and civil rights is a classic area where the body of opinion represented so widely in the country and in this room, which is that genuine equality
of opportunity means not discriminating by race or gender. this is not a large body of academics behind it. they are almost unanimously -- it is one of the reasons why civil rights laws so incredibly hard to reform. it becomes even worse with human rights law. >> i would like everyone to join me in thanking walter. [applause] >> for more information visit walter olson's web site, overlawyering.com. dr. gentry, the title of your book is in the middle and on the edge and the process you mentioned, how twin falls has always been on the middle and on the edge of different parts of idaho civilization. what you mean by that? >> well, twin falls is located between present though --
present-day pocatello lacy and those areas had a larger indian population in the beginning. so we are almost exactly in the middle there. and what i've really argue in my book is twin falls is in the middle. it is between two canyons which is easy to see. but it is also in the middle of between boise and pocatello. if one looks to the south it is in the middle, basically northern nevada. and the sun valley. of course everybody loves to be in the middle. it is not always fun to be on the edge and i argue that the fact that twin falls has been on the edge in a number of different instances has made people in twin falls more defensive than they might be, and they think really it is crucial in understanding our history. for example, when the freeway was built in the 60s, the freeway was built north of twin
falls. it missed the cities and there was this tremendous disappointment that somehow twin falls had been missed. we were on the edge again. >> and how of native americans and pioneers influence the development of twin falls? >> well, the native americans moved around a great deal. in fact in my book i said just they moved much like a lot of senior citizens do today. they moved up into the campus prairie area, up into what is present-day the south hills, so they migrated a great deal. and of course, new contacts in this area were for trappers, oregon trail travelers. these were some of the first people who really came through this area and wrote about it. in fact in a 1011, the party came through here and are
celebrating this year the 200th anniversary. they made people in the east aware of the area for the first time. >> and your book also looks at the rise of unions and the rise of lagging in twin falls. why did you decide to head back to the book and how did you research the topic? >> i did extensive research of twin falls over 13 years and what i was really dealing with, what was key at the time was local newspapers and they adopted a dry area, adopted -- before national prohibition. that was in the area constantly hear. and often individuals would obtain alcohol in nevada, just as today nevada has legalized gambling and people from twin falls twin falls go to jackpot less than 50 miles away. and so there is that i think rather interesting tension between the desire to -- alcohol
or gambling but also access to it in northern nevada. it is really following the newspapers in terms of what is deemed important in the city. >> what do you see is the as the biggest change in 10 -- twin falls over 100 years of existence? >> oh my goodness. we had just celebrated in 2004 the 100th anniversary of the city and of course just a little over 100 years ago there was no irrigation here. the snake river had not been and there was basically no agriculture, so there has been a german this growth of agriculture in the last 100 years. of course within the city itself, there has been a growth associated with travel, our nearness to interstate 84. also the development of tourism and other factors that they could've not envisioned 100
years ago. >> and for those who are not familiar with twin twin falls how does your book help them understand the region and? >> well, it really, what i was trying to make it so that i could deal with those things influencing twin falls but not deal with county history for example. and so, what it really does is it focuses on twin falls but also allows me to deal with a lot of issues tangential to twin falls such as the opening of sun valley in 1936, the development of jackpot nevada in 1954 and that sort of thing. >> and your book has numerous anecdotes of life in twin falls over the years. can you give us an example that sums of twin falls or something you really enjoyed researching? >> well, it was all really fascinating to me. i think one of the things that i really enjoyed was the focus on community, that twin falls is still small enough area that
communities and i guess because it may be my own southern roots in a small town, my committee is very important. so the constant focus on community and how to develop communities to me is very very interesting. >> and you are not from idaho or from twin falls so what brought you out here in what got you so interested in writing this book? >> i completed high school in ohio and my family moved to california in 1962 after i graduated from high school. i came to the college of southern idaho in 1969 and while i was in my doctoral dissertation at the university of utah, i dealt with choreographers who described regions in england and that itself made me aware of the rich possibilities of understanding local history in terms of geography and all the different components of local history. >> and is there anything you are
working on coming up next? >> a i am doing some research on the history of the college of southern idaho. the college was created in 1965. i came here in 1969, so the college and i kind of grew up together. >> great, thank you so much dr. gentry. >> thank you for your time. >> what are you reading this summit? booktv wants to know. >> well, but i john kenneth golf brave call the good society. it is a small book, tremendous wisdom for today. i am reading an encyclopedia of conservatism edited by jeffrey nelson. i'm reading a book called viral spiral on the digital -- and a recent bestseller which i haven't gotten around to fully reading, the black swan by the same. >> visit booktv.org to see this and other summer reading lists.
>> now while working for the oss in washington julia became fast friends with a number of young women that were actually training to be spies and she was green with envy. one of them was a young woman named jane foster. now jane mike julia like chile was from a wealthy conservative west coast family. she was adventurous california girl. but there the similarity ended. jane was widely traveled. she had briefly been married to a dutch diplomat and stationed in job and she spoke several languages including fluent malay. jane was everything that julia felt she was not, wildly sophisticated and alluring, witty and outrageous, bold and daring enough to be true motto hari material. while jane was -- while julia was the collating files, jane was taking a crash course in espionage and learning everything from forgery, cartography, cryptography to the fundamentals of what the os called morale operations, how to create subversive propaganda and rumor campaigns to demoralize the enemy and create dissent.
another oss call a guy became a great friend of julius was named betty mcdonald. that he had grown up in honolulu and she had been a young reporter and one of the very first on the scene after the pearl harbor attack. she was recruited by the oss because of her working knowledge of japanese and her wartime experience. sheehan show you would disappear -- sheehan jane would disappear for weeks at a time on orientation courses and small-arms courses where they learned how to master a thompson submachine gun and a colt 45. julia was desperate to go to france but after 17 years of high school and college friends, she discovered she couldn't. >> a word. she had no special skills to recommend her for overseas service. so when the word went out that donovan was looking for warm bodies, anybody's, to help set up and running the network of new intelligence bases in india, burma and china she immediately volunteered. she didn't care where she went, as long as she got to go and
there was a man shortage and a newly formed oss was woefully understaffed. it is important i think to remember that when you think of the oss, you generally think about this paramilitary and guerrilla operations. they get all the glory. you know you think of grainy images of agents parachuting behind enemy lines but the fact of the matter is of the 13,000 employees, about 4500 of which were women, the vast majority spent their time writing reports, collecting and analyzing information, and planning missions. so the fact that many of the oss's unorthodox activities could be conducted from behind a desk meant that women could he equally as effective. and so while the majority of women did remain in washington, helping to support the oss far-flung missions, a very small percentage went overseas, and an even tinier percentage ever went into active operations.
but the small percentage that did go overseas, like jane, like chile and betty, they carried out their assignments with the same mixture of audacity, self-reliance and seat-of-the-pants ingenuity that donovan inspired and everyone that worked for him. >> you can watch this and other programs on line at booktv.org. >> this week on "the communicators" jacqueline beauchere of microsoft discusses her company's efforts to improve security security to protect consumers from identity theft cyberbullying and internet piracy. >> host:jacqueline beauchere of microsoft, director and the trustworthy computing group, what is your job at microsoft? >> guest: first let me tell you a little bit about trustworthy computing and i can tell you what ice pieces -- maxie specifically. it is an initiative started at microsoft almost 10 years ago coming up in january of 2012. it will be 10 years young, and
it came at a time when bill gates sent an e-mail to the entire company and he basically was going to revamp the way they look at computing. so he wanted to make it as trustworthy, as reliable, as dependable as some other essential services we are more familiar with. for instance you pick up the phone and you get a dial tone. you flip a light switch, you get a light coming on in the room. so we wanted computing to be that kind of a dependable, reliable responsive experience. so we basically revamp the way we look at computing. and we divided it up into a couple of segmented areas one of them being security, one of them being privacy, and other being reliability. and all of that is to provide a safer, more trusted experience for the consumer, for the end-user and he or she goes on line. >> host:so you specifically, what do you do? >> guest: i run a group of folks that specialize in on line safety and we do a lot of on line safety outreach and a lot of on line safety communications
work. i look at on line safety as sort of two parts of one whole. it takes a little bit of security and it also takes a little bit of privacy. specifically on line safety is taking care of the pc and the device and they help and maintenance of that device, and then also to combat against some of those social engineering type attacks that become to the person. and we provide consumers with the resources and materials about how they can best protect themselves when they go on line. >> host:so jacqueline beauchere what is your number one priority right now? what is on the top of your list? >> guest: we have a host of things we are addressing that we are particularly interested in on line reputation and we are also concerned with issues like cyberbullying or identity theft. there are a whole host of issues we could dwell on and we could look into. it is important to look at the kind of risks that people could be exposed to. we at microsoft categorize those
risks into four buckets. risks that come from content. they could come from contact. they could come from conduct and they can come from commerce so what i like to call the four c's. in the content that it as we know, when i was growing up it was just because you read it in the newspaper or sought on television that doesn't mean it is true and that probably goes doubly or tripoli for the internet. so, you could be exposed to inappropriate content. kids can be exposed to inappropriate content. their extreme views out there. there is hate speech out there so we have to be cognizant of what is going on in the content front in terms of conduct -- this is about how an individual behaves on line and we have to look at the individual as a 360-degree element. so we could see piracy violations. we could see people stealing intellectual property whether it be games or books or videos or
music and then in some of the extreme circumstances we could see cyberbullying. we could see when it occurs amongst adults it is more cyberstalking or cyberharassment. that is exercising a role probably more a perpetrator rolled whereas in the content, conduct, content commerce, commerce we are looking at everybody seeing in their inbox -- they have seen the spam kinds of solicitations and so forth and if we are not careful, those could result in identity theft or some other instances. so we have to be really conscious of what works, what we might exposing ourselves to and so forth. content conduct, content commerce. >> host: joining us on "the communicators" is technology reporter from politico, tony romm. >> guest: i'm interested in the study that the national cybersecurity alliance. earlier this month and it is an effort that microsoft and you
personally have worked with recently. is not a series of statistics that kind of gets a bit of understanding as to what students and parents think about tough issues and privacy and security and they are very knowledgeable about them. won his second out to me was this one figure that was 6% homages 6% have based understanding of geolocation and educational a school and we are talking about the k-12 group. considering this week's hearing, where senator al franken had that hearing on geolocation talk to folks from apple and google specifically about the way they're smart phones in their devices track the location of the users themselves from nearby cell towers. i guess my question to you is where should washington, and on all this? on one hand there seems to be a knowledge deficit as the report itself points out and on the other hand there seems to be this action on capitol hill so what is your perspective? where does congress go? >> guest: you talk about -- i think that might continue for the better part of a generation, for the better part of 20 years,
because the digital natives, we have to wait until they become the teachers and educators in the classroom and then it is going to be a different story. but the digital immigrants are there now that is why it is so difficult for teachers and adults and parents to get their arms around some of these issues. so in terms of what congress can do, there is a number of things. particularly and you mentioned the research. commissioning research, commissioning studies, helping to fund these activities so that we really get a clear picture of the landscape and really know what is out there, that is going to be key. there is a lot of private-sector research that is done. there is other research that is done but we are not always comparing the same thing. france is a little while ago i mentioned cyberbullying. not many people are familiar with the term cyberbullying so they might say well i get pushed around on line or people try to harass me on line or i get much am i. we want to make sure we are talking the same language so there's definitely a research
component and a commissioning studies component. also, this is a k-12 study as you mentioned, and it would be key for some integrated on line safety education in the classrooms on a regular basis. i know how hard it is. had many friends who are teachers, and they know that there are so many things that need to be woven into the daily work day and the daily school day, what they have to work in. but if some of those lessons were supplemented or complemented with some cybersecurity, cyberethics, cybersafety education, that would be a really great start. so supporting that kind of education in schools is important and there is plenty of free curricula out there that can be woven into the existing. >> host: jacqueline beauchere, tony brought up congress's role. does microsoft have a responsibility to help ensure people's privacy and their safety? >> guest: absolutely. not only does microsoft have responsibility, we see this as the notion of a shared
responsibility among a whole host of factors. we have the industry and microsoft and we have a particular role, not only to create the technology but to provide those tools and resources and materials to help educate people about how to use the product and how to best protect themselves on line. consumers also have a responsibility. consumers have to do their updates. they have to make sure again when i talked about the pc health and safety and maintenance of the device, they have certain actions that they need to take him affirmative actions that they need to take and educators have responsibility. law enforcement has responsibility. no one person, no one entity, no one organization can tackle these issues themselves. we all need to band together to make that happen. >> guest: that is an interesting point you have about the difference of the digital data in the digital immigrants. that is the one we hear a lot about, specific privacy proposals continues to and earnest this week but what are some of the specific steps congress should take to respect to companies. microsoft has come out in
support for comprehensive privacy reform. get me a couple of thoughts about geolocation data and privacy and security from the corporate site. >> guest: microsoft has the comprehensive federal privacy legislation since 2005 so that is something we are definitely behind that we are also behind industry self-regulation particularly with these emerging technologies and particularly with this new innovation perk we don't want anything to really curtail innovation. we want that to thrive because that is going to be the ticket for children living in the 21st century. want to make sure they have the right tools and it resources they need to excel. we are teaching kids today about jobs that don't even exist. we are grooming them for jobs that don't exist on technology that hasn't been invented yet so that is the kind of rolling to play really in the educational phase. >> host: jacqueline beauchere, you mentioned industry self-regulation. when it comes to microsoft and a lot of talk here in washington now about the collection of
information, personal information on line and how to safeguard that. how does microsoft safeguard that? >> guest: microsoft has its own policies and procedures for acting as a data handler and so forth, and we also encourage consumers to take their role in doing that. so we make sure that we encouraged people to really be careful what they share on line. what i noted before about the on line reputation, your on line reputation is being created out there and you don't even know it sometimes. you might not have a social media come. you may not have a social networking account but these profiles and these images and pictures of you as an individual are being swarmed even sometimes without your knowledge so it is an equal responsibility for the consumer to be careful what he or she posts on line, what he or she shares on line. we particularly share this with you people as well because that reputation is being formed now. and kids to engage in somewhat questionable activity whether the questionable posting of
photos or videos or even just some tax to go on line. once it is on line it is there to stay. i heard a really cute quip earlier this week here in d.c., what happens on facebook and google is like it happens in vegas and it stays there forever, right? so, it is really important to be careful what is posted on line and what you share because that reputation is being formed. >> host: along that line, have you attempted to simplify some of your user agreement so people understand what they are signing up for? >> guest: with the privacy notices we have something called layered notices now and many in the industry are adopting it so you get a high level view of the privacy notice and then it if you want more detail. so that is really important and something that should be watched. >> guest: something we learned last month, things can go wrong and that is what we saw with sony and epsilon to companies that were victims of data
breaches. hackers who came in and stole some about of information about a large quantity of users and the potential uses for malicious purposes. microsoft was not implicated any of that but the question arises what are mycra -- microsoft thoughts? does there need to be a federal data breach standard or other protections delivered on that front? >> guest: again, the microsoft focuses on control for the user and transparency and those are the in-depth policies and practices and standards and procedures that we follow as a data handler and other comptrollers and so forth. so when we talk about comprehensive privacy legislation and as we have them for several years now, it has to encompass love these things whether it be a on line reputation and the on line activities and the off-line activities as well. not to make any real distinction between what is going on in the real world and what is going on in the on line world. >> host: . >> guest: do you think in your
opinion there needs to be a federal standard? i know something like 40 states have their own data breach notification and ultimately what kind of remedies are available for consumers. do you think the federal government should have something along those lines? >> guest: certainly for any -- difficult wrenched the to do business with 50 different standards potentially but that is something for the businesses and legislators to decide. >> host: this as he stands communicators program. our guest from seattle washington is microsoft's jacqueline beauchere. she is a director in the trustworthy computing group focused on on line safety and privacy. tony romm of politico is our guest reporter. jacqueline beauchere, with a the move into tablets and the mobility and the wireless, has that increased -- not the knee but the security breaches that
could happen? >> guest: meaning exposing people more? >> host: yeah. >> guest: well it is another other side of the same coin, right? the same basic advice and guidance we give to consumers is probably only applicable whether on the go or whether at home or whether you are at work. suggests doing simple things that will need to keep in mind again being careful what they share on line and not sharing personal information, making sure that the device itself is firmly defended in terms of beefing up all of the computer's defenses whether this antivirus or anti-spyware are making sure there are automatic updates and so forth. you have to take care of the health and maintenance of the device as well. not sharing personal information and so forth down the line. >> host: when you say not sharing personal information, millions of people bank on line today. that is as personal to you can get. >> host: . >> guest: you have to make sure you have special counsel special passwords and everything is protected as opposed to just
leaving passwords or things out where they can easily be seen or consumed or responded to by someone else. >> host: has cloud computing -- where does cloud computing fit in today? >> guest: it is a new term we are hearing but it is very much something that has been around for a long time. when you think about hotmail at microsoft for instance that has existed for 15 plus years and that is cloud computing for the consumer and it has been around for a long time so microsoft has a good foothold in a stronghold in that area. >> host: without getting it away -- my -- giving way into corporate informational kind of security do have on your server basis? protection for the consumer and their information? >> guest: maybe that is the corporate secret. >> host: tony romm. >> guest: we can't mention tablets without mentioning abs. it is the reason people buy those awesome phones. what we saw a lot of last less
weaker companies talking about how they are giving a lot in the space of privacy and security that the other devices are doing as much. the first question here is can you talk a little bit about how microsoft approaches some of those apps on windows votes in the process that goes on with that? >> guest: well, it is not my area of expertise, but i guess -- >> guest: i guess the larger more comprehensive question would be what is the line here? how does a company like microsoft deal with those app makers who are operating under different circumstances than you guys? you go all-out with a lot of privacy policies so how does one reconcile that? >> guest: microsoft is build on the partner model so we have this large ecosystem that we work with and we help grow, and one of the things that we have gotten on the security side of things and that we share publicly as the security
development lifecycle. i don't know if you are familiar with that, but i have friends who -- i'm not a technologist but i have friends who are at microsoft obviously and when they went to the university and when they were learning about security it was not too long ago that security was very much an afterthought. the software would be developed and they -- would come to fruition and in chapter 37 of attacks that he would find something about security and they would try to retrofit security back in to the product after-the-fact. that is not the way microsoft does it. anything that connects to the internet it has to go through the security development lifecycle so where security is actually baked into the product from the beginning. all the security situations -- considerations. thinking about it at the early stages of software development. so instead of security being in chapter 37 of the textbook it is built in up front and that is something we would want to share with the ecosystem as well to make sure that they are aware of
these practices and can take hold. >> host: jacqueline beauchere with the advent of electronic health care records and electronic health care interaction, what is microsoft doing to ensure the privacy of those very personal records? >> guest: again, we have a division of of the company that focuses on health care, health solutions group and it is just the same thing as any other data handling practice or data controlling practice. they have to be given the utmost care in the most attention as this is about as personal as personal information can get obviously, and we have although standards and policies and practices and procedures for that handling of data. >> host: how widespread is cyberbullying? >> guest: pretty widespread unfortunately. ready widespread and obviously the biggest problem with cyberbullying is where it could wind up in where we have seen a windup and the press coverage we have seen which is children and young people, teens taking their
own lives because they have been bullied to such an extent. >> host: could you see further federal legislation dealing with cyberbullying? >> guest: right now we have a collection of laws at the state level, probably about 44 states cover cyberbullying in -- on their books now and that seems to be working fairly well. i think we need to get at the problem from a different perspective than that is more from an education and awareness perspective as opposed to legislating against it necessarily. >> host: jacqueline beauchere spent four years in the legal department at microsoft before moving over to the trustworthy computing group. tony romm. >> guest: now that we are on the topic of kids let's take it further. there a a plethora of laws that deal with children and privacy debate when being the children's on line privacy protection act. without digging into the specifics of this very complex law are there any other elements out side of cyberbullying that you think need to be addressed with respect to children's privacy? >> guest: well i would also
focus on what lawmakers can do in terms of existing laws, terms of child exploitation generally. microsoft works with national center for missing and exploited children, to national center for missing and exploited children, interpol, law enforcement agencies to really take a hard look at child pornography in make sure that we are doing everything that we can to stop that. what we need to do an international site as well what government can do is to make sure that other countries and all other countries are all on board with our same standards. not only can -- it is important that we not only have those laws and that the dissemination laws but possession laws as well. there are plenty of countries that exist that, where it is not a law and that needs to come to -- >> guest: federal agencies address this addressed this issue on cyberbullying in children's privacy. the notice the government has taken on more of an active role
in rooting out these abuses? >> guest: last month we saw president obama hold a conference here in washington at the white house on cyberbullying or bullying prevention and cyberbullying was a key topic. we were active people there and that is going to continue. is going to continue that dialogue and to see what can be done on that front and i would note that effort is an effort underway that can benefit from another effort that we have seen. as you mentioned the national sues tiber security alliance, a microsoft representative that board. it works very closely with the department of homeland security. last october we launched what we are calling and messaging convention, and it was many from industry, many from business, many from agencies and departments coming around together or around one holistic
message around cybersecurity, cybersafety of cyberethics and that messages stop, think, connect. i hope you have heard of it and if you have and i'm sure you'll be hearing more but in the months to come but basically it is a virtual who's who around the table participating in this convention and it is that one message that will galvanize people and bring people together so that we don't have all these disparate messages out there and people talking about whatever their particular pet project or initiative might be. instead we are coming together with one voice and it is google, does facebook and microsoft. verizon, at&t, costco walmart to all these folks that are involved in that effort. that is something that i think cyberbullying effort and model itself after. what message around this important issue as opposed to a whole host of efforts where maybe a little bit of attention is garnered but nothing at a high level. >> host: jacqueline beauchere microsoft read a quote i steve ballmer. is a big company we have got to
lead on privacy. we have a responsibility, all of us, not just a socially respect the user but to build the technology that will protect the anonymity, the privacy and the security of what i say, who i say it tooto, where i go, what is important to me. given the recent hearing on phone tracking and given the fact that, if you happen to look at a web site and all of a sudden target the ads started popping up no matter where you go. there is a lot of concern out there about being tracked. does microsoft have the technology and do you aggregate your -- information that the information that you collect from people or can you identify individuals? >> guest: on the phone for instance, there has to be an express action by the consumer to say that you want to know, you want to make your location known. so now that is not, that is not known and not aggregated.
every application, every can counter you can either turn it off completely or every action, every encounter you have to expressly say guess you want your location to be known. a lot of people of the services. we did some research not too long ago and those who are aware of the service is really like them. he will be able to be standing on a street corner in the movie theaters there and you want to know what time the movie theater is. the movie that you want to see. for instance, you might be near a store and they might give you an instant coupon to go in there get 25% off of your entire purchase or whatever. there are very economical reasons to have these kinds of features in people who do have them love them, but other people, it is a very polarizing issue so other people might be a little bit more wear them. >> host: to follow up on tony romm this --'s does that keep you awake at night? >> guest: it is always a risk. could happen to anyone. but we do take significant
percussions. the company takes significant precautions are going testing in people on the ground in all of our business groups specializing privacy, specialize in security, and specialize in safety issues to help guard against that. >> host: tony romm? >> guest: is you your health is that it happens, what happens on google stays there too much. one of the ideas we heard floated earlier this week i representative ed markey and joe barton is this idea of an eraser button that there be some technology available that they would be able to click it and information about their child that is publicly available wouldn't be available in a more. as someone who kind of understand what is going on in some someone who focuses on the stuff for a living, give me a sense. is this a possible thing we can have? is a something microsoft would be able or interested to do? >> guest: this notion of digital forgetting is something that is very new, ari on the cutting edge right now and there's a lot of focus being paid and attention being paid to it so it is definitely something
we we are going to watch in the years to come and hopefully will be playing a significant role as well. >> host: what about do not track legislation? how does microsoft feel about that? >> guest: microsoft made its announcements in ie-9. we are doing what we can at the technology level and it's working fairly well for us. >> guest: have you gotten any metrics back on those tracking protection list? do you have an idea of who is adopting, kind of folks qwest. >> guest: not that i'm aware of yet. guest: further on the idea, if congress were to broach the issue is a company that does offer some "do not track" technology of congress were to mandate some "do not track" technology, any thoughts on where microsoft might come out? >> guest: we will have to see where that falls out as well. >> host: finally jacqueline beauchere, with bing, are those being searches saved? the people have confidence that
their searches go away or are the safe? >> guest: we are not we are not going to be serving ads in those searches. excuse me, particularly in the e-mail sector. we are not going to be when you are sending an e-mail we are not going to be serving up ads that say what is going on in that e-mail or a context that would allow that. >> host: what brings you to d.c.? >> guest: among other things, these issues which are very important to microsoft. there's a conference going on locally about cybersecurity and the strategy summit. >> host: do you work with dhs on those types of issues? >> guest: dhs had a stakeholder meeting that i participated in yesterday basically trying to come up with a plan for what would what woula cybersecurity the look i? their efforts underway right now in san diego and efforts underway in san antonio and this is kind of that the state level for maryland, what would cybersecurity look like? >> host: what does that mean
a? >> guest: that was a question posed yesterday. what does that look like? how equipped and prepared does the citizenry have to be? our government services are readily and fully available? to citizens not fall susceptible to worms or viruses or other kinds of issues? that is what the group is trying to design what a cybercity would look like her cohost what people want to know more about what microsoft does with regard to security, microsoft.com/security is that the best place to start? jacqueline beauchere is a director and the trustworthy computing group, focusing on on line safety and privacy for microsoft. tony romm tech knowledge it reporter at political -- politico thank you vote for being on "the communicators." >> up next on booktv from the 2011 virginia festival of the book, a panel on the american revolution and the role of religion played in the founding of the united states. this is just over an hour.
>> i am delighted to introduce our panel of authors this afternoon. barbara clarke smith is our scholar from the smithsonian. she is curator of the division of clinical history at the national museum of american history. her new book is freedoms we have lost, consent and resistance in revolutionary america. in this and other publications, clarke smith writes about politics with a sharp social historians eye for drama and detail. she co-curated a favorite exhibition of mine called jamestown, québec and santa fe, three north american beginnings in 2006. john ragosta is her second speaker. he teaches at the uva school of law. he has published in three fields contemporary law, legal history and early america. his new book is called how
virginia's religious dissenters helps when the american revolution and secure its religious liberty. and in revolutionary virginia we can count on the baptists for baptist for some good theater. [laughter] this year ragosta is a research fellow at the international center for jefferson studies at monticello. john day, our final speaker is an associate professor of history and department chair at the messiah college in grantham pennsylvania. his new book is called was america founded as a christian nation? john fea has written about religion in american and american history and contemporary culture and articles, newspapers and on line publications, including a blog called the way to improvement leads home. with that, barbara clarke smith. >> thank you. well, my book offers a new interpre