:00:14. > :00:17.to make his big pitch to the Lib Dem conference, stick with the
:00:17. > :00:22.coalition, and as importantly, stick with him. Ignore flirtations
:00:22. > :00:25.with Labour at the conference this week, the only conversation in
:00:25. > :00:28.Glasgow may be what kind of coalition we get after the election.
:00:28. > :00:32.Saving the environment, with heavy industry and GM crops. Bring it on
:00:32. > :00:36.says the deputy editor of the Economist.
:00:36. > :00:40.This man masterminded Barack Obama's on-line election campaign,
:00:40. > :00:49.has media power now gone from TV to Twitter. We will hear this...#
:00:49. > :00:55.Ahhhh. And oh the handbags and the glad
:00:55. > :01:05.rags, on the catwalk at London Fashion Week.
:01:05. > :01:09.Good evening Nick Clegg has a job of work to do at the party annual
:01:09. > :01:13.conference this weekend. The Liberal Democrats poll ratings are
:01:13. > :01:14.in the doldrums, one of his rising stars, Sara Tether, has thrown in
:01:15. > :01:19.the towel. According to the latest stars, Sara Tether, has thrown in
:01:20. > :01:23.Ipsos mori survey of the party supporters, almost half believe
:01:23. > :01:26.Nick Clegg is taking the party in the wrong direction. It has not
:01:27. > :01:33.been a summer of fun for Labour or Conservatives either. Assessing the
:01:33. > :01:38.conference to come. Soft centre? Something harder?
:01:38. > :01:43.Perhaps you prefer your politics a bit NUTier. Conference season
:01:43. > :01:46.normally has it all. It is where the parties compete to tempt voters.
:01:46. > :01:53.The start of this year's conferences mark exactly 600 days
:01:53. > :01:56.until the election. Sweet news for Nick Clegg, whose conference comes
:01:56. > :01:59.first, is he goes into the conference season perhaps the most
:01:59. > :02:06.secure out of all the party leaders, with the least to worry about from
:02:06. > :02:10.the coming few weeks. Friday the 13th didn't start so
:02:10. > :02:15.well for the Lib Dem leader, a call for him to step down from the
:02:15. > :02:19.former fresh spokesman Lord Oakeshott. He said the ratings were
:02:19. > :02:23.down at levels, which if you go back, were only seen by Mrs
:02:23. > :02:28.Thatcher shortly before she left and Michael Foot. The call gained
:02:28. > :02:34.no traction with Vince Cable, he disowned the comments and Nick
:02:34. > :02:39.Clegg was able to shrug them off. It is like foul weather in the
:02:39. > :02:43.autumn, it comes around regularly at this time of year, and as do
:02:43. > :02:45.remarks by Lord Oakeshott. He has said them before about previous
:02:45. > :02:49.leaders, you have people like that said them before about previous
:02:49. > :02:53.in politics. One of the reasons Nick Clegg sleeps well right now is
:02:53. > :02:57.there are no obvious contenders for their job. Had Chris Huhne been
:02:57. > :03:00.acquitted earlier in the year, he would have been the obvious answer
:03:00. > :03:04.to that question. Given what has happened with him. Actually there
:03:04. > :03:09.isn't an obvious alternative leader, in particular because a lot of the
:03:09. > :03:13.criticism levelled at Nick Clegg is by virtue of him being the leader
:03:13. > :03:17.of a small party in Government. That is why activists do understand
:03:17. > :03:21.if there was a new leader of the party they would be in exactly the
:03:21. > :03:25.same position and face the same criticisms. The Lib Dems have had a
:03:25. > :03:27.few sweet successes this year, defeating the Conservatives on
:03:27. > :03:31.boundary reform and childcare ratios went down very well with the
:03:31. > :03:34.base, as did killing off the Communications Data Bill. The
:03:34. > :03:40.budget announcement that the Lib Dem policy of a £10,000 tax-free
:03:40. > :03:45.allowance would be reached by 2014 was also seen as a victory for the
:03:45. > :03:48.party. That all came before the hugely important political news of
:03:48. > :03:52.better economic figures. The economy is starting to turn a
:03:52. > :03:58.corner because of the Lib Dems, without us showing remarkable unity
:03:58. > :04:02.and resolve over the last period, we wouldn't have produced, as we
:04:02. > :04:07.have done, over a million-and-a- half new jobs in the private sector.
:04:07. > :04:10.We wouldn't have provided the confidence to businesses to employ
:04:10. > :04:13.more people and investing in businesses and getting the economy
:04:13. > :04:18.growing again. Nick Clegg has secured his party leadership may be
:04:18. > :04:22.good news for him, does it matter if nobody going to vote for his
:04:22. > :04:24.party? At the moment they are bumping along at around about 11
:04:24. > :04:30.points in the polls, they have shed bumping along at around about 11
:04:30. > :04:34.a third Lib Dem members since 2010, however, both of the other party
:04:34. > :04:38.leaders have their problems too. At the moment Liberal Democrat MPs are
:04:38. > :04:40.more confident of holding on to their seats, therefore they are
:04:40. > :04:46.more confident of holding on to less jumpy and ease yr to lead. --
:04:46. > :04:49.easier to lead. Since Nick Clegg last addressed his
:04:49. > :04:54.party his position may have strengthened, but he still faces
:04:54. > :05:01.challenges next week, motions on Trident, the 50p tax rate, the
:05:01. > :05:05.spare room subsidy and tuition fee, all promise to be uncomfortable.
:05:05. > :05:09.With Britain ruled out of military action in Syria and the economy
:05:09. > :05:13.looking well, there is nothing it that trip the party into an
:05:13. > :05:16.existential fist fight. That means they can all concentrate their
:05:16. > :05:23.address in trying to push the other parties out of the picture. Now we
:05:23. > :05:26.speak to our political editor. Where do you think the sparks will
:05:26. > :05:32.fly at conference conference? There will be a few sparks, I was amazed
:05:32. > :05:37.that there was 600 days to the next election. There will be sparks at
:05:37. > :05:41.the conference, many more in the 600 days. The sparks will be quite,
:05:41. > :05:45.quite massive, but nothing compared to what we will see close to the
:05:45. > :05:49.election. We will get row over the economy. There is some who want
:05:49. > :05:54.some kind of Plan B, they always get this at Lib Dem conferences.
:05:54. > :06:00.Today we gather that Nick Clegg will put forward his own amendment
:06:00. > :06:03.and personalise it, and say if you defeat this you will defeat me. I
:06:03. > :06:06.would say that will be avert, there is also nuclear supsidies and a
:06:06. > :06:10.couple of others. You will hear a lot of rows coming out of Lib Dem
:06:10. > :06:15.conference, and it is fair to say, my sources tell me, at a very
:06:16. > :06:20.senior meeting of Conservative and Lib Dem ministers, they regularly
:06:20. > :06:26.meet for this thing called coalition r 2.0. The clue is in the
:06:26. > :06:29.name, ministers who would like the coalition to continue after the
:06:29. > :06:38.next election. The last meeting of that, just before the summer, was
:06:38. > :06:42.very rancour res, partly because of the story we broke on Newsnight
:06:42. > :06:47.that Nick Clegg said he wanted to unilaterally kill the childcare
:06:47. > :06:51.ideas. You had an unhappy coalition, such that Conservatives at the
:06:51. > :06:55.dinner said to their Lib Dem counterparts, we don't believe
:06:55. > :07:00.anything you say any more, we think in the future you will go to Labour.
:07:00. > :07:05.The Lib Dems had to remonstrate and say we won't and we have an open
:07:05. > :07:08.mind. The reason I tell this story and it is relevant this is now I
:07:08. > :07:11.gather from very good people, including friends of the Prime
:07:11. > :07:14.Minister, it is being patched up because of Syria. Syria has
:07:14. > :07:17.massively changed the mood between the two guys at the top. That is
:07:17. > :07:22.what made the coalition seem to get the two guys at the top. That is
:07:22. > :07:27.along better, simply over Syria? I think there is for David Cameron
:07:27. > :07:30.and Nick Clegg there has been a realise that Ed Miliband will do
:07:30. > :07:35.what he needs to do politically to get into the best spot. That
:07:35. > :07:53.clarifies what the next coalition negotiations might be like. So
:07:53. > :08:01.worth waiting for? Now in the history of the world, there have
:08:01. > :08:09.been five huge waves of ex tifpbgss, one wiped out dinosaurs and one
:08:09. > :08:13.wiped out 98% of the life on earth. Many think there is a next wave,
:08:13. > :08:18.caused by us. That is if you believe that economic growth and
:08:18. > :08:23.technologies like GM destroy biodiversity and ecosystems. Emma
:08:23. > :08:28.Duncan doesn't believe anything of the sort and believes the green
:08:28. > :08:33.lobby is wrong-headed, she is in the studio as is Craig Bennett, who
:08:33. > :08:38.disagrees. Here is Emma on why we and the world's creatures might not
:08:38. > :08:43.be going to hell in a four-wheel drive.
:08:43. > :08:49.Since man sharpened his first spear he has been killing off other
:08:49. > :08:53.species at an astonishing rate. All the world's continents used to have
:08:53. > :08:58.great beasts like Africa's elephants and Rhinos, in Britain we
:08:58. > :09:06.used to have giant deer with Antlers 12-feet wide. Most
:09:06. > :09:11.scientists believe these huge creatures got wiped out as people
:09:11. > :09:14.spread across the globe and killed them off. Progress and economic
:09:15. > :09:19.growth have allowed mankind to dominate the planet, to the point
:09:19. > :09:23.where we have squeezed out other species. Many environmentalists
:09:23. > :09:29.believe unless we slow growth down and adopt eco friendly technologies,
:09:29. > :09:37.we will condemn more species to extinction. I don't believe that is
:09:37. > :09:42.right. Right now we are at a crucial juncture for other species,
:09:42. > :09:46.the earth has seen five waves of destruction caused by geological
:09:46. > :09:50.events. Now even without climate change damage, scientists think man
:09:50. > :09:57.has pushed the world to the brink of a sixth great extinction. If you
:09:57. > :10:00.look at the underlying rate of current extinctions, I'm inclined
:10:00. > :10:05.to say we are right on the tipping point. The numbers of species going
:10:05. > :10:12.extinct annually could be as few as 200 but as many as well over 10,000.
:10:12. > :10:16.While it is true if there weren't seven billion on the planet, other
:10:16. > :10:21.species would be having a more comfortable time. The problem isn't
:10:21. > :10:27.growth, it is poverty. Look at a satellite map of the island of
:10:27. > :10:32.Hispaniola, the western side is Haiti, where people's average
:10:32. > :10:36.income is $771 a year. It has been striped bear, not surprising,
:10:36. > :10:42.people who can't afford fuel chop trees down. On the eastern side of
:10:42. > :10:48.the island is the Dominican Republic, where the average income
:10:48. > :10:51.is $5,800 a year, it has plenty of forest. Richer countries have
:10:51. > :10:54.better Government, and without a decent Government you can't have
:10:54. > :10:59.conservation work. Richer countries clean up their rivers and their air.
:10:59. > :11:02.Population growth, which is the biggest problem for other species,
:11:02. > :11:05.slows as countries get richer, and people start pressing their
:11:05. > :11:08.Governments for change. That is what happened in the west in the
:11:08. > :11:12.1960s with the formation of groups like Greenpeace, and WWF, that
:11:12. > :11:14.played a large part in the passage of laws, to clean up the
:11:14. > :11:19.played a large part in the passage environment and protect other
:11:19. > :11:22.species. You can see how things have
:11:22. > :11:27.improved in this countries as we have got richer. Our rivers, once
:11:28. > :11:31.little better than open sewer are getting cleaner all the time. You
:11:31. > :11:36.can see the wildlife coming back. 30 years ago there were otters in
:11:36. > :11:40.6% of the sites surveyed by the Environment Agency. In the most
:11:40. > :11:45.recent survey it had spread to 60%. And in China, which has made a huge
:11:45. > :11:49.mess of its environment, National Parks are being create at an
:11:49. > :11:53.astonishing pace. It set up the first one in 1982 and now has
:11:53. > :12:05.three-times the amount of land in National Park as America has.
:12:06. > :12:08.London Zoo is nearly 200 years old. The technological progresses has
:12:09. > :12:13.London Zoo is nearly 200 years old. revolutionised the work of
:12:13. > :12:17.conservationists in recent years. Conservation used to be done mostly
:12:17. > :12:23.by men in shorts with not much more than a pair of binoculars, here it
:12:23. > :12:29.has heavy duty technology at its disposelia. In Brazil
:12:29. > :12:31.environmentalists used NASA site light data to embarrass politicians
:12:31. > :12:34.environmentalists used NASA site into doing something about
:12:34. > :12:41.deforestation. That is one of the main reasons why deforestation in
:12:41. > :12:46.the Brazilian Amazon has fell down to 5,000 square metres last year.
:12:46. > :12:50.Technology has also had a huge impact on agriculture. Fertiliser,
:12:50. > :12:55.pesticides and genetically modified seeds have boosted farm yields. In
:12:55. > :13:00.America, for instance, corn production has increased five-fold
:13:00. > :13:04.over the past 60 years, while the area harvested has increased by
:13:04. > :13:08.only half. With demand for food expected to double by 2050, if we
:13:08. > :13:13.are to leave any land for other species, we have to make farming
:13:13. > :13:18.more intensive still. And use all the tools available to us. This is
:13:18. > :13:22.why a former anti-GM company parts company with those in the green
:13:22. > :13:26.movement, who don't like intensive ago culture, and would prefer we
:13:26. > :13:30.farmed organically. You really have to use twice as much land to
:13:30. > :13:37.produce the same amount of food and crops with organic. If the whole
:13:37. > :13:41.world was to turn organic it would mean essentially destroying all the
:13:41. > :13:44.rainforest to feed the number we have now. Intensive and
:13:44. > :13:51.conventional farming for all of the ills is a very efficient way of
:13:51. > :13:54.using land. The challenge now is to sustainably intensify to produce
:13:55. > :13:59.more food for a growing human population and hopefully a
:13:59. > :14:04.reduction in land area to be prevefrd for natural areas and eek
:14:04. > :14:12.toe-is is emit is. The why -- and ecosystems. The idea
:14:12. > :14:16.here my seem odd. We need to change our thinking about how best to look
:14:16. > :14:22.after other species, if we are going to avoid the sixth great
:14:22. > :14:27.extinction. Emma Duncan and Craig Bennett of Friends of the Earth
:14:27. > :14:30.joins me now. Emma is right in the developed world Governments are
:14:30. > :14:35.responsible, Governments create good policy which reduces, for
:14:35. > :14:37.example, pollution? I think we have seen obviously a strong growth of
:14:37. > :14:40.environmental movement in the seen obviously a strong growth of
:14:40. > :14:43.developed world over the last 40 years which has been really
:14:43. > :14:46.successful in encouraging Government to put in basic
:14:46. > :14:51.pollution controls. We haven't seen any real attempts to make sure that
:14:51. > :14:54.our consumption and lifestyles are sustainable and work within
:14:54. > :14:58.environmental limits. It is wrong to suggest that some how there is
:14:58. > :15:01.not a strong environmental movement in the developing world. Actually
:15:01. > :15:05.Friends of the Earth, we are part of the international group with
:15:05. > :15:11.groups in over 80 countries, most in developing countries.
:15:12. > :15:15.I think that is absolutely right and one of the great developments
:15:15. > :15:18.we are seeing. With economic growth you get the environment getting
:15:18. > :15:24.worse up to a certain point, and then you get things getting better
:15:24. > :15:27.as people get richer. One of the reasons that happens is people
:15:27. > :15:31.start minding about their environment, once they have
:15:31. > :15:37.satisfied their basic needs like food, shelter, education they start
:15:37. > :15:39.caring more about things on a wider basis.
:15:39. > :15:45.All growth is good, let's take the might of dairy farmers in this
:15:45. > :15:50.country. They are going to the wall every single week because cheap
:15:50. > :15:56.milk is brought in from Lithuania and Poland. Is that better for us,
:15:56. > :16:01.that milk is older and the carbon footprint of bringing it in and no
:16:01. > :16:06.sustainable dairy industry. Is that the kind of thing that reduces
:16:06. > :16:11.pollution? You have to look at it on a wider scale and look at what
:16:11. > :16:15.growth brings, it brings sewage systems, poor countries can't
:16:15. > :16:20.afford that. You build a sewage system you clean your rivers up,
:16:20. > :16:25.you start introducing regulation to make the air cleaner because people
:16:25. > :16:27.want cleaner air. Every age people get richer they want their
:16:27. > :16:31.environment cleaned up. I think it is a really old fashioned approach
:16:31. > :16:36.actually to suggest that all that matters is the quantity of growth.
:16:36. > :16:40.And this obsession with how much percentage points of growth we are
:16:40. > :16:44.talking about is very misleading. We need to be having a discussion
:16:44. > :16:46.not so much about the quantity of growth, but the quality of growth.
:16:46. > :16:51.If we left the studio and went and growth, but the quality of growth.
:16:51. > :16:56.smashed a few shop windows, it would add to GDP a tiny bit. It
:16:56. > :16:59.would not add to the quality of people's lives. We need to talk
:16:59. > :17:04.about the purpose of the economy, what is it for, how can it lead to
:17:04. > :17:09.real human progress and make life better on this planet. The
:17:09. > :17:14.scientists have changed their view from anti-GM to say they are good
:17:14. > :17:18.for the planet? A journalist.They feed more people using less
:17:18. > :17:22.territory? Again that's a very forced dichotomy. What we need to
:17:23. > :17:26.do is not think about a reductionist approach about whether
:17:26. > :17:30.this bit of land here is for agriculture and this bit of land
:17:30. > :17:36.for urban areas and this bit for something else. What wf learned
:17:36. > :17:40.over the last few decades is to get multiple uses out of the land. And
:17:40. > :17:46.not to have the agricultural deserts we have in East Anglia, we
:17:46. > :17:54.need to think about biodiversity living in areas where we use axe
:17:54. > :17:56.culture. If you are going to have the organic agriculture that
:17:56. > :17:59.Friends of the Earth want, you will plough up every piece of wild
:17:59. > :18:03.territory on the earth. Isn't the argument the consumption?
:18:03. > :18:07.We have actually got to change our lifestyle, given the fine night
:18:07. > :18:11.resources. There is such a thing as unsustainable growth? If you look
:18:11. > :18:14.at countries that don't have growth you find they destroy their
:18:14. > :18:19.environments much more quickly than those of you that have had growth
:18:19. > :18:22.and have the prosperity. Would you accept that? We have to have a
:18:22. > :18:28.sensible debate about what progress is in the 21st century. Do you
:18:28. > :18:32.accept be you say Friends of the Earth is operating, but do you
:18:32. > :18:36.accept in underdeveloped countries, for whatever reason, that pollution,
:18:36. > :18:40.problems with the environment are much greater than in developed
:18:40. > :18:45.countries? I think it is dangerous to generalise, at the end of the
:18:45. > :18:48.day if you look at one thing, carbon emissions we are worse in
:18:48. > :18:52.this country, developed countries, we are not taking it seriously
:18:52. > :18:57.enough to control those. You can focus on a few hours of pollution
:18:57. > :19:02.control, we are missing the big picture, in climate change it is
:19:02. > :19:07.the richer countries to blame far and away for climate change. Is
:19:07. > :19:11.carbon control a problem? We are not sure how, treem it will be, at
:19:12. > :19:17.the moment we haven't had any temperature increased for the last
:19:17. > :19:23.ten years. The range of estimates of what climate change might be
:19:23. > :19:31.have very, very large. What I do know if we want to decarbonise
:19:31. > :19:34.energy, without growth we won't get that. It is ridiculous to suggest
:19:34. > :19:38.that the environmental lobby is against new technology, we promote
:19:38. > :19:44.it all the time. Let's not have an ideolgical approach to suggest it
:19:44. > :19:48.is all good or all bad. We need a pragmatic approach, some are good
:19:48. > :19:51.and some bad and it depends on the context. Central London was
:19:51. > :19:55.swinging at the start of London Fashion Week, it has late low
:19:55. > :20:03.acquired edge with affects the fashion world's love of finer
:20:04. > :20:08.product dues, cashmere, silk and tweed. The arrival of a clutch of
:20:08. > :20:16.designers known all over the world, happening in le central London. I
:20:16. > :20:25.began not at the catwalk but outside an iconic British store.
:20:25. > :20:30.Who is your favourite British designer? Probably Matthew
:20:30. > :20:37.Williamson. Stella McCartney is good. Christopher Kane.At the
:20:37. > :20:41.moment Victoria Beckham. Young British designers and young
:20:41. > :20:47.British customers are very savvy, you might not be able to afford
:20:47. > :20:50.something from the catwalk collections but they make for the
:20:50. > :20:56.high street. Two collections for Topshop were a
:20:56. > :21:04.sell-out, the best collaboration Topshop had ever done and the
:21:04. > :21:08.customers came back for more. London Fashion Week is open for
:21:08. > :21:12.business, and Newsnight blagged a front row seat. While once London
:21:12. > :21:17.stood in the shadow of New York, Milan and Paris, it is now the big
:21:17. > :21:23.ticket. It is seen as such a creative place and people want to
:21:23. > :21:26.be part of it. Tom Ford, case in point, is based in London. It makes
:21:26. > :21:33.sense for people to be here. Over the next week, when the 58
:21:33. > :21:38.designers will show off their collections in front of the top
:21:38. > :21:43.journalist, bloggers and buyers, clothes are a serious business.
:21:43. > :21:49.With fashion contributing £21 billion to the economy. According
:21:49. > :21:53.to the British Fashion Council millions of orders will be placed
:21:54. > :22:00.over the next few days. Names like Richard Westley and Burberry will
:22:00. > :22:05.be there, as well as other brands reinventing themselves like Dax.
:22:05. > :22:09.The theme is Made in Britain, and the clamour is led by the younger
:22:10. > :22:13.designers. They manufacture on their doorstep and it is easier,
:22:13. > :22:17.some of the bigger brands are also looking at how they can do more
:22:17. > :22:22.manufacturing in the UK. Made in Britain, designed in Britain does
:22:22. > :22:27.sell. One of the freshest talents to combine British fabrics and
:22:27. > :22:32.sharp tailoring, is Christopher Raeburn. I watched him back stage
:22:32. > :22:36.as he revved up for the show. When I was studying I found there was
:22:36. > :22:40.already something of a loss of skills. In fact it was something
:22:40. > :22:46.that you turn it on the head and you realise it is an obligation as
:22:46. > :22:50.a young designer to continue, to really encourage and inspire
:22:50. > :22:57.manufacturing, the skills that go with it. Clearly my outfit wasn't
:22:57. > :23:02.quite up to scratch. This is a wool mac, this is from the autumn winter
:23:02. > :23:06.collection. It is pure pool and all the production for this is done in
:23:06. > :23:18.East London as well. We are hoping that will keep you nicely protected.
:23:18. > :23:21.The hall of packed and a Hughes sense of anticipation for
:23:21. > :23:31.Christopher Raeburn's first main show. The Business Minister was
:23:31. > :23:36.squashed in between the fashionistas in the front row, the
:23:37. > :23:39.clothes draped beautifully, the models immpossibly elegant and
:23:39. > :23:44.striking, well most of them. In less than 20 minutes it was all
:23:44. > :23:48.over. The fashion writers and buyers will decide if Christopher
:23:48. > :23:52.Raeburn will be next spring's must- have designer.
:23:52. > :23:56.It is amazing what you can do with just 140 characters. Last night in
:23:56. > :24:00.a single tweet Twitter announced the intention to float on the US
:24:00. > :24:03.stock market. The global media frenzy that followed is the
:24:03. > :24:06.clearest possible testament to the unique power of the medium. One man
:24:06. > :24:13.who understands that power more than most is Harper Reid, tech
:24:13. > :24:19.whizz and self-proclaimed cool buy, and the guy who ran the on-line
:24:20. > :24:25.campaign for Barack Obama's re- election last year. Are you first
:24:25. > :24:30.in the queue for Twitter shares? Yeah, maybe, it is such an
:24:30. > :24:36.interesting company because it has powered so many revolutions, real
:24:36. > :24:39.ref lugs and it has changed so many industries -- revolutions and it
:24:40. > :24:44.has changed so many industries. You would want a return on your money?
:24:44. > :24:47.How will they monetise, it there is talk of advertising on Twitter,
:24:47. > :24:53.will it not irritate people. I wonder how they will do it, they
:24:53. > :24:56.produced a company in the US, it is a large advertising network for
:24:56. > :25:00.mobile phones, maybe the advertising is just not on Twitter,
:25:00. > :25:05.but on the general internet or. Of. We will have to wait a see a bit.
:25:05. > :25:10.How do you think Twitter will change and how do you think the way
:25:10. > :25:17.people use Twitter will change? I don't think Twitter will change
:25:17. > :25:21.much. I do think people will be they might react interestingly if
:25:21. > :25:23.Twitter does drastic changes. But Twitter has had had a long time to
:25:23. > :25:28.mess this up and they haven't. I Twitter has had had a long time to
:25:28. > :25:33.don't know why an IPO would be a trigger to cause a problem. So
:25:33. > :25:40.actually they would not want to upset their customers as well as
:25:40. > :25:44.shareholders. Exactly.So you obviously have been the person in a
:25:44. > :25:49.sense who has revolutionised, in American politics, at least, the
:25:49. > :25:51.idea of using the on-line media. You had a team, but you were the
:25:51. > :25:56.guy? I had a team and some really You had a team, but you were the
:25:56. > :26:02.great co-workers that really helped out. You had people from Google and
:26:02. > :26:06.Craig's list, people from everywhere helping you? That whole
:26:06. > :26:10.pour of what is out there, mining data on people. Do you think
:26:10. > :26:20.essentially the Internet is not a place for privacy. The reason I say
:26:21. > :26:27.is I wonder looking at the revealing of certain things lately,
:26:27. > :26:34.Governments all over the world mine our data and others data? It is a
:26:34. > :26:40.hard thing to answer in a way I think I could go on for hours. It
:26:40. > :26:46.is a nuanced situation, on the one hand the goal is to stop terrorism,
:26:46. > :26:50.on the otherhand, I was the guy that had "internet freedom" written
:26:50. > :26:57.on my hand in a photocall. I wonder how we can have both of these
:26:57. > :27:02.things and if we can achieve both of them. With that said the
:27:02. > :27:09.Internet is challenging privacy as we know it, I'm 35 and I think in
:27:09. > :27:12.regards to internet privacy I'm old. When you look at 25-year-olds they
:27:12. > :27:17.use it so differently. When you look at 20 yearled olds they use it
:27:17. > :27:21.different from 25-year-olds, the younger you go, people who grew up
:27:21. > :27:25.with the interin the, their definition of privacy is completely
:27:25. > :27:30.different. Is it good or bad?I don't think we can make a judgment
:27:30. > :27:34.yet, any judgment we would make is using our pasts and lives and
:27:34. > :27:42.understanding that we grew up with to make the judgment. In that case
:27:42. > :27:48.isn't there a universal moral code, but more a gep rationale moral
:27:48. > :27:52.code? It is a paradime shift, we will talk -- Dara dime shift, we
:27:52. > :27:57.code? It is a paradime shift, we will talk about data and it should
:27:57. > :28:02.be secure, another person says the same word and means something
:28:02. > :28:09.different. I don't want to conflate it with NMA thing. Any talk about
:28:09. > :28:12.privacy you have toed accept that young people use the Internet --
:28:12. > :28:16.you have to accept that young people use the Internet in a
:28:16. > :28:20.different way. If you were working for Barack Obama, the on-line
:28:20. > :28:24.campaign, would some decent on-line campaign have made a difference to
:28:24. > :28:30.him had he been running up to the decision of whether or not to go
:28:30. > :28:35.for military intervention. Would he have been so out of step from the
:28:36. > :28:40.American people if you used your data mining? One thing for
:28:40. > :28:45.Governments, especially those working in social media and use it
:28:45. > :28:48.to listen. I know the White House really puts the ear to the ground
:28:48. > :28:52.and lisenceps to what people are saying. There is a lot of
:28:52. > :28:55.notifications, I got a notification from Twitter and the White House
:28:55. > :28:59.that the President of going to be doing a live address a couple of
:28:59. > :29:03.weeks ago. That is great, but how are they listening? How do the
:29:03. > :29:07.Governments around the world listen? That is the really
:29:07. > :29:11.interesting piece. Will you be back in for whatever candidates they
:29:11. > :29:16.are? They know my number and they should call, we will see how it
:29:16. > :29:21.goes, take some naps, see my wife, that might be fun.
:29:21. > :29:25.Last night we set you the challenge of cracking a secret code at the
:29:25. > :29:34.end of the programme. Well done to Danny for being the first to tweet
:29:34. > :29:36.with the correct answer. We extend the uncoded message to
:29:36. > :30:02.with the correct answer. you all:
:30:02. > :30:11.The Beatles are to release more live performances, 63 track, 37 of
:30:11. > :30:15.them previouslyen released. To get you in the mood here is a rare
:30:15. > :30:26.performance in the Odeon theatre 50 years and 16 days ago. In August
:30:26. > :30:35.1963, start screaming now. # Ahhhh
:30:35. > :30:42.# Shake it up baby # Twist and shout
:30:42. > :30:49.# Come on come on come on baby now # Come on and work it all out
:30:49. > :30:50.# Well you twist a little girl