December 9, 2025 • 39 mins
Roger hosts a special episode of Liberty + Leadership that brings listeners inside the 32nd Annual TFAS Journalism Awards Dinner and the Journalism Forum that preceded it. These curated conversations offer a look at how TFAS is shaping the journalists of tomorrow through their rich ecosystem of programs like the Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship, the Joseph Rago Memorial Fellowships for Excellence in Journalism, the Student Journalism Association, the Media Accelerator Fellowship and the Campus Transparency Fellowship.
Listeners will hear keynote remarks and panel discussions featuring alumni, fellows, editors and student journalists who examine the state of journalism, the collapse of trust in legacy media and the rise of independent reporting. Topics include the responsibilities of credible news organizations, the importance of showing one’s work, the changing business models of journalism and the discipline required to report with accuracy and independence. Listeners will also hear the results of the yearlong projects of two Novak alumni and a panel of student journalists who demonstrate the bright possibilities of the future of journalism.
This special episode features voices from across TFAS’s journalism network, including Brian Anderson of City Journal; Novak alumni Charles Lehman, Kate Batchelder Odell and Mene Ukueberuwa, Carine Hajjar (also a Rago alumna) and Audrey Fahlberg; student journalists Alex Shieh, Natalia Lopez and Max Whalen. Their commentary reflects the mission of TFAS to prepare principled, curious and courageous reporters who can strengthen the public square and elevate the standards of their profession.
The Liberty + Leadership Podcast is hosted by TFAS president Roger Ream and produced by Podville Media. If you have a comment or question for the show, please email us at podcast@TFAS.org. To support TFAS and its mission, please visit TFAS.org/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:00):
Welcome to the Liberty and Leadership Podcast,
a conversation with TFAS alumni,faculty, and friends who are
making an impact today.
I'm your host, Roger Reen.
On November 11th, the Fund forAmerican Studies held its 32nd
annual Journalism Awards dinnerin New York City.
(00:22):
Over 50 years ago, TFAS embracedjournalism as one of its many
important focuses by launchingthe Institute on Political
Journalism, a summer internshipprogram and holding conferences
on college campuses.
Then we added the prestigiousRobert Novak Journalism
Fellowship.
(00:43):
In 2018, we started the JosephRago Fellowships in partnership
with the Wall Street Journal andthe Rago family.
More recently, our stable ofprograms has grown tremendously.
In 2023, we launched our StudentJournalism Association, which
works to support independentstudent journalism on college
(01:05):
campuses across the country.
The Student JournalismAssociation started with 15
student publications and has nowgrown to 30 publications in less
than two years.
The very next year in 2024, ourMedia Accelerator Fellowship
came online to work with youngprofessional journalists in
(01:26):
Washington, D.C.
to help them develop their beatand really grow in the craft of
journalism.
And then this year in 2025, webegan our Campus Transparency
Fellowship, which works withstudent journalists to do
critical investigative reportingon their campuses across the
country on topics such as DEI,anti-Semitism, administrative
(01:51):
bloat, and more.
Also, this year in 2025, weexpanded the Joseph Rago
Memorial Fellowship forExcellence in Journalism to
offer fellowships to three youngwriters.
So in this spirit ofhighlighting the impact our
donors make through TFAS on ouralumni in the field of
(02:11):
journalism, this year's awardsdinner was preceded by a
journalism impact forum, whichfeatured discussions with TFAS
alumni, Robert Novak fellows,and student journalists who
gathered to examine the state ofjournalism and the future of the
media.
Today's episode of the Libertyand Leadership Podcast will
(02:33):
feature selections from thoseforum discussions.
First, we'll hear from BrianAnderson, who delivered a
keynote on the state ofjournalism.
He is the editor of the CityJournal and was the 2024
recipient of our Thomas PhillipsCareer Achievement Award.
Here's Brian.
SPEAKER_01 (02:59):
It depends on what poll you look at.
About 31% of Americans say theytrust newspapers, television, or
radio to report fully andfairly.
Among Republicans, the figure isjust 10%.
So conservatives, you know, canpoint to years of selective
outrage, you could call it,since Donald Trump entered
(03:21):
politics, from the phony Russiagate investigations to the
celebration of the mostlypeaceful uh George Floyd riots,
uh, to the pretense thatPresident Biden was sharp as
attack.
One could name countlessexamples of elite outlets
alignment with progressivecauses reinforced during the
(03:44):
Biden years by what is now shownto be widespread coordination
among the press, social mediafirms, and government officials
to suppress and even deplatformcontroversial conservative
voices.
This was a failed effort torestore some kind of control or
(04:05):
command over what was becoming amedia cornucopia.
And with newsrooms clustered injust a few coastal cities
steeped in the assumptions ofthe journalistic class, the more
those institutions declarethemselves guardians of truth,
the more half the countryconcluded that truth was a
(04:27):
partisan brand.
And yet the hunger for reportinghasn't vanished.
People still want to know whathappened, who did what, where,
and why.
Engagement with factualstorytelling remains high.
I can speak from our ownexperience at City Journal, our
reported pieces.
(04:47):
Abigail Schreier on the sexualtrafficking of minors in
California, uh, Christopher Rufoon critical race theory in
schools, Heather McDonald onpolicing, much more.
They've reached millions ofpeople and have helped shape the
national debate.
So putting a face, as goodjournalism does, to the
(05:08):
abstractions of policy choicescan make them come alive,
clarifying the stakes in humanlives.
It's also about, though, havingjournalists who do the hard work
and have the receipts, as thesaying goes.
Contemporary audiences nowincreasingly seek out individual
voices they can trust.
(05:30):
That searched is producing a newecosystem of journalist
entrepreneurs.
Now, this emerging public spherelooks much less like the New
York Times and more like aconversation or argument among
hundreds of independent orquasi-independent interpreters.
(05:50):
Some rigorous, some reckless orworse conspiratorial, but all
accountable directly to theiraudiences.
So if I were to offer advice toaspiring journalists, it would
be to keep these realities verymuch in mind.
Reporting can still make anenormous difference, but you do
(06:12):
have to get the story, and thereare many untold stories out
there in areas the legacy press,because of its assumptions, has
long ignored.
A contemporary journalist shouldalso think of themselves as an
entrepreneur, even when workingfor an institution, and those
institutions in turn must adaptto the reality of the journalist
(06:36):
as brand.
So the future of journalism, Ithink, may lie in a kind of
unstable synthesis, uhtechnologically fluent, yet
recognizably human, fast butalso capable of depth, and
drawing on subscription,commercial, and donor funding
alike.
(06:57):
So the story of modernjournalism is really one of
constant transformation toconclude.
The Internet freed up speech,but it's brought cacophony and
cultural conflict.
Social media has empoweredindividuals but eroded
institutions.
AI is promising new efficienciesbut threatens originality.
(07:18):
Yet the public's need forreliable storytelling, the
ancient hunger for a narrativethat makes sense of the world
remains.
The next phase of journalismwill belong to those who can
reconcile abundance withauthority, harness new tools
without surrendering to them,and remember that the press at
(07:40):
its very best is devoted touncovering reality itself.
SPEAKER_00 (07:45):
Brian captures something that has become hard
to ignore.
Trust in legacy outlets hasobjectively collapsed, yet the
hunger for honest reportingremains stronger than ever.
Americans still want facts, theystill look for reliable
storytellers, and they refuse tobelieve that only a handful of
traditional institutions canprovide that.
(08:08):
That sets the stage for our nextsegment, where Brian is joined
by a panel of recent Novakfellows to continue the
conversation on the state ofjournalism.
First, you'll hear from CharlesLehman, senior editor at the
City Journal, followed by KateBatchelder O'Dell, a member of
the Wall Street JournalEditorial Board, and followed by
(08:29):
Mene Ukabarua, also a member ofthe Wall Street Journal
Editorial Board.
SPEAKER_01 (08:43):
Is this something that's even addressable?
Maybe some of the things youhave just been describing are is
one way to address it.
But you know, what can theprofession do to prove its
position with the public?
I'll start in the middle and goto the Wall Street Journal.
Oh, it's easy.
SPEAKER_03 (09:00):
Yeah, why not?
I'm maybe a little bit of apessimist on this front, in the
sense that, to go back to thepoint earlier about the history
of journalism, which I thinkeveryone in this room sort of
knows and agrees with, thecollapse of trust in journalism
is related to the class of trustand institutions generally,
which is in some senses justabout the sort of
(09:21):
disintermediation ofinstitutions or the revolt of
the public, the phenomenon bywhich the middle of the 20th
century, the institutions in themiddle of the 20th century were
able to sort of cloak themselvesin unearned authority, and the
public's greater insight intothose institutions has revealed
that to be a house of cards,mixed by metaphors.
You know, I don't think there'sa lot that we can do about that.
(09:43):
Like, yes, it would be good ifjournalists consistently told
the truth.
That would be ideal.
I would prefer that.
I'd certainly try to do that.
I think, you know, my colleaguesup here try to do that.
But I think you do actually justhave to live in a world where
there is less trust.
There's like there's very littleyou can do about that except act
as though every time you'reinteracting with the reader, you
aren't owed their trust.
(10:03):
You aren't owed any authority.
You don't have any authoritywith them.
And instead, I think you have tobe able to share your work.
You know, part of the virtue ofthe rise of citizen journalists
is that anyone who can do thatand who can share their work
will end up having influence.
I know people who have gotten,you know, legislation passed
because they wrote anonymousblog posts.
But like, that's great.
And then on the other hand, likethat imposes a higher standard
(10:24):
on journalists because we toohave to be able to share our
work all the time.
I think that's good.
It is a much less trustingenvironment, but I don't think
there's any going back.
And I think you just have tolive with it.
SPEAKER_01 (10:34):
Okay.
SPEAKER_06 (10:35):
I mean, I think if you went back four years ago and
said that Barry Weiss, our callold colleague at the journal
would be running CBS News, thatwould be a pretty big surprise.
I mean, I think real change ispossible and underrated as a
possibility in the mediaenvironment.
I mean, I think the loss ofconfidence is real in reacting
to something substantive, but Ithink that is by no means
(10:57):
inevitable to continue.
And I think the country isevincing a real cultural shift
that the business will have torespond to to stay competitive.
And I think that's similar tothe technology front, where it
is a reality, the new mediumsare here, but at the same time,
I hear from more and more peoplewho are constantly overloaded
with information coming at them,and they are basically doing a
(11:19):
flight to quality.
They want a curated product thattells them what they need to
know.
And I say, that's a newspaper.
So I I use both of thoseexamples to say that I think
some of these changes really canbe arrested and that the
pendulum is is seems to becoming back in a different
direction.
SPEAKER_01 (11:33):
Yeah, I would agree with that.
Uh Mene?
SPEAKER_09 (11:36):
Yeah, I I think that a lot of publications aren't
particularly interested in beingcredible.
It's not their business model.
They're interested incultivating an audience of
people who are fully on boardwith the message that they're
selling, and it's essentially aform of political entertainment,
and that that is what it is.
But if you are a publicationthat is interested in being
(11:56):
credible and drawing a wideraudience, I think one of the
ways that you do that, ofcourse, is being willing to
criticize your own side fromtime to time.
That signals to people on theother side.
I may not agree with the overallworldview or thrust of this
publication, but they're doingtheir best to be fair.
They're trying to actually lookobjectively at subjects and come
(12:18):
to a conclusion.
And sometimes that conclusionwill be the opposite of what
their own party tends to think.
To give an example, I disagreewith Ezra Klein about just about
everything politically.
I think that he has exercisedquite a lot of bias on a lot of
subjects, but he is someone whofrom time to time is willing to
criticize his coalition.
(12:39):
He criticized Democrats forcovering up Biden's frailty,
criticized Democrats forover-reliance on interest groups
and things like that.
And so I think that he's worthlistening to for that reason,
despite the fact that I'm aconservative.
And I think that on theconservative side of the aisle,
you have to pick your spots tooand criticize your side in a way
that's going to signal to youraudience that you're actually
(12:59):
dealing objectively with thestories you cover.
SPEAKER_01 (13:02):
Aaron Powell Let's just do a quick final lightning
round.
Basically a short statement.
If you were advising, you're allpretty young, a young journalist
today, um what habits and skillswould you emphasize and what
have you found useful in yourown career so far?
SPEAKER_09 (13:19):
I think at in the very beginning of your career,
doing reporting, uh focusing allof your stories on give my
audience new information thatthey didn't know, Charles?
SPEAKER_03 (13:28):
The one piece of advice I give everybody is write
every single day.
SPEAKER_01 (13:32):
Which he does.
SPEAKER_06 (13:34):
Habits of the mind, like Manet said, focus on
reporting and developing humanrelationships, turn off the
technology and try to immerseyourself in reading and writing.
SPEAKER_00 (13:44):
The Novak Fellowship is a year-long program which
allows serious and enterprisingjournalists early in their
careers to pursue projects theyotherwise would be unable to
research and report.
Next, in a panel moderated byRyan Wolfe, the director of the
TFAS Center for Excellence inJournalism, we get to hear from
(14:05):
two journalists who justcompleted their Novak
fellowships.
The first is Corrine Hajar.
Corrine was a former Joseph Ragofellow with the Wall Street
Journal and a former editorialboard member at the Boston
Globe.
Soon she will be an opinionjournalist and editorial board
member at the Washington Post.
(14:26):
After Corinne, the next fellowis Aubrey Fahlberg, a former
politics reporter at TheDispatch, former Robert Bartley
Fellow at the Wall StreetJournal, and current politics
reporter at National Review.
SPEAKER_10 (14:40):
At these events each year, you guys meet the new
class of Novak fellows.
And some of you who were herelast year may have wondered so
what did they do?
What were the results of theirprojects?
What kind of outcomes did theyhave?
And so I'm excited to be herewith Karine Hajar and Audrey
Fahlberg, who just recentlycompleted their Novak
(15:02):
fellowships to talk a little bitabout that.
Audrey's project was Who's Next?
The politicians, personnel, andpolicies shaping a shifting GOP.
And Karine's project was Iranand its proxies, a return to an
unstable Middle East.
Could you guys share kind of thegeneral thesis of your projects?
(15:22):
Like what did you sort of expectto find?
And then maybe a little bit onwhat you actually found.
I'll just add that with theNovak fellowships, they last one
year.
So when fellows apply, you mighthope or assume events will go a
certain way.
In this case, Audrey appliedprior to the 2024 election, and
(15:43):
there were some questions aboutwho would win, and that was
decided pretty clearly.
And Corinne applied before thepagers went off.
And so these are two pretty bigevents that sort of altered the
course of their project.
So if you want to comment oneither of those two, that would
be great.
So Audrey, we can start withyou.
SPEAKER_07 (16:06):
But yeah, I mean, for example, you know, one of
the first stories that bigstories that I wrote was a
profile of Bernie Marino, who'skind of part of this
self-described ascending part ofthe GOP that's very Vance
aligned, very, again, skepticalof foreign intervention
overseas, open to tariffs, veryhawkish on immigration.
And you know, a lot of peoplewere really dug in on Sherrod
Brown being able to win thatrace.
But he, Bernie Marino, this, youknow, not a career politician,
(16:29):
first-time political candidate,he won it very handily.
And I think that that reallyspoke to how, you know, Trump's
coalition has really shiftedpolitics so much.
I did a lot of policy piecesfrom my project, but also
focused on, you know, somefigures in the Trump
administration, for example, um,traveling out to California to
do some reporting and a profilefor the magazine on Lee Zeldon
(16:50):
and how he's leading at the EPA.
Um, doing another magazine pieceon John Thune, who one of the
things that really intrigues meabout him is he's kind of part
of this old guard, thisinstitutionalist type who really
loves a filibuster.
Trump does not.
We uh remember that this week,of course.
So kind of watching that tensionplay out on the hill where you
have kind of these steady handsin congressional leadership and
(17:12):
how they're trying to understandand work with Trump during the
first year of hisadministration, second term.
SPEAKER_05 (17:17):
Yeah, I thought I would be in Lebanon
approximately a year before Iactually ended up getting to
arrive to Beirut, which was finebecause things changed so much.
I went in wanting to write aboutthis idea of colonialism.
And on campus, you were hearingthat Israel was colonizing.
But in my mind, I mean, realityis that Iran is colonizing, and
(17:39):
it's that colonization and thatimperialism that is
destabilizing places likeLebanon.
And that was the truth that Ihad seen my whole life.
Then the pagers went off.
I think I I forget what swingstate I was in on like day three
of no sleep before the election.
And my cousin texted me, she hadbeen in Lebanon visiting family,
and she was like, oh, just haha,just got off the last flight out
(18:01):
of the Beirut airport.
All the pagers went off in thehospital.
I mean, it was superinteresting, but I think it was
the first time that a lot ofLebanese who really see
Hezbollah as the biggest problemin the country felt hopeful for
change.
It just felt like a big shift.
And because of the NovakFellowship, it was a great
opportunity to sort of reorientand plan when it was safe and
(18:24):
feasible to return to Beirut totalk more about that
opportunity.
And also to talk about there wasa lot of enthusiasm, and that
was important, but also whypeople were a little too
enthusiastic.
Like right now, I think I thinkthe narrative you hear from a
lot of Israeli officials, butalso American officials, is that
Hezbollah has been smited.
But even back in August, when Idid end up getting to go to
(18:46):
Lebanon, we knew that wasn'tentirely true.
Yes, like a lot of theirweaponry has been destroyed, but
there's still hidden missilecaches that we don't know about.
But that wasn't really thebigger problem.
It was more about their socialpurchase with the Lebanese.
And this comes back to theproblem of the Lebanese
sometimes being their own worstenemy, that they were tolerating
Hezbollah rule.
And that's the struggle that thecountry's facing now.
(19:07):
So that's what I wrote about.
SPEAKER_10 (19:09):
What did you guys see as sort of the most
important, impactful pieces ofreporting that came out of your
projects?
SPEAKER_07 (19:15):
Well, I do think it's fitting that, you know, my
project is about how theshifting GOP, right?
And at the end of it,technically two months after my
project ends, we have this uhinteresting crack up at the
Heritage Foundation, which, youknow, kind of demonstrates we're
at this interesting moment wherethe party really is in the
presidency is up for grabs.
We're in the first year of theTrump administration, but we
(19:36):
have a lot of people who aredefinitely vying to replace
Trump, and there are a lot ofarguments to be had about kind
of what's next.
Um, in terms of kind of what oneof my favorite pieces were,
around the time that Trumpbombed Iran, I got this tip from
I was just talking to one of mysources, and he casually
dropped, oh, yeah, you know, onthe 2024 campaign trail, you
know, Susie Wiles was justtelling everybody that Trump
(19:57):
really wanted to go to CPACHungary in 2022.
But he didn't go because hethought that the Secret Service
couldn't keep him safe from theIranians because the Iranians
hated him so much after theQasim Soleimani strike.
I was like, what?
So that turned into a huge scoopand a really interesting story
about, you know, obviously therewere multiple attempts on
Trump's life, but also how muchthe Iranian threat really did
(20:19):
spook the Trump campaign.
And, you know, was that thereason that he bombed Iran?
No.
I mean, clearly there werethere's a lot of intelligence
that motivated that, but clearlythat stuck with him.
And he just it would stick withanybody.
I mean, I think that was aninteresting story for me because
again, I'm traditionally on thenational politics campaign beat.
But being able to kind ofexplore foreign policy reporting
a little bit, especially at atime when, you know, a lot of
(20:40):
people have panned Trump as anisolationist when it's he's a
lot more complicated when itcomes to foreign policy.
So I think that that kind ofstory helped me kind of really
better understand who he is as aleader.
SPEAKER_05 (20:50):
Yeah, and Audrey has quite literally shaped multiple
news cycles with some of herscoops, like from foreign policy
scoops to elections.
So it's just super impressive.
And it's been really fun towatch and be like, oh, Audrey
broke a nut.
That's awesome.
My favorite piece that I didfrom my Novak project was the
second long essay I did afterreturning from Lebanon.
(21:10):
I think it was in September.
And I had already sort of goneinto a big part of the globe
audience's academics, we're inBoston, lots of colleges, lots
of professors.
So I had already made theargument that was surprisingly
novel to a lot of people aboutwhy Hezbollah was Lebanon's
biggest problem and gone intothe different dimensions of
that.
But after going to Lebanon, Ifound that I was really
(21:31):
challenged because I did realizehow much the Lebanese people
were holding themselves back.
And when you grow up in theLebanese diaspora, all you hear
about is how awesome we are andhow, you know, the diaspora is
everywhere.
They're usually successful inbusiness.
When I was back in Lebanon, in,you know, the motherland, I
guess, seeing how muchcorruption had ruined the
(21:53):
government.
And it wasn't just becauseHezbollah was being funded by
the Iranians and had been builtup into what it was.
It was because a lot of Lebanesepoliticians were tolerating this
and continue to tolerate it.
You know, here I am in thisamazing country that I've heard
so many great things about, andI've always had a good time
there.
You go to Lebanon and therecould be bombs flying and there
are still rooftop nightclubsgoing and multiple weddings
(22:14):
raging.
Everyone keeps partying, it's ofno consequence to them.
And I think that that mentalityis why the Lebanese are so
resilient, but it's also whytheir government continues to
face challenge after challengeis because they've sort of like
grown to adapt to the situation.
So the project really was anexercise in compassion, but also
clarity.
(22:34):
And I really enjoyed that.
SPEAKER_00 (22:36):
What stands out about the Novak Fellows is their
ability to follow a storywherever it leads.
Whether the topic is foreignpolicy, national politics, or
regional conflicts.
They do the work, they get thefacts, and they bring clarity to
issues that are oftenmisrepresented.
That kind of reporting takesdiscipline and integrity.
(22:58):
And TFAS is proud to support it.
But the most inspiring part ofthe entire forum, at least for
me, was the Student JournalismAssociation panel.
These students are not waitingfor permission to do meaningful
work.
They are reviving campusnewspapers, exposing
administrative failures, pushingback against censorship, holding
(23:22):
institutions to account andactively transforming the
college media landscape.
In a panel moderated by NovakFellow and current reporter for
the free press, Maya Salkin,you'll first hear from Alex
Shea, formerly of The BrownSpectator, then from Natalia
Lopez of the Florida Finibus,followed by Max Wayland of the
(23:45):
Cornell Review.
SPEAKER_08 (23:47):
I want to start with how student journalism can
change real things on campus.
When I was at Columbia, I reallyquickly kind of got kicked out
of the spectator because Iwasn't the most popular person
in the room.
But you guys have done somethingreally, really remarkable at
each of your campuses.
And a lot of that is because youreally were enterprising and you
kind of didn't let the existingpaper or institutions kind of
(24:11):
keep you down.
I wonder if you can each speak alittle bit to how your own
publications really help shapecampus and student life.
You want to start, Alex?
SPEAKER_11 (24:21):
Sure.
We've historically had this uhconservative student paper
called the Brown Spectator.
And that has been a thing for awhile, but in 2014 it just went
away.
There wasn't enough interest init.
And that's really a shamebecause, you know, Brown, people
say it's the most liberal of allthe Ivies, even more so than
Columbia.
And uh that might be true.
And so it really gives studentsthe impression that there aren't
(24:43):
a lot of like-minded individualsaround them.
And I think part of the reasonwhy Brown is so liberal as well
is because it's a school that'soverwhelmingly wealthy.
It's also the wealthiest medianincome in the Ivy League.
And part of that is because it'sreally expensive.
And so we really just wanted toget to the bottom of what's
going at Brown?
Why is Brown so weird?
And so we revived thisnewspaper, The Brown Spectator.
(25:06):
And one of our first projectsoff the bat initially was just
to tackle this issue ofadministrative bloat.
Now, for those of you who don'tknow, Brown has about 4,000
administrators.
And to be clear, we're talkingabout administrators.
We're not talking aboutprofessors, we're talking about
deans and associate deans andtheir administrative assistants.
(25:27):
And there were 4,000 of thosecompared to like 1,600
professors and like 8,000undergrads.
And so that's a lot ofadministrators.
So we sent out a survey, um,sort of in the format of Doge
and Elon Musk, just like, we wewanted to know what do you
actually do?
And and this was not wellreceived.
Um and I would have thought thatthey would have had some of the
(25:49):
foresight to not, you know,instigate disciplinary charges
against their student newspaper,but they did.
They disciplined me and theentire rest of the board of the
Brown Spectator because theysaid that we were using Brown,
we were violating Brown'strademark because we had the
word brown in the name of thenewspaper, the Brown Spectator,
despite the fact that the BrownDaily Herald, the other
(26:10):
newspaper at Brown, also has thename Brown.
And Brown is also like a color.
But um this then becomes, youknow, a sort of a snowballing
and into a big controversy.
Eventually, I am cleared becausethe the Foundation for
Individual Rights and Expressionfire thankfully steps up on my
behalf, and I'm invited totestify before Congress about
(26:33):
really what's going on at Brown.
Why is it so expensive?
Why are there so manyadministrators?
After I testified beforeCongress, after I did this sort
of AI-powered project tocategorize the administrators, I
get hired by PalantirTechnologies.
I don't have a college degree,it's fine.
They hire me, and so I drop outof Brown.
And I work at Palantir for a fewmonths, and then I raise$5
(26:54):
million from VCs to start my owncompany that does sort of
investigative journalismprojects like this.
And so what's the moral of thestory?
Unclear, but I I think there'sthere's one thing that I I was
proven correct is that there aretoo many administrators because
Brown did end up laying offabout 100.
And also that maybe college iskind of overrated because the
(27:15):
the people who really benefitfrom this education industrial
complex are these hordes ofadministrators who make you pay
$90,000 a year tuition and giveyou a piece of paper at the end.
SPEAKER_04 (27:27):
I think it's fairly self-evident that there's a
crisis in trust in the educationsystem, higher education system,
and thus there's a crisis oftrust in the university's
ability to prepare students tobe citizens.
And when I was in high schooland I wrote for my student
newspaper, I was the onlyconservative opinion writer, and
(27:47):
I would write about everything.
I'd write about why Timemagazine decided to name Kamala
and Biden as people of the year.
I thought that was incrediblystupid.
And so I pretty much coveredeverything, and I got to college
with the expectation that Iwould, especially at the
University of Florida, that Iwould be able to have an
intellectual home on campuswhere I could publish my
thoughts.
And to my disappointment, thatplace did not exist.
(28:08):
I remember my freshman year, theBiden spy balloon, Chinese spy
balloon situation happened, andI really wanted to write about
it in the spring.
And I remember just like runningaround campus trying to find a
publication to be able topublish my piece, and no one
wanted it because it eitherdidn't tie back to the state of
Florida, it was too conservativean opinion, and I was
criticizing President Biden toomuch, and I was like, no, like
(28:30):
I'm at the University ofFlorida, this is a fairly
supposed to be a fairlyconservative university.
I should have a home on campusto publish this.
This is unjust.
And so that kind of question ofcreating a home on campus for at
least if it's not conservative,a somewhat conservative
counterweight to the liberalinstitutional media on campus.
And that kind of stood in theback of my mind.
(28:51):
And I went to DC uh one summerto do a program with the Hudson
Institute, and TFAS approachedme and I was able to start this
paper.
And I originally envisioned itto be a place to publish foreign
affairs and national securityissues on campus.
And the more I thought about it,I was like, no one is gonna read
this because who are we collegestudents to be commenting on
what's going on in DC?
(29:12):
No one cares what we have tosay, except probably my mom.
But I was able to figure out away to combine all the ends of
the university.
So that's where you get theFlorida Finibus after day
finibus.
So we combine foreign affairsand national security, campus
politics, we have a journal ofideas, and we have domestic US
politics as well.
And so going back to yourquestion, I'd say on campus,
(29:35):
we've been able to revive theAmerican intellectual tradition,
which is our mission statement.
I will say that.
Just getting students to not bepassive citizens on campus.
We've just attracted all kindsof audiences to campus, and it's
been really wonderful to watchthat grow.
SPEAKER_02 (29:50):
Yeah, and I mean I can say, listen, if you're
gonna, if you want a glamorousjob, um student journalism
certainly isn't it.
If you want applause for yourwork, I suggest, you know,
joining the football team orsomething like that because
you're not gonna find it.
But you see a lot of great workthroughout the IVs, I think, and
a lot of these largerinstitutions that have been
dominated by one party, oneideology for for far too long.
(30:14):
So I mean, I can give you a fewanecdotes.
I mean, I remember the CornellReview coming back.
I was editor-in-chief, the mainnewspaper just wasn't covering
certain issues.
We f found this kind of odd.
We would try to step in, fillthis in.
We woke up one spring morningand on the sidewalks of campus,
spray painted uh death to Israeland death to Jews on campus.
(30:37):
Something like that was notreported on.
It's hard to believe, right?
Uh on a main street to callpeople out.
Um, so we believe, and verysimilar to the Cinnabis, I
think, um, everyone has a right,everyone has a right to write in
this case.
We want you to write.
We want to make campus safe forplurality, of course.
(30:58):
So in this regard, you canreally do a lot of change really
quickly.
And then the second, I'll say,is actually writing to your
audience, right?
Some that's your fellowstudents, but a lot of it's to
the donors, a lot of it's to thealumni, a lot of it's to the
trustees.
You'd be surprised, actually,someone who attended, let's say,
Cornell or Brown or theUniversity of Florida in the
(31:19):
1980s.
Uh, things have changed a lot,actually.
And to find out who's actuallywriting these checks, what do
they think, how their money isbeing utilized, in many cases,
not well.
They don't take it very well.
So we see a lot of the work thatwe're doing on campuses across
the nation get positive andpositive messages because to be
(31:42):
quite frank, nobody's talkingabout a lot of these issues.
I mean, to a great degree,sometimes it's hard for the
student journalists becausewe're so desensitized to the
madness, to the insanity.
There was kind of a breakingstory, and maybe not as serious,
but a group of individuals atCornell had hunted and skinned a
bear on campus in theirresidency hall.
I don't know what's in the waterin upstate New York, but that's
(32:04):
the stuff they do up there.
And um, it's just somethingnobody talked about.
It was just something thathappened on campus, you know.
Oh well, another DI initiative,oh well, a lot of madness, oh
well.
But actually, when you take astep back, and I think Cornell
actually is a perfect example ofthis for those unaware, it's in
Ithaca, New York, upstate.
Um, if you leave TompkinsCounty, if you leave the city of
(32:26):
Ithaca, you're gonna find a verydifferent place than within
Ithaca.
So sometimes having theperspective to say, okay, maybe
I'm gonna take a step back, andthis is madness.
This is not reflective of thatof a university.
This is not reflective of thatof maybe the culture that
surrounds us, or even some ofthe mainstream views, center
(32:48):
left, center right, or whateverhave you.
So I think to a great degree, Imean, the national media will
come in when there's a scandal,but we live through it.
At the end of the day, we'restudents, right?
We write about certain things,but we live through it.
And sometimes it's hard, but uhtaking a step back, I find, is
very important.
SPEAKER_00 (33:07):
This is exactly the type of courage and initiative
we hope to cultivate in ourstudents.
They see problems othersoverlook.
They ask questions that othersavoid, they work hard to uncover
facts rather than accept easynarratives.
It is remarkable to see thislevel of drive and
(33:27):
professionalism so early intheir careers.
Which brings us to our finalselection of this episode.
How do the journalists of thefuture view the future of
journalism?
Once again, we'll hear fromAlex, Natalia, and then Max.
SPEAKER_08 (33:46):
I wanted to just ask each of you really what gives
you hope about the future ofjournalism in higher ed?
Because I feel like when I wasin college was not that long
ago, everyone told me not to bea journalist because it was
dying and my life would behorrible, but that really hasn't
been the case.
So I'm guessing wondering whatgives each of you guys hope and
fulfillment right now.
SPEAKER_11 (34:07):
Well, I mean, for me at least, I'd say something that
gives me hope is my new company.
And for those of you who aren'tfamiliar, is essentially what we
do is we're sort of flipping thejournalism model on its head, is
people were talking initiallyabout how journalism is just
going down the drain when youhave to rely on advertising and
that you get trans out toclickbait.
So essentially what we're doing,which we feel is fairly novel,
(34:28):
is we're doing investigativejournalism that we give to the
government when we find fraud intheir government programs.
So sort of a private version ofDoge.
And we're monetizing based onwhistleblower rewards programs,
which then give you sort of apercentage of this.
When you're unveilingbillion-dollar frauds, then you
might get like hundreds ofmillions of dollars out of it.
And so it can be incrediblyremunerative, especially
(34:51):
compared to, you know, just likeGoogle ads or whatever.
Um and so I guess I'm hopefulfor the future of journalism is
because I think new, moreinnovative business models,
people using AI, can produce abetter business model that can
allow journalists to not onlyimpact um real change, but also
um do it with a sort of a fiscalmodel that makes sense for the
(35:11):
new age.
SPEAKER_04 (35:12):
Say for me, one, that programs like TFAS exist
and are reviving these debatesand media on campus.
And then number two, the factthat like students are still
curious and still have questionsand want to engage in debate and
want to find an intellectualcommunity on their campus.
I'd say I've been in a reallyinteresting position at UF given
its growth since I started as afreshman and the expansion of
(35:34):
civic education on campus.
And one of the things I'venoticed is that the programs are
investing a lot in freshmen andsophomores, but kind of leaving
out juniors and seniors that aregraduating that didn't reap the
benefits of these new programsthat are meant to start when
you're a freshman.
And so I've been fortunateenough that I'm a senior.
I know a lot of juniors, we'veall really taken leadership
(35:55):
positions within the Finibus andhave dedicated it to becoming an
intellectual home.
We have a lot of communityevents where we all talk about
politics, talk about philosophy.
Um, we were reading excerptsfrom Winston Churchill's My
Early Life the other day andtalking about it together.
And it's been a really beautifulexperience to see how curious
(36:16):
people are.
And no matter what corruptionthere is, what kind of diseases
there are in universitydepartments, they can never ever
take that away from us.
SPEAKER_02 (36:26):
Yeah, totally agree.
And I mean, look around.
I mean, that gives me hope,certainly.
The Fund for American Studiesdoes an excellent job in
promoting student journalists,the new generation, investing
into the education of a lot ofthese student journalists as
well.
So to give credit where credit'sdue, of course.
Another reason, you know, I feelpeople want honesty, people want
(36:47):
reason.
You know, that's maybe not themost popular take at times, but
I think you see that with thefree press.
I think you see great reporting,honest reporting based in fact
and logic, and lo and behold,it's rewarded.
I'm also hopeful because as youknow, an editor in chief, I can
speak to this.
When I see the student writing apiece at 2 a.m.
(37:10):
or editing this piece, andthey're not getting paid and
they're meeting this deadline,that makes the difference.
It's this longing, the desire,the ambition, the tenacity to
keep going, even when everythingis stacked against you.
SPEAKER_00 (37:23):
I have great confidence in the future of
journalism.
The students, fellows, andalumni involved in TFAS programs
are thoughtful, independent, andcommitted to seeking the truth
even when it is difficult.
In a time when trust in themedia is low and polarization is
high, a strong commitment tojournalism has never been more
(37:47):
important.
Before I say goodbye, I'd liketo offer a round of
congratulations to this year'sclass of Robert Novak Fellows,
this year's class of Joseph Ragofellows, our Thomas L.
Phillips Career AchievementAward recipient, Mary Anastasio
Grady of the Wall StreetJournal, and the Kenneth Y.
(38:07):
Tomlinson Award for CourageousJournalism recipient, John
Tierney of the City Journal.
TFAS is committed to developingleaders who can strengthen our
country through principledreporting.
Visit TFAS.org to learn moreabout our journalism programs
that help shape these youngreporters.
Thank you for joining us forthis special episode of Liberty
(38:30):
and Leadership.
We'll see you next time.
Thank you for listening to theLiberty and Leadership Podcast.
If you have a comment orquestion, please drop us an
email at podcasttfas.org.
And be sure to subscribe to theshow on your favorite podcast
app and leave a five starreview.
(38:51):
Liberty and Leadership isproduced at Podville Media.
I'm your host, Roger Reim, anduntil next time, show courage in
things large and small.
Welcome to the Liberty and Leadership Podcast,
a conversation with TFAS alumni,faculty, and friends who are
making an impact today.
I'm your host, Roger Reen.
On November 11th, the Fund forAmerican Studies held its 32nd
annual Journalism Awards dinnerin New York City.
(00:22):
Over 50 years ago, TFAS embracedjournalism as one of its many
important focuses by launchingthe Institute on Political
Journalism, a summer internshipprogram and holding conferences
on college campuses.
Then we added the prestigiousRobert Novak Journalism
Fellowship.
(00:43):
In 2018, we started the JosephRago Fellowships in partnership
with the Wall Street Journal andthe Rago family.
More recently, our stable ofprograms has grown tremendously.
In 2023, we launched our StudentJournalism Association, which
works to support independentstudent journalism on college
(01:05):
campuses across the country.
The Student JournalismAssociation started with 15
student publications and has nowgrown to 30 publications in less
than two years.
The very next year in 2024, ourMedia Accelerator Fellowship
came online to work with youngprofessional journalists in
(01:26):
Washington, D.C.
to help them develop their beatand really grow in the craft of
journalism.
And then this year in 2025, webegan our Campus Transparency
Fellowship, which works withstudent journalists to do
critical investigative reportingon their campuses across the
country on topics such as DEI,anti-Semitism, administrative
(01:51):
bloat, and more.
Also, this year in 2025, weexpanded the Joseph Rago
Memorial Fellowship forExcellence in Journalism to
offer fellowships to three youngwriters.
So in this spirit ofhighlighting the impact our
donors make through TFAS on ouralumni in the field of
(02:11):
journalism, this year's awardsdinner was preceded by a
journalism impact forum, whichfeatured discussions with TFAS
alumni, Robert Novak fellows,and student journalists who
gathered to examine the state ofjournalism and the future of the
media.
Today's episode of the Libertyand Leadership Podcast will
(02:33):
feature selections from thoseforum discussions.
First, we'll hear from BrianAnderson, who delivered a
keynote on the state ofjournalism.
He is the editor of the CityJournal and was the 2024
recipient of our Thomas PhillipsCareer Achievement Award.
Here's Brian.
SPEAKER_01 (02:59):
It depends on what poll you look at.
About 31% of Americans say theytrust newspapers, television, or
radio to report fully andfairly.
Among Republicans, the figure isjust 10%.
So conservatives, you know, canpoint to years of selective
outrage, you could call it,since Donald Trump entered
(03:21):
politics, from the phony Russiagate investigations to the
celebration of the mostlypeaceful uh George Floyd riots,
uh, to the pretense thatPresident Biden was sharp as
attack.
One could name countlessexamples of elite outlets
alignment with progressivecauses reinforced during the
(03:44):
Biden years by what is now shownto be widespread coordination
among the press, social mediafirms, and government officials
to suppress and even deplatformcontroversial conservative
voices.
This was a failed effort torestore some kind of control or
(04:05):
command over what was becoming amedia cornucopia.
And with newsrooms clustered injust a few coastal cities
steeped in the assumptions ofthe journalistic class, the more
those institutions declarethemselves guardians of truth,
the more half the countryconcluded that truth was a
(04:27):
partisan brand.
And yet the hunger for reportinghasn't vanished.
People still want to know whathappened, who did what, where,
and why.
Engagement with factualstorytelling remains high.
I can speak from our ownexperience at City Journal, our
reported pieces.
(04:47):
Abigail Schreier on the sexualtrafficking of minors in
California, uh, Christopher Rufoon critical race theory in
schools, Heather McDonald onpolicing, much more.
They've reached millions ofpeople and have helped shape the
national debate.
So putting a face, as goodjournalism does, to the
(05:08):
abstractions of policy choicescan make them come alive,
clarifying the stakes in humanlives.
It's also about, though, havingjournalists who do the hard work
and have the receipts, as thesaying goes.
Contemporary audiences nowincreasingly seek out individual
voices they can trust.
(05:30):
That searched is producing a newecosystem of journalist
entrepreneurs.
Now, this emerging public spherelooks much less like the New
York Times and more like aconversation or argument among
hundreds of independent orquasi-independent interpreters.
(05:50):
Some rigorous, some reckless orworse conspiratorial, but all
accountable directly to theiraudiences.
So if I were to offer advice toaspiring journalists, it would
be to keep these realities verymuch in mind.
Reporting can still make anenormous difference, but you do
(06:12):
have to get the story, and thereare many untold stories out
there in areas the legacy press,because of its assumptions, has
long ignored.
A contemporary journalist shouldalso think of themselves as an
entrepreneur, even when workingfor an institution, and those
institutions in turn must adaptto the reality of the journalist
(06:36):
as brand.
So the future of journalism, Ithink, may lie in a kind of
unstable synthesis, uhtechnologically fluent, yet
recognizably human, fast butalso capable of depth, and
drawing on subscription,commercial, and donor funding
alike.
(06:57):
So the story of modernjournalism is really one of
constant transformation toconclude.
The Internet freed up speech,but it's brought cacophony and
cultural conflict.
Social media has empoweredindividuals but eroded
institutions.
AI is promising new efficienciesbut threatens originality.
(07:18):
Yet the public's need forreliable storytelling, the
ancient hunger for a narrativethat makes sense of the world
remains.
The next phase of journalismwill belong to those who can
reconcile abundance withauthority, harness new tools
without surrendering to them,and remember that the press at
(07:40):
its very best is devoted touncovering reality itself.
SPEAKER_00 (07:45):
Brian captures something that has become hard
to ignore.
Trust in legacy outlets hasobjectively collapsed, yet the
hunger for honest reportingremains stronger than ever.
Americans still want facts, theystill look for reliable
storytellers, and they refuse tobelieve that only a handful of
traditional institutions canprovide that.
(08:08):
That sets the stage for our nextsegment, where Brian is joined
by a panel of recent Novakfellows to continue the
conversation on the state ofjournalism.
First, you'll hear from CharlesLehman, senior editor at the
City Journal, followed by KateBatchelder O'Dell, a member of
the Wall Street JournalEditorial Board, and followed by
(08:29):
Mene Ukabarua, also a member ofthe Wall Street Journal
Editorial Board.
SPEAKER_01 (08:43):
Is this something that's even addressable?
Maybe some of the things youhave just been describing are is
one way to address it.
But you know, what can theprofession do to prove its
position with the public?
I'll start in the middle and goto the Wall Street Journal.
Oh, it's easy.
SPEAKER_03 (09:00):
Yeah, why not?
I'm maybe a little bit of apessimist on this front, in the
sense that, to go back to thepoint earlier about the history
of journalism, which I thinkeveryone in this room sort of
knows and agrees with, thecollapse of trust in journalism
is related to the class of trustand institutions generally,
which is in some senses justabout the sort of
(09:21):
disintermediation ofinstitutions or the revolt of
the public, the phenomenon bywhich the middle of the 20th
century, the institutions in themiddle of the 20th century were
able to sort of cloak themselvesin unearned authority, and the
public's greater insight intothose institutions has revealed
that to be a house of cards,mixed by metaphors.
You know, I don't think there'sa lot that we can do about that.
(09:43):
Like, yes, it would be good ifjournalists consistently told
the truth.
That would be ideal.
I would prefer that.
I'd certainly try to do that.
I think, you know, my colleaguesup here try to do that.
But I think you do actually justhave to live in a world where
there is less trust.
There's like there's very littleyou can do about that except act
as though every time you'reinteracting with the reader, you
aren't owed their trust.
(10:03):
You aren't owed any authority.
You don't have any authoritywith them.
And instead, I think you have tobe able to share your work.
You know, part of the virtue ofthe rise of citizen journalists
is that anyone who can do thatand who can share their work
will end up having influence.
I know people who have gotten,you know, legislation passed
because they wrote anonymousblog posts.
But like, that's great.
And then on the other hand, likethat imposes a higher standard
(10:24):
on journalists because we toohave to be able to share our
work all the time.
I think that's good.
It is a much less trustingenvironment, but I don't think
there's any going back.
And I think you just have tolive with it.
SPEAKER_01 (10:34):
Okay.
SPEAKER_06 (10:35):
I mean, I think if you went back four years ago and
said that Barry Weiss, our callold colleague at the journal
would be running CBS News, thatwould be a pretty big surprise.
I mean, I think real change ispossible and underrated as a
possibility in the mediaenvironment.
I mean, I think the loss ofconfidence is real in reacting
to something substantive, but Ithink that is by no means
(10:57):
inevitable to continue.
And I think the country isevincing a real cultural shift
that the business will have torespond to to stay competitive.
And I think that's similar tothe technology front, where it
is a reality, the new mediumsare here, but at the same time,
I hear from more and more peoplewho are constantly overloaded
with information coming at them,and they are basically doing a
(11:19):
flight to quality.
They want a curated product thattells them what they need to
know.
And I say, that's a newspaper.
So I I use both of thoseexamples to say that I think
some of these changes really canbe arrested and that the
pendulum is is seems to becoming back in a different
direction.
SPEAKER_01 (11:33):
Yeah, I would agree with that.
Uh Mene?
SPEAKER_09 (11:36):
Yeah, I I think that a lot of publications aren't
particularly interested in beingcredible.
It's not their business model.
They're interested incultivating an audience of
people who are fully on boardwith the message that they're
selling, and it's essentially aform of political entertainment,
and that that is what it is.
But if you are a publicationthat is interested in being
(11:56):
credible and drawing a wideraudience, I think one of the
ways that you do that, ofcourse, is being willing to
criticize your own side fromtime to time.
That signals to people on theother side.
I may not agree with the overallworldview or thrust of this
publication, but they're doingtheir best to be fair.
They're trying to actually lookobjectively at subjects and come
(12:18):
to a conclusion.
And sometimes that conclusionwill be the opposite of what
their own party tends to think.
To give an example, I disagreewith Ezra Klein about just about
everything politically.
I think that he has exercisedquite a lot of bias on a lot of
subjects, but he is someone whofrom time to time is willing to
criticize his coalition.
(12:39):
He criticized Democrats forcovering up Biden's frailty,
criticized Democrats forover-reliance on interest groups
and things like that.
And so I think that he's worthlistening to for that reason,
despite the fact that I'm aconservative.
And I think that on theconservative side of the aisle,
you have to pick your spots tooand criticize your side in a way
that's going to signal to youraudience that you're actually
(12:59):
dealing objectively with thestories you cover.
SPEAKER_01 (13:02):
Aaron Powell Let's just do a quick final lightning
round.
Basically a short statement.
If you were advising, you're allpretty young, a young journalist
today, um what habits and skillswould you emphasize and what
have you found useful in yourown career so far?
SPEAKER_09 (13:19):
I think at in the very beginning of your career,
doing reporting, uh focusing allof your stories on give my
audience new information thatthey didn't know, Charles?
SPEAKER_03 (13:28):
The one piece of advice I give everybody is write
every single day.
SPEAKER_01 (13:32):
Which he does.
SPEAKER_06 (13:34):
Habits of the mind, like Manet said, focus on
reporting and developing humanrelationships, turn off the
technology and try to immerseyourself in reading and writing.
SPEAKER_00 (13:44):
The Novak Fellowship is a year-long program which
allows serious and enterprisingjournalists early in their
careers to pursue projects theyotherwise would be unable to
research and report.
Next, in a panel moderated byRyan Wolfe, the director of the
TFAS Center for Excellence inJournalism, we get to hear from
(14:05):
two journalists who justcompleted their Novak
fellowships.
The first is Corrine Hajar.
Corrine was a former Joseph Ragofellow with the Wall Street
Journal and a former editorialboard member at the Boston
Globe.
Soon she will be an opinionjournalist and editorial board
member at the Washington Post.
(14:26):
After Corinne, the next fellowis Aubrey Fahlberg, a former
politics reporter at TheDispatch, former Robert Bartley
Fellow at the Wall StreetJournal, and current politics
reporter at National Review.
SPEAKER_10 (14:40):
At these events each year, you guys meet the new
class of Novak fellows.
And some of you who were herelast year may have wondered so
what did they do?
What were the results of theirprojects?
What kind of outcomes did theyhave?
And so I'm excited to be herewith Karine Hajar and Audrey
Fahlberg, who just recentlycompleted their Novak
(15:02):
fellowships to talk a little bitabout that.
Audrey's project was Who's Next?
The politicians, personnel, andpolicies shaping a shifting GOP.
And Karine's project was Iranand its proxies, a return to an
unstable Middle East.
Could you guys share kind of thegeneral thesis of your projects?
(15:22):
Like what did you sort of expectto find?
And then maybe a little bit onwhat you actually found.
I'll just add that with theNovak fellowships, they last one
year.
So when fellows apply, you mighthope or assume events will go a
certain way.
In this case, Audrey appliedprior to the 2024 election, and
(15:43):
there were some questions aboutwho would win, and that was
decided pretty clearly.
And Corinne applied before thepagers went off.
And so these are two pretty bigevents that sort of altered the
course of their project.
So if you want to comment oneither of those two, that would
be great.
So Audrey, we can start withyou.
SPEAKER_07 (16:06):
But yeah, I mean, for example, you know, one of
the first stories that bigstories that I wrote was a
profile of Bernie Marino, who'skind of part of this
self-described ascending part ofthe GOP that's very Vance
aligned, very, again, skepticalof foreign intervention
overseas, open to tariffs, veryhawkish on immigration.
And you know, a lot of peoplewere really dug in on Sherrod
Brown being able to win thatrace.
But he, Bernie Marino, this, youknow, not a career politician,
(16:29):
first-time political candidate,he won it very handily.
And I think that that reallyspoke to how, you know, Trump's
coalition has really shiftedpolitics so much.
I did a lot of policy piecesfrom my project, but also
focused on, you know, somefigures in the Trump
administration, for example, um,traveling out to California to
do some reporting and a profilefor the magazine on Lee Zeldon
(16:50):
and how he's leading at the EPA.
Um, doing another magazine pieceon John Thune, who one of the
things that really intrigues meabout him is he's kind of part
of this old guard, thisinstitutionalist type who really
loves a filibuster.
Trump does not.
We uh remember that this week,of course.
So kind of watching that tensionplay out on the hill where you
have kind of these steady handsin congressional leadership and
(17:12):
how they're trying to understandand work with Trump during the
first year of hisadministration, second term.
SPEAKER_05 (17:17):
Yeah, I thought I would be in Lebanon
approximately a year before Iactually ended up getting to
arrive to Beirut, which was finebecause things changed so much.
I went in wanting to write aboutthis idea of colonialism.
And on campus, you were hearingthat Israel was colonizing.
But in my mind, I mean, realityis that Iran is colonizing, and
(17:39):
it's that colonization and thatimperialism that is
destabilizing places likeLebanon.
And that was the truth that Ihad seen my whole life.
Then the pagers went off.
I think I I forget what swingstate I was in on like day three
of no sleep before the election.
And my cousin texted me, she hadbeen in Lebanon visiting family,
and she was like, oh, just haha,just got off the last flight out
(18:01):
of the Beirut airport.
All the pagers went off in thehospital.
I mean, it was superinteresting, but I think it was
the first time that a lot ofLebanese who really see
Hezbollah as the biggest problemin the country felt hopeful for
change.
It just felt like a big shift.
And because of the NovakFellowship, it was a great
opportunity to sort of reorientand plan when it was safe and
(18:24):
feasible to return to Beirut totalk more about that
opportunity.
And also to talk about there wasa lot of enthusiasm, and that
was important, but also whypeople were a little too
enthusiastic.
Like right now, I think I thinkthe narrative you hear from a
lot of Israeli officials, butalso American officials, is that
Hezbollah has been smited.
But even back in August, when Idid end up getting to go to
(18:46):
Lebanon, we knew that wasn'tentirely true.
Yes, like a lot of theirweaponry has been destroyed, but
there's still hidden missilecaches that we don't know about.
But that wasn't really thebigger problem.
It was more about their socialpurchase with the Lebanese.
And this comes back to theproblem of the Lebanese
sometimes being their own worstenemy, that they were tolerating
Hezbollah rule.
And that's the struggle that thecountry's facing now.
(19:07):
So that's what I wrote about.
SPEAKER_10 (19:09):
What did you guys see as sort of the most
important, impactful pieces ofreporting that came out of your
projects?
SPEAKER_07 (19:15):
Well, I do think it's fitting that, you know, my
project is about how theshifting GOP, right?
And at the end of it,technically two months after my
project ends, we have this uhinteresting crack up at the
Heritage Foundation, which, youknow, kind of demonstrates we're
at this interesting moment wherethe party really is in the
presidency is up for grabs.
We're in the first year of theTrump administration, but we
(19:36):
have a lot of people who aredefinitely vying to replace
Trump, and there are a lot ofarguments to be had about kind
of what's next.
Um, in terms of kind of what oneof my favorite pieces were,
around the time that Trumpbombed Iran, I got this tip from
I was just talking to one of mysources, and he casually
dropped, oh, yeah, you know, onthe 2024 campaign trail, you
know, Susie Wiles was justtelling everybody that Trump
(19:57):
really wanted to go to CPACHungary in 2022.
But he didn't go because hethought that the Secret Service
couldn't keep him safe from theIranians because the Iranians
hated him so much after theQasim Soleimani strike.
I was like, what?
So that turned into a huge scoopand a really interesting story
about, you know, obviously therewere multiple attempts on
Trump's life, but also how muchthe Iranian threat really did
(20:19):
spook the Trump campaign.
And, you know, was that thereason that he bombed Iran?
No.
I mean, clearly there werethere's a lot of intelligence
that motivated that, but clearlythat stuck with him.
And he just it would stick withanybody.
I mean, I think that was aninteresting story for me because
again, I'm traditionally on thenational politics campaign beat.
But being able to kind ofexplore foreign policy reporting
a little bit, especially at atime when, you know, a lot of
(20:40):
people have panned Trump as anisolationist when it's he's a
lot more complicated when itcomes to foreign policy.
So I think that that kind ofstory helped me kind of really
better understand who he is as aleader.
SPEAKER_05 (20:50):
Yeah, and Audrey has quite literally shaped multiple
news cycles with some of herscoops, like from foreign policy
scoops to elections.
So it's just super impressive.
And it's been really fun towatch and be like, oh, Audrey
broke a nut.
That's awesome.
My favorite piece that I didfrom my Novak project was the
second long essay I did afterreturning from Lebanon.
(21:10):
I think it was in September.
And I had already sort of goneinto a big part of the globe
audience's academics, we're inBoston, lots of colleges, lots
of professors.
So I had already made theargument that was surprisingly
novel to a lot of people aboutwhy Hezbollah was Lebanon's
biggest problem and gone intothe different dimensions of
that.
But after going to Lebanon, Ifound that I was really
(21:31):
challenged because I did realizehow much the Lebanese people
were holding themselves back.
And when you grow up in theLebanese diaspora, all you hear
about is how awesome we are andhow, you know, the diaspora is
everywhere.
They're usually successful inbusiness.
When I was back in Lebanon, in,you know, the motherland, I
guess, seeing how muchcorruption had ruined the
(21:53):
government.
And it wasn't just becauseHezbollah was being funded by
the Iranians and had been builtup into what it was.
It was because a lot of Lebanesepoliticians were tolerating this
and continue to tolerate it.
You know, here I am in thisamazing country that I've heard
so many great things about, andI've always had a good time
there.
You go to Lebanon and therecould be bombs flying and there
are still rooftop nightclubsgoing and multiple weddings
(22:14):
raging.
Everyone keeps partying, it's ofno consequence to them.
And I think that that mentalityis why the Lebanese are so
resilient, but it's also whytheir government continues to
face challenge after challengeis because they've sort of like
grown to adapt to the situation.
So the project really was anexercise in compassion, but also
clarity.
(22:34):
And I really enjoyed that.
SPEAKER_00 (22:36):
What stands out about the Novak Fellows is their
ability to follow a storywherever it leads.
Whether the topic is foreignpolicy, national politics, or
regional conflicts.
They do the work, they get thefacts, and they bring clarity to
issues that are oftenmisrepresented.
That kind of reporting takesdiscipline and integrity.
(22:58):
And TFAS is proud to support it.
But the most inspiring part ofthe entire forum, at least for
me, was the Student JournalismAssociation panel.
These students are not waitingfor permission to do meaningful
work.
They are reviving campusnewspapers, exposing
administrative failures, pushingback against censorship, holding
(23:22):
institutions to account andactively transforming the
college media landscape.
In a panel moderated by NovakFellow and current reporter for
the free press, Maya Salkin,you'll first hear from Alex
Shea, formerly of The BrownSpectator, then from Natalia
Lopez of the Florida Finibus,followed by Max Wayland of the
(23:45):
Cornell Review.
SPEAKER_08 (23:47):
I want to start with how student journalism can
change real things on campus.
When I was at Columbia, I reallyquickly kind of got kicked out
of the spectator because Iwasn't the most popular person
in the room.
But you guys have done somethingreally, really remarkable at
each of your campuses.
And a lot of that is because youreally were enterprising and you
kind of didn't let the existingpaper or institutions kind of
(24:11):
keep you down.
I wonder if you can each speak alittle bit to how your own
publications really help shapecampus and student life.
You want to start, Alex?
SPEAKER_11 (24:21):
Sure.
We've historically had this uhconservative student paper
called the Brown Spectator.
And that has been a thing for awhile, but in 2014 it just went
away.
There wasn't enough interest init.
And that's really a shamebecause, you know, Brown, people
say it's the most liberal of allthe Ivies, even more so than
Columbia.
And uh that might be true.
And so it really gives studentsthe impression that there aren't
(24:43):
a lot of like-minded individualsaround them.
And I think part of the reasonwhy Brown is so liberal as well
is because it's a school that'soverwhelmingly wealthy.
It's also the wealthiest medianincome in the Ivy League.
And part of that is because it'sreally expensive.
And so we really just wanted toget to the bottom of what's
going at Brown?
Why is Brown so weird?
And so we revived thisnewspaper, The Brown Spectator.
(25:06):
And one of our first projectsoff the bat initially was just
to tackle this issue ofadministrative bloat.
Now, for those of you who don'tknow, Brown has about 4,000
administrators.
And to be clear, we're talkingabout administrators.
We're not talking aboutprofessors, we're talking about
deans and associate deans andtheir administrative assistants.
(25:27):
And there were 4,000 of thosecompared to like 1,600
professors and like 8,000undergrads.
And so that's a lot ofadministrators.
So we sent out a survey, um,sort of in the format of Doge
and Elon Musk, just like, we wewanted to know what do you
actually do?
And and this was not wellreceived.
Um and I would have thought thatthey would have had some of the
(25:49):
foresight to not, you know,instigate disciplinary charges
against their student newspaper,but they did.
They disciplined me and theentire rest of the board of the
Brown Spectator because theysaid that we were using Brown,
we were violating Brown'strademark because we had the
word brown in the name of thenewspaper, the Brown Spectator,
despite the fact that the BrownDaily Herald, the other
(26:10):
newspaper at Brown, also has thename Brown.
And Brown is also like a color.
But um this then becomes, youknow, a sort of a snowballing
and into a big controversy.
Eventually, I am cleared becausethe the Foundation for
Individual Rights and Expressionfire thankfully steps up on my
behalf, and I'm invited totestify before Congress about
(26:33):
really what's going on at Brown.
Why is it so expensive?
Why are there so manyadministrators?
After I testified beforeCongress, after I did this sort
of AI-powered project tocategorize the administrators, I
get hired by PalantirTechnologies.
I don't have a college degree,it's fine.
They hire me, and so I drop outof Brown.
And I work at Palantir for a fewmonths, and then I raise$5
(26:54):
million from VCs to start my owncompany that does sort of
investigative journalismprojects like this.
And so what's the moral of thestory?
Unclear, but I I think there'sthere's one thing that I I was
proven correct is that there aretoo many administrators because
Brown did end up laying offabout 100.
And also that maybe college iskind of overrated because the
(27:15):
the people who really benefitfrom this education industrial
complex are these hordes ofadministrators who make you pay
$90,000 a year tuition and giveyou a piece of paper at the end.
SPEAKER_04 (27:27):
I think it's fairly self-evident that there's a
crisis in trust in the educationsystem, higher education system,
and thus there's a crisis oftrust in the university's
ability to prepare students tobe citizens.
And when I was in high schooland I wrote for my student
newspaper, I was the onlyconservative opinion writer, and
(27:47):
I would write about everything.
I'd write about why Timemagazine decided to name Kamala
and Biden as people of the year.
I thought that was incrediblystupid.
And so I pretty much coveredeverything, and I got to college
with the expectation that Iwould, especially at the
University of Florida, that Iwould be able to have an
intellectual home on campuswhere I could publish my
thoughts.
And to my disappointment, thatplace did not exist.
(28:08):
I remember my freshman year, theBiden spy balloon, Chinese spy
balloon situation happened, andI really wanted to write about
it in the spring.
And I remember just like runningaround campus trying to find a
publication to be able topublish my piece, and no one
wanted it because it eitherdidn't tie back to the state of
Florida, it was too conservativean opinion, and I was
criticizing President Biden toomuch, and I was like, no, like
(28:30):
I'm at the University ofFlorida, this is a fairly
supposed to be a fairlyconservative university.
I should have a home on campusto publish this.
This is unjust.
And so that kind of question ofcreating a home on campus for at
least if it's not conservative,a somewhat conservative
counterweight to the liberalinstitutional media on campus.
And that kind of stood in theback of my mind.
(28:51):
And I went to DC uh one summerto do a program with the Hudson
Institute, and TFAS approachedme and I was able to start this
paper.
And I originally envisioned itto be a place to publish foreign
affairs and national securityissues on campus.
And the more I thought about it,I was like, no one is gonna read
this because who are we collegestudents to be commenting on
what's going on in DC?
(29:12):
No one cares what we have tosay, except probably my mom.
But I was able to figure out away to combine all the ends of
the university.
So that's where you get theFlorida Finibus after day
finibus.
So we combine foreign affairsand national security, campus
politics, we have a journal ofideas, and we have domestic US
politics as well.
And so going back to yourquestion, I'd say on campus,
(29:35):
we've been able to revive theAmerican intellectual tradition,
which is our mission statement.
I will say that.
Just getting students to not bepassive citizens on campus.
We've just attracted all kindsof audiences to campus, and it's
been really wonderful to watchthat grow.
SPEAKER_02 (29:50):
Yeah, and I mean I can say, listen, if you're
gonna, if you want a glamorousjob, um student journalism
certainly isn't it.
If you want applause for yourwork, I suggest, you know,
joining the football team orsomething like that because
you're not gonna find it.
But you see a lot of great workthroughout the IVs, I think, and
a lot of these largerinstitutions that have been
dominated by one party, oneideology for for far too long.
(30:14):
So I mean, I can give you a fewanecdotes.
I mean, I remember the CornellReview coming back.
I was editor-in-chief, the mainnewspaper just wasn't covering
certain issues.
We f found this kind of odd.
We would try to step in, fillthis in.
We woke up one spring morningand on the sidewalks of campus,
spray painted uh death to Israeland death to Jews on campus.
(30:37):
Something like that was notreported on.
It's hard to believe, right?
Uh on a main street to callpeople out.
Um, so we believe, and verysimilar to the Cinnabis, I
think, um, everyone has a right,everyone has a right to write in
this case.
We want you to write.
We want to make campus safe forplurality, of course.
(30:58):
So in this regard, you canreally do a lot of change really
quickly.
And then the second, I'll say,is actually writing to your
audience, right?
Some that's your fellowstudents, but a lot of it's to
the donors, a lot of it's to thealumni, a lot of it's to the
trustees.
You'd be surprised, actually,someone who attended, let's say,
Cornell or Brown or theUniversity of Florida in the
(31:19):
1980s.
Uh, things have changed a lot,actually.
And to find out who's actuallywriting these checks, what do
they think, how their money isbeing utilized, in many cases,
not well.
They don't take it very well.
So we see a lot of the work thatwe're doing on campuses across
the nation get positive andpositive messages because to be
(31:42):
quite frank, nobody's talkingabout a lot of these issues.
I mean, to a great degree,sometimes it's hard for the
student journalists becausewe're so desensitized to the
madness, to the insanity.
There was kind of a breakingstory, and maybe not as serious,
but a group of individuals atCornell had hunted and skinned a
bear on campus in theirresidency hall.
I don't know what's in the waterin upstate New York, but that's
(32:04):
the stuff they do up there.
And um, it's just somethingnobody talked about.
It was just something thathappened on campus, you know.
Oh well, another DI initiative,oh well, a lot of madness, oh
well.
But actually, when you take astep back, and I think Cornell
actually is a perfect example ofthis for those unaware, it's in
Ithaca, New York, upstate.
Um, if you leave TompkinsCounty, if you leave the city of
(32:26):
Ithaca, you're gonna find a verydifferent place than within
Ithaca.
So sometimes having theperspective to say, okay, maybe
I'm gonna take a step back, andthis is madness.
This is not reflective of thatof a university.
This is not reflective of thatof maybe the culture that
surrounds us, or even some ofthe mainstream views, center
(32:48):
left, center right, or whateverhave you.
So I think to a great degree, Imean, the national media will
come in when there's a scandal,but we live through it.
At the end of the day, we'restudents, right?
We write about certain things,but we live through it.
And sometimes it's hard, but uhtaking a step back, I find, is
very important.
SPEAKER_00 (33:07):
This is exactly the type of courage and initiative
we hope to cultivate in ourstudents.
They see problems othersoverlook.
They ask questions that othersavoid, they work hard to uncover
facts rather than accept easynarratives.
It is remarkable to see thislevel of drive and
(33:27):
professionalism so early intheir careers.
Which brings us to our finalselection of this episode.
How do the journalists of thefuture view the future of
journalism?
Once again, we'll hear fromAlex, Natalia, and then Max.
SPEAKER_08 (33:46):
I wanted to just ask each of you really what gives
you hope about the future ofjournalism in higher ed?
Because I feel like when I wasin college was not that long
ago, everyone told me not to bea journalist because it was
dying and my life would behorrible, but that really hasn't
been the case.
So I'm guessing wondering whatgives each of you guys hope and
fulfillment right now.
SPEAKER_11 (34:07):
Well, I mean, for me at least, I'd say something that
gives me hope is my new company.
And for those of you who aren'tfamiliar, is essentially what we
do is we're sort of flipping thejournalism model on its head, is
people were talking initiallyabout how journalism is just
going down the drain when youhave to rely on advertising and
that you get trans out toclickbait.
So essentially what we're doing,which we feel is fairly novel,
(34:28):
is we're doing investigativejournalism that we give to the
government when we find fraud intheir government programs.
So sort of a private version ofDoge.
And we're monetizing based onwhistleblower rewards programs,
which then give you sort of apercentage of this.
When you're unveilingbillion-dollar frauds, then you
might get like hundreds ofmillions of dollars out of it.
And so it can be incrediblyremunerative, especially
(34:51):
compared to, you know, just likeGoogle ads or whatever.
Um and so I guess I'm hopefulfor the future of journalism is
because I think new, moreinnovative business models,
people using AI, can produce abetter business model that can
allow journalists to not onlyimpact um real change, but also
um do it with a sort of a fiscalmodel that makes sense for the
(35:11):
new age.
SPEAKER_04 (35:12):
Say for me, one, that programs like TFAS exist
and are reviving these debatesand media on campus.
And then number two, the factthat like students are still
curious and still have questionsand want to engage in debate and
want to find an intellectualcommunity on their campus.
I'd say I've been in a reallyinteresting position at UF given
its growth since I started as afreshman and the expansion of
(35:34):
civic education on campus.
And one of the things I'venoticed is that the programs are
investing a lot in freshmen andsophomores, but kind of leaving
out juniors and seniors that aregraduating that didn't reap the
benefits of these new programsthat are meant to start when
you're a freshman.
And so I've been fortunateenough that I'm a senior.
I know a lot of juniors, we'veall really taken leadership
(35:55):
positions within the Finibus andhave dedicated it to becoming an
intellectual home.
We have a lot of communityevents where we all talk about
politics, talk about philosophy.
Um, we were reading excerptsfrom Winston Churchill's My
Early Life the other day andtalking about it together.
And it's been a really beautifulexperience to see how curious
(36:16):
people are.
And no matter what corruptionthere is, what kind of diseases
there are in universitydepartments, they can never ever
take that away from us.
SPEAKER_02 (36:26):
Yeah, totally agree.
And I mean, look around.
I mean, that gives me hope,certainly.
The Fund for American Studiesdoes an excellent job in
promoting student journalists,the new generation, investing
into the education of a lot ofthese student journalists as
well.
So to give credit where credit'sdue, of course.
Another reason, you know, I feelpeople want honesty, people want
(36:47):
reason.
You know, that's maybe not themost popular take at times, but
I think you see that with thefree press.
I think you see great reporting,honest reporting based in fact
and logic, and lo and behold,it's rewarded.
I'm also hopeful because as youknow, an editor in chief, I can
speak to this.
When I see the student writing apiece at 2 a.m.
(37:10):
or editing this piece, andthey're not getting paid and
they're meeting this deadline,that makes the difference.
It's this longing, the desire,the ambition, the tenacity to
keep going, even when everythingis stacked against you.
SPEAKER_00 (37:23):
I have great confidence in the future of
journalism.
The students, fellows, andalumni involved in TFAS programs
are thoughtful, independent, andcommitted to seeking the truth
even when it is difficult.
In a time when trust in themedia is low and polarization is
high, a strong commitment tojournalism has never been more
(37:47):
important.
Before I say goodbye, I'd liketo offer a round of
congratulations to this year'sclass of Robert Novak Fellows,
this year's class of Joseph Ragofellows, our Thomas L.
Phillips Career AchievementAward recipient, Mary Anastasio
Grady of the Wall StreetJournal, and the Kenneth Y.
(38:07):
Tomlinson Award for CourageousJournalism recipient, John
Tierney of the City Journal.
TFAS is committed to developingleaders who can strengthen our
country through principledreporting.
Visit TFAS.org to learn moreabout our journalism programs
that help shape these youngreporters.
Thank you for joining us forthis special episode of Liberty
(38:30):
and Leadership.
We'll see you next time.
Thank you for listening to theLiberty and Leadership Podcast.
If you have a comment orquestion, please drop us an
email at podcasttfas.org.
And be sure to subscribe to theshow on your favorite podcast
app and leave a five starreview.
(38:51):
Liberty and Leadership isproduced at Podville Media.
I'm your host, Roger Reim, anduntil next time, show courage in
things large and small.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!